Apex Group Ltd. ("Apex Group"), a leading global financial services provider with more than $3.5 trillion in assets serviced, and OpenVC, a pioneer in private market indexing and asset management, today announced a strategic partnership to develop new real-world asset (RWA) indices and expand access to private market investment opportunities. The partnership brings together Apex Group's global private markets infrastructure, proprietary data and distribution capabilities with OpenVC's expertise in index construction and benchmark development. Together, the firms will develop a suite of indices designed to provide investors with greater transparency, insights and access to the rapidly evolving real-world asset market. As private markets continue to grow in scale and importance, investors are increasingly seeking reliable benchmarks and data-driven tools to evaluate opportunities across asset classes. Through this collaboration, Apex Group and OpenVC aim to support greater transparency and standardisation across private markets while helping investors better understand emerging areas of growth within the real-world asset ecosystem. In addition to index development, OpenVC's investment products will be made available through ApexInvest Markets, Apex Group's broker-dealer affiliate, expanding access for qualified investors, family offices and advisory communities. Georges Archibald, CEO of Apex Distribution, said: "Private markets are undergoing a period of rapid transformation, creating opportunities for better data, improved transparency and more sophisticated benchmarking. By partnering with OpenVC, we have the opportunity to combine Apex Group's unique data assets and distribution capabilities with an innovative approach to private market indexing. Together, we aim to deliver tools that help investors navigate an increasingly dynamic market environment." David Shapiro, CEO of OpenVC, said: "OpenVC was founded on the belief that private markets deserve the same transparency, accessibility and benchmarking standards that investors have long relied on in public markets. By combining our indexing expertise with Apex Group's global data resources and market reach, we believe we can help create meaningful benchmarks for the real-world asset market while helping investors better understand and access this evolving space.” The planned indices are expected to leverage Apex Group's private markets data and OpenVC's index construction methodology to create benchmarks focused on real-world asset funds and strategies. The firms will also collaborate on distribution and market education initiatives designed to support broader understanding of the asset class.

The enhancement to the Aggregate Risk Manager (ARM), to adopt an Origin Multiplier for use when calculating the Allowable Engagement Percentage previously scheduled for implementation on August 31, 2026, has been postponed and will now be implemented on September 11, 2026. Please refer to the following Regulatory Circular for more information: MIAX Options RC 2026-133 For additional information, please contact MIAX Trading Operations at TradingOperations@miaxglobal.com or (609) 897-7302. Please direct questions to the Regulatory Department at Regulatory@miaxglobal.com or (609) 897-7309.  

The enhancement to the Mass Cancellation of Trading Interest, to adopt Selective Liquidity Auto Purge (“SLAP”) functionality previously scheduled for implementation on August 31, 2026, has been postponed and will now be implemented on September 11, 2026.Please refer to the following Regulatory Circular for more information: MIAX Options RC 2026-134 For additional information, please contact MIAX Trading Operations at TradingOperations@miaxglobal.com or (609) 897-7302. Please direct questions to the Regulatory Department at Regulatory@miaxglobal.com or (609) 897-7309.

The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) today released the termination of a bank enforcement action. The OCC terminates enforcement actions when a bank has demonstrated compliance with all articles of an enforcement action; or when the OCC determines that articles deemed “not in compliance” have become outdated or irrelevant to the bank’s current circumstances; or when the OCC incorporates the articles deemed “not in compliance” into a new action. The termination action is: Order Terminating the Formal Agreement with First National Bank of Pasco, Dade City, Florida, dated September 18, 2025 (Docket No. AA-SO-2025-46). (Docket No. AA-SO-2026-37) To receive alerts for news releases announcing public OCC enforcement actions, subscribe to OCC Email Updates. All OCC public enforcement actions taken since August 1989 are available for download by viewing the searchable enforcement actions database at https://apps.occ.gov/EASearch. Related Link Enforcement Action Types

The Commodity Futures Trading Commission today published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking seeking public comments on proposed amendments to Commission regulation § 37.3(a)(2) to remove the order book requirement allowing swap execution facilities not to offer an order book for permitted transactions.  The Commission has observed that order books for permitted transactions, unlike order books for required transactions, have been rarely used by market participants for swaps trading on SEFs despite their availability for all swaps listed by SEFs for trading.  “Today’s action continues the agency’s commitment to prescribing the minimum effective dose of regulation for market participants,” said Chairman Michael S. Selig. “By removing excessive requirements from our rulebook, the Commission is remaining true to its principles-based regulatory approach.”  The proposed elimination of the order book requirement for permitted transactions provides SEFs with the flexibility to determine how to allocate their resources, while also potentially helping to spur further development and innovation in execution methods that may be better suited to trading the products that SEFs list. Comments will be accepted for 30 days following publication in the Federal Register. RELATED LINKS Request for Comments: SEF Order Book Requirement

These high-risk investments should not usually be advertised widely to the public. We banned the marketing of speculative mini-bonds and loan notes to ordinary retail investors from 1 January 2021. We did this because these are complicated investments, not suitable for most people. The ban means these high-risk investments should not usually be advertised widely to the public. But some unregulated firms may still try to sell them by using legal exemptions.   You should be on alert if you’re offered these types of investments by someone not regulated by us. They may ask you to tick a box saying you are a sophisticated, experienced or high-net-worth investor before you can invest. Most people don’t meet these criteria. Be very careful before ticking any boxes, as it could mean you lose important protections if things go wrong. You’re unlikely to be able to take complaints to the Financial Ombudsman Service or make a claim through the Financial Services Compensation Scheme. You can use the FCA Firm Checker to see if a firm has permission to provide the services you are looking for and to help avoid scams.  Mini-bonds and loan notes A loan note or mini-bond usually involves lending money to a company for a set period in return for interest or buying such a loan that someone else has made. That means you have to feel comfortable analysing the company’s ability to pay it back. If the company fails, you may get back much less than you invested, or nothing at all. What we are seeing All investing carries some risk. That risk is what leads to investment returns and is no bad thing. But if you’re putting money into products that sit outside normal savings and investments, especially through a firm that is not regulated, the risks can be much higher. You may also be more exposed to fraud or scams. Be especially careful if an investment promises very high returns, makes unusual guarantees or if something sounds too good to be true. Ask yourself how the underlying company can pay back that amount and, if they can, why they are funding it this way.   There shouldn’t normally need to be unregulated introducers in investments; if there are, make sure you understand their roles and incentives.   People are seeing adverts for loan notes and mini-bonds in everyday places, including websites, online, social media and through people who pass their details to investment firms. Examples we have seen include: An online advert saying potential investors can earn a return significantly above the amount a bank would pay you for your savings. A website that claims an investment is asset-backed, for example in property, but does not clearly explain what the assets are worth or who else may have a claim on them. An investment proposal with a reference to an 'FCA-authorised security trustee' being involved. Don’t assume it is safe because acting as a security trustee is not a regulated activity in its own right. The firm may have a limited role in the deal. It does not mean you are protected if things go wrong. Scammers may use this wording to make an investment look more trustworthy. A firm or individual contacting people they don’t know offering to introduce them to an investment opportunity based in the UK or overseas. A listing on an overseas exchange which makes a bond look legitimate but is traded infrequently or not at all on the exchange.   A firm asking potential investors to tick a box saying they are a sophisticated investor before you can invest. People being told there is a deadline to invest, told to act quickly to get the promised interest rate. The promotions focus entirely on what investors could earn but say little about how they could lose money. Promotions that aren’t clear on whether investors can get their money back early, or what happens if the company fails. How your money may be used In some of the cases we have seen, only part of your money is used for the investment itself. A high proportion of it may go towards paying an introducer, marketing, staffing and other costs.   This means the investment may need to perform very well just for you to get back the money you put in, regardless of any promised return.   These features are not common in mainstream investments and are potential hallmarks of scams.   Promises of high returns can be a warning sign. Before investing, check the costs, ask where your money will go, decide whether the return sounds realistic, and remember that higher returns usually mean higher risk. What you should do before investing Most people investing their own money should use an FCA-authorised firm. That should be the party you are speaking to, and you are sending money to. If you’re not sure, get independent financial advice, especially if no authorised firm is involved. Use the Firm Checker to see if a firm has permission to provide the services you are looking for and to help avoid scams. There are ways to protect yourself from being scammed. Find out how to spot the warning signs of investment, pension and other financial scams. Never tick a box or sign anything saying you are a sophisticated or high-net worth investor unless it is true and you fully understand what it means. Scammers may tell you this is needed to access an investment, but it could mean you lose important protections.   Check comparison sites to see what rates FCA-regulated providers are offering. If you are promised much higher fixed returns, be careful. Higher returns usually mean higher risk. Do not invest because of pressure, a deadline or based solely on a social media recommendation. Ask the firm whether anyone else will be paid commission or fees, and how much. Check that you understand what you are getting for this money. Check how much of your money will actually be invested. If you do not get a clear answer, treat it as a warning sign. If you are worried If you are worried about a firm or promotion, report it to us. If you have already invested and think your money may be at risk, contact your bank straight away and report it to Report FraudLink is external . What we do to reduce harm We seek to disrupt potential scams by unregulated firms. We look across a wide range of websites, promotions, firms and reports to spot where consumers may be at risk. We also work with police and law enforcement in the UK and overseas to help disrupt harm. So far this year, we have issued more than 1,200 warnings. But scams can be complex, fast-moving and hard to stop, especially when run from overseas or designed to avoid our rules. If you invest through an unauthorised firm, you are unlikely to get your money back. If you are unsure, do not invest. Protecting people from harm takes everyone working together, including banks, payment providers, regulators, government and law enforcement. But you can help protect yourself too by staying alert, checking who you’re dealing with and taking time to think before investing. 

Shanghai International Energy Exchange has released its Notice on Further Expanding the Investment Scope of Qualified Foreign Investors in Commodity Futures and Options as follows: INE [2026] No. 91 To all concerning parties: To facilitate the further participation of Qualified Foreign Institutional Investors and RMB Qualified Foreign Institutional Investors (hereinafter collectively referred to as “Qualified Foreign Investors”, or QFIs) in the trading of commodity futures and options of Shanghai International Energy Exchange (INE), INE is hereby notifying the following matters: 1. Please see the attachment for the list of banks with the qualification to conduct futures margin depository business for QFIs. 2. Futures Firm Members entrusted by QFIs to trade INE’s commodity futures and options shall open accounts for QFIs in accordance with the Management Rules on the Account Opening of Futures Market Clients, and the Business Guidelines on the Account Opening of Special Corporate Clients issued by the China Futures Market Monitoring Center (CFMMC), and manage the trading access of their clients in strict compliance with the Circular on Expanding the Investment Scope of Qualified Foreign Investors in Commodity Futures and Options (INE Circular [2026] No. 94) and other relevant requirements. For QFIs trading products with investor eligibility requirements, Futures Firm Members shall strictly comply with the relevant requirements in the Futures Trading Participant Eligibility Rules of the Shanghai International Energy Exchange, and the Operational Guidelines for the Futures Trading Participant Eligibility Rules of the Shanghai International Energy Exchange, and properly manage the eligibility of QFIs. 3. Futures Firm Members shall properly interpret rules on trading access management and other relevant rules, fully remind QFIs of matters and risks related to the trading, clearing, and other businesses, and guide QFIs to engage in trading commodity futures and options in an orderly manner.  4. All concerning parties are suggested to make full preparations for QFIs' participation in commodity futures and options trading, strengthen risk prevention and control, and ensure the stable operation of the market. Attachment: 1. Designated Depository Banks of Shanghai International Energy Exchange  

With the approval of the China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC), starting from 9:00 a.m. on September 10th, 2026, Shanghai Futures Exchange (SHFE) will further expand the investment scope of Qualified Foreign Institutional Investors and RMB Qualified Foreign Institutional Investors (collectively referred to as Qualified Foreign Investors, QFI) to include the following commodity options: Hot Rolled Coil Options and Stainless Steel Options.

Within the framework of the reclassification of EGX market segments and the unification of the criteria of securities eligible for specialized activities with EGX indices’ criteria, as per item 34 of the Egyptian Exchange Board of Directors' development strategy, EGX announces the review of the market segments classification, which will come into effect on Tuesday, September 1st, 2026, as follows: 1. Most Active Board2. Short Selling Board3. Medium Activity Board4. Inactive Board5. SMEs Board-“TAMAYUZ” List6. SMEs Board-“NILE” List - Securities listed on the Most Active board are eligible for intraday and T+1 trading as well margin trading and are accepted as collateral for up to 100% of their market value. - Securities listed on the Medium Activity and the SMEs board- "Tamayuz" list are eligible for intraday and T+1 trading as well margin trading and are accepted as collateral for up to 80% of their market value.- Only EGX30 index constituents and EGX 30 INDEX ETF are eligible for securities lending and borrowing for short selling. -The allowance for intraday and T+1 trading as well margin trading on securities listed in the Most Active board, the Medium Activity board, and SMEs board- "Tamayuz" list, aims at increasing activity and enhancing liquidity  across all those securities, and therefore improving market efficiency. Members firms licensed to engage in those specialized activities must adhere to all governing regulations, in particular the followings: 1. Complying with the provisions of Article 262 of the Executive Regulations of the Capital Market Law, which require the verification of the buyer's ability to pay for the transaction, irrespective of the client’s type, whether a natural or legal person. In all cases, the company shall be liable for its own funds to pay for the securities it purchased on behalf of its clients in case the client fails to settle for the buy transaction.2. Conducting a comprehensive analysis for the risks related to the market, security, and the client, ensuring the highest possible level of risk management.3. Preparing a list of securities accepted as collateral and for margin trading, while specifying the collateral percentage for each security based on risk analysis. Most Active Board  Short Selling Board  Medium Activity Board  Inactive Board SMEs Board-“TAMAYUZ” List  SMEs Board-“NILE” List 

James Butterfill, Head of Research at CoinShares said: Bitcoin's latest rally is a macro story, not a crypto one. While the FOMC minutes revealed a more hawkish internal debate than the final policy decision implied, the data released since have steadily undermined the case for further tightening. A lower than expected CPI print and weaker payrolls have renewed expectations that US monetary policy is heading in a less restrictive direction, and Bitcoin, which remains acutely sensitive to shifts in liquidity expectations and real yields, has responded accordingly. The Treasury market tells the same story, but with an important twist. Short dated yields have fallen, a clear signal that bond investors no longer expect further Federal Reserve rate hikes. At the long end, however, yields have risen, with the 30 year in particular reflecting mounting concern over the US fiscal position. This combination of easing monetary expectations alongside growing doubts over sovereign debt sustainability has historically been a constructive environment for Bitcoin, and we see any Treasury intervention at the long end as likely to be read by markets as dovish, and therefore supportive, and Bitcoin prices have reflected this over the last 24 hours. Furthermore, we find Bessent's expanded buybacks more troubling than supportive. They may relieve pressure at the long end temporarily, but they do nothing to address the underlying fiscal problem. The purchases still need to be funded through new issuance, most likely further down the curve, which accelerates the shift toward shorter duration debt, lowers the government's weighted average maturity and leaves the fiscal position far more sensitive to Fed policy, since higher short term rates feed through into interest costs much faster. There is also a policy contradiction at work. Higher long term yields have been doing some of the Fed's tightening for it; if Treasury actively suppresses them, financial conditions loosen and the Fed may be forced to keep rates higher for longer, or even hike again, raising the Treasury's own refinancing costs more quickly given the shorter maturity profile. The dollar adds a further leg to this feedback loop. Markets have already interpreted the intervention as yield suppression, weakening the dollar as the relative appeal of US fixed income falls, which raises import costs, adds to inflation pressure and makes it harder for the Fed to ease. In our view this is not a durable solution to high borrowing costs. It risks swapping long end pressure for a weaker currency, higher imported inflation and greater sensitivity to short term rates, while leaving the fiscal credibility problem that pushed yields higher in the first place entirely unresolved. Bitcoin positioning has meanwhile improved beneath the surface. Whales have stopped selling and have begun to accumulate again, although not yet at a scale that would imply an immediate and sustained breakout, and are unlikely to over the next 12 months. This shift has helped underpin prices and supported Bitcoin's move convincingly above its 200 day moving average, a level historically associated with stronger rallies once overcome. We nonetheless expect the market to remain range bound for now, with the US$80,000 area an important upper boundary; a more decisive move would likely require clearer confirmation from the Federal Reserve that policy risks have shifted decisively away from further tightening. Fund flows suggest institutional demand is returning alongside the improving macro backdrop. Digital asset investment products (ETPs) have attracted US$1.3 billion so far this week, with approximately US$715 million recorded on Wednesday, the strongest daily figure since 1st May and among the strongest of the year. Bitcoin focused products accounted for roughly US$1 billion of the weekly total, bringing year to date flows back into positive territory after an extended weaker period. Regulatory developments in the United States, including progress on the CLARITY Act and continued engagement between the administration and the industry, are in our view more directly relevant to Ethereum, Solana and the wider altcoin market than to Bitcoin itself, though a clearer framework would improve the outlook for the sector as a whole. The next major test is Jackson Hole. With limited forward guidance currently on offer, markets will be watching closely for signals from policymakers, including Kevin Warsh, and any comments could trigger a potential Bitcoin price breakout past US$80,000 if his comments confirm the dovish stance that markets are beginning to imply.

ETFGI reports Global ETF Industry Assets Reach Record US$ 23.11 Trillion at the end of July and YTD Inflows Hit All-Time High US$ 1.71 Trillion. During July, the ETFs industry globally gathered net inflows of US$383.60 billion, bringing year-to-date net inflows to US$1.71 trillion, according to ETFGI's July 2026 Global ETFs and ETPs industry landscape insights report, the monthly report which is part of an annual paid-for research subscription service. ETFGI, is a 14 year old leading independent research and consultancy firm renowned for its expertise in subscription research, consulting services, 6 annual ETFGI Global ETFs Insights Summits, and ETF TV on global ETF industry trends. (All dollar values in USD unless otherwise noted) Highlights Assets invested in the ETFs industry globally reached a new record of $23.11 Tn at the end of July, beating the previous record of $23.09 Tn at the end of June 2026. Assets increased 16.6% YTD in 2026, going from $19.84 Tn at end of 2025 to $23.11 Tn. Record monthly net inflows of $383.60 Bn gathered during July. YTD net inflows of $1.71 Tn are the highest on record, while the second highest recorded YTD net inflows were of $1.09 Tn in 2025 and the third highest recorded YTD net inflows are of $944.18 Bn in 2024. 86th month of consecutive net inflows. YTD 2141 new ETFs have been launched by 397 providers and 353 ETFs have closed. “The S&P 500 declined slightly by 0.06% in July but remained up 10.14% year-to-date in 2026. Developed markets excluding the US gained 0.30% during July and were up 14.62% year-to-date, with Luxembourg (+12.10%) and Norway (+9.93%) posting the strongest gains among developed markets. Emerging markets fell 0.33% in July but remained up 9.40% year-to-date, while Taiwan (-7.80%) and Turkey (-5.91%) recorded the largest declines among emerging markets,” according to Deborah Fuhr, Managing Partner, Founder, and Owner of ETFGI. Source: ETFGI data sourced from ETF/ETP sponsors, exchanges, regulatory filings, Thomson Reuters/Lipper, Bloomberg, publicly available sources and data generated in-house. Note: “ETFs” are typically open-end index funds that provide daily portfolio transparency, are listed and traded on exchanges like stocks on a secondary basis as well as utilising a unique creation and redemption process for primary transactions. “ETPs” refers to other products that have similarities to ETFs in the way they trade and settle but they do not use a mutual fund structure. The use of other structures including grantor trusts, partnerships, notes and depositary receipts by ETPs can create different tax and regulatory implications for investors when compared to ETFs which are funds. The Global ETF industry had 17,654 ETFs, with 34,072 listings, assets of $23.11 Tn, from 1,025 providers on 85 exchanges in 66 countries at the end of July. ETF Issuers iShares remained the largest ETF provider globally with $6.35 trillion in assets under management, representing a 27.5% market share. Year-to-date through July, iShares gathered $370.26 billion in net new assets, accounting for 21.7% of the industry's record $1.71 trillion in net inflows. Vanguard ranked second with $5.00 trillion in assets and a 21.6% market share. Vanguard led the industry in year-to-date net new asset gathering, attracting $372.93 billion in net inflows, representing 21.8% of total industry net inflows. State Street SPDR ETFs ranked third with $2.27 trillion in assets and a 9.8% market share. State Street SPDR ETFs gathered $122.84 billion in net new assets year-to-date, accounting for 7.2% of the industry's total net inflows. The top three ETF providers, out of 1,025 globally, accounted for 58.9% of total ETF industry assets at the end of July 2026. Collectively, iShares, Vanguard, and State Street SPDR ETFs attracted $866.03 billion in net new assets year-to-date, representing 50.6% of the industry's record $1.71 trillion in net inflows, while the remaining 1,022 providers each held less than a 5% market share. Net flows Record monthly net inflows of $383.60 Bn gathered during July.  YTD net inflows of $1.71 Tn are the highest on record.  Equity ETFs attracted net inflows of $230.87 billion during July, bringing year-to-date net inflows to $772.88 billion, significantly higher than the $477.77 billion gathered during the first seven months of 2025. Fixed income ETFs recorded net inflows of $42.03 billion during July, increasing year-to-date net inflows to $314.70 billion, compared with $216.53 billion at the end of July 2025. Commodity ETFs gathered net inflows of $3.61 billion during July, bringing year-to-date net inflows to $15.14 billion, lower than the $44.96 billion recorded by the end of July 2025. Active ETFs attracted net inflows of $89.58 billion during July, lifting year-to-date net inflows to $590.46 billion, well above the $322.69 billion gathered during the same period in 2025. Substantial inflows can be attributed to the top 20 ETF's by net new assets, which collectively gathered $125.96 Bn in July, the Vanguard S&P 500 ETF (VOO US) gathered $19.66 Bn alone. Top 20 ETFs by net new assets July 2026: Global Source: ETFGI data sourced from ETF/ETP sponsors, exchanges, regulatory filings, Thomson Reuters/Lipper, Bloomberg, publicly available sources and data generated in-house. Note: This report is based on the most recent data available at the time of publication. Asset and flow data may change slightly as additional data becomes available. Substantial inflows can be attributed to the top 10 ETP's by net new assets, which collectively gathered $3.28 Bn in July, the Invesco Physical Gold ETC - Acc (SGLD LN) gathered $688.47 Mn alone. Top 20 ETPs by net new assets July 2026: Global Source: ETFGI data sourced from ETF/ETP sponsors, exchanges, regulatory filings, Thomson Reuters/Lipper, Bloomberg, publicly available sources and data generated in-house. Note: This report is based on the most recent data available at the time of publication. Asset and flow data may change slightly as additional data becomes available. Investors have tended to invest in Equity ETFs during July.

The Kuala Lumpur High Court yesterday has ruled that the Securities Commission Malaysia (SC) successfully proved its case against five individuals for perpetrating a scheme to defraud and causing wrongful losses to four public listed companies, contraventions under sections 179 and 317A of the Capital Markets and Services Act 2007 (CMSA). The five individuals are Tey Por Yee (Tey), Lim Chye Guan (Lim), See Poh Yee (See), Francis Tan Hock Leong (Francis Tan) and Faizatul Ikmi binti Abdul Razak (Faizatul) (collectively referred to as the Defendants).  The four public listed companies affected at the material time were Nexgram Holdings Berhad, R&A Telecommunication Group Berhad, Asdion Berhad and Ire-Tex Corporation Berhad. The SC had previously filed a civil suit against the Defendants on 29 November 2022 for allegedly perpetrating a scheme to defraud and/or causing wrongful losses valued at RM120.6 million to the four public listed companies.  Under section 179 of the CMSA, a person is prohibited from directly or indirectly using any scheme to defraud or engaging in any act, practice or course of business that operates as a fraud or deceit upon any person in connection with the subscription, purchase or sale of securities. As for section 317A of the CMSA, a director or officer of a listed corporation is prohibited from doing any act with the intention of causing wrongful loss to the listed corporation. In its claim, the SC alleged that between December 2013 and July 2014, Tey, Lim, See and Francis Tan, in their various capacities as directors and officers of the four public listed companies, siphoned out the proceeds of the companies’ fundraising exercises, while Faizatul abetted or furthered the siphoning.  The trial took place between 8 October 2025 and 29 April 2026, whereby the SC called 33 witnesses to prove its claim. The Defendants gave evidence on their own behalf, except for Francis Tan who had been declared bankrupt and did not appear in the proceedings. In delivering the court’s decision yesterday, High Court Judge Dato’ Indera Mohd Arief Emran Arifin held that there was evidence that the Defendants took control of the four public listed companies and procured fundraising exercises, after which the proceeds were siphoned out from the said companies.  The Court declared that each Defendant contravened, amongst others, sections 179(a), 179(b), 317A and 370 of the Capital Markets and Services Act 2007 (CMSA).  The High Court further ordered as follows: Defendants to pay a sum of RM100.6 million to the SC, pursuant to section 360 of the CMSA;   Defendants to pay civil penalties amounting to RM2.65 million to the SC with the following sums: Tey to pay RM1 million, Lim to pay RM600,000 and See,Francis Tan and Faizatul to each pay RM350,000; Defendants to be barred from being a director of, or being concerned, or taking part, directly or indirectly, in the management of any public listed company for a period 10 years from the date of judgment; and Defendants to pay total costs of RM500,000 to the SC.   To preserve the fruits of the judgment, the Court also ordered that the Defendants are restrained from dealing with their assets, until the sums due above have been paid in full. Previously, in order to prevent the dissipation of the Defendants’ assets pending the trial, the SC had successfully obtained an injunction from the High Court in 2022, restraining Tey, Lim, See and Faizatul from dealing with the monies in their respective bank accounts.  The SC did not seek an injunction against Francis Tan as he is an undischarged bankrupt. Tey, Lim, See and Faizatul then appealed, and the Court of Appeal upheld the High Court’s decision on 21 August 2024.  The SC was represented by its officers Ng Chian Huey, Mohd Izuddin Mohamad, Annarina Chacko Jacob, Adibah Saiful Bahri and Caysseny Tean Boonsiri together with SC's external counsel Christopher Leong, Janet Chai Pei Ying, Calvin Wong Wai Hou and Jason Kok Jia Qi from Messrs Chooi & Company. Tey, Lim, See and Faizatul were represented by counsel Dato’ C. Vignesh Kumar whilst the solicitor on record was Messrs B H Lawrence & Co. This decision by the High Court reinforces the accountability of directors and officers entrusted with managing public listed companies. The SC remains committed to ensuring that misconduct involving the abuse of corporate structures, misappropriation of fundraising proceeds and conduct that causes wrongful losses to listed corporations will not be tolerated. 

Axiology, the digital asset financial infrastructure platform, today announces that it has been included in the European Central Bank’s evolving list of distributed ledger technology operators registered for the initial launch of Pontes in September 2026, and has also been selected to participate in the ECB’s Appia Contact Group. Axiology is one of four DLT operators included on the Pontes list, alongside Clearstream, SWIAT and Cashlink. Its participation in the Appia Contact Group extends Axiology’s involvement across the Eurosystem’s two key initiatives for DLT-based settlement using central bank money. Pontes and Appia are complementary parts of the Eurosystem’s strategy for tokenized wholesale markets. Pontes focuses on connecting DLT platforms with TARGET Services, while Appia looks to the longer-term development of a more integrated tokenized financial ecosystem. The new Appia Contact Group brings market engagement across both initiatives into a single forum, supporting the evolution of Pontes as well as the development of the Appia roadmap. Axiology’s involvement in both initiatives positions it to contribute to both the practical implementation of DLT settlement and the evolution of Europe’s future market infrastructure. Together, these initiatives support the development of a European capital markets environment in which tokenized securities can move more efficiently across regulated infrastructure. Europe’s markets remain fragmented across national systems and infrastructures, creating additional operational hand-offs and complexity for cross-border issuance and investment. Connecting DLT-based securities infrastructure with central bank money settlement is an important step towards reducing that fragmentation. Axiology is preparing to connect its regulated DLT Trading and Settlement System (DLT TSS) with Eurosystem payment infrastructure. Under the model being tested, tokenized securities remain recorded and transferred through Axiology’s infrastructure, while the corresponding cash leg can settle in central bank money. Axiology’s testing work covers settlement scenarios relevant to the lifecycle of digital securities, including primary issuance, secondary-market transactions, redemptions and coupon or interest payments. Marius Jurgilas, CEO of Axiology, said, “Tokenization will only deliver meaningful change to European capital markets if digital securities can connect effectively with the infrastructure institutions already rely on. Pontes is an important step in making that connection possible today, while Appia looks further ahead to how a more integrated tokenised financial ecosystem could develop. For Axiology, participating in both is an opportunity to help demonstrate how regulated DLT infrastructure can become part of the wider European financial system.”  Axiology is currently progressing through the Pontes testing and certification process ahead of the initial launch, scheduled for 21 September 2026. Production participation remains subject to the completion of all operational prerequisites, as well as final certification and necessary regulatory approvals.

The FCA is warning consumers about the risks of investing in loan notes and mini-bonds issued by unregulated companies, after continuing to see people lose money in these high-risk investments.  The recent failure of Woodville Consultants Ltd, a litigation funder that raised capital from retail investors through unregulated loan notes, shows the potential risk to investors. A loan note or mini-bond usually involves lending money to a company for a set period in return for interest. If that company fails, consumers could lose every penny. The FCA permanently banned the marketing of speculative illiquid securities, including mini-bonds and loan notes, to retail investors from 1 January 2021. But consumers may still come across adverts for loan notes and mini-bonds in everyday places, including social media, online adverts or websites promoting high fixed returns. The adverts can look simple and safe, but warning signs include pressure to act quickly, unclear explanations of how money could be lost, or claims that an investment is 'asset-backed' without clear evidence of what stands behind it.   Examples of the practices the FCA sees include: Unregulated introducer firms passing consumers on to unregulated companies offering high-risk investments often taking a large fee, or commission, so reducing their initial investment. Consumers encouraged to certify themselves as experienced or wealthy investors to enable investments to be promoted to them. Firms promoting high-risk investments without the permission they need. Unclear fees or hidden conflicts, where those selling the investment may benefit from consumers investing. Scammers seeking to add ‘halo’ associations to infer legitimacy; whether that be listing on overseas exchanges, or highlighting an FCA regulated firm being involved in the wider administration. Using trust structures or other arrangements to try to stay outside FCA rules. Lucy Castledine, director of consumer investments at the FCA, said:   'Big, fixed returns are a warning sign, not a guarantee. Loan notes, mini-bonds and other speculative illiquid securities are high-risk investments and are not suitable for most people. 'Ordinary retail investors should only invest through regulated firms because if they invest through an unauthorised firm, they may have little or no protection if things go wrong. We are working hard to prevent harm, but consumers should still stop and check before investing.' The FCA encourages anyone involved in distributing or funding high-risk investments to report anything suspicious. This includes regulated firms, banks, payment firms, lawyers, accountants and auditors who may be involved in getting these investments to consumers. The FCA has issued more than 1,200 warnings so far this year, told firms to stop unlawful promotions and referred cases to other law enforcement agencies where further action may be needed. But scams can be complex, fast-moving and hard to stop, especially when run from overseas or designed to avoid regulation.   To address the harm, regulated firms like banks and payment providers, regulators, government and law enforcement need to continue to work together. Consumers need to be alert to the risk of harm and protect themselves using the tools available, like the FCA Firm Checker. Consumers can help too by reporting any concerns to the FCA if they see a suspicious investment or think they’ve been contacted by a fraudster or unauthorised firm. Background In its Perimeter Report, the FCA has called on the government to review the legislative exemptions that can mean certain high risk investments can be promoted outside FCA regulation. Investors in mini-bonds or loan notes are unlikely to be able to refer their complaints to the Financial Ombudsman Service or claim for losses through the Financial Services Compensation Scheme if things go wrong, unless they dealt with an authorised person and the complaint relates to a regulated activity. Since January 2026, a new regime regulating offers of securities to the public came into force. Read more information about what this regime means for consumers and what they should look out for. Robert Goodhew and Andrew Stoneman of Kroll Advisory were appointed as joint administrators of Woodville Consultants Limited on 16 July 2026. Enquiries should be made via woodville@kroll.com.

Japan Exchange Group, Inc. and Osaka Exchange, Inc. will participate in STAC Summit Tokyo 2026 as the Host Exchange Partner. STAC Summit is an industry event organized by the Strategic Technology Analysis Center (STAC), bringing together market participants, exchanges, technology providers, and industry professionals to discuss the latest developments in technologies supporting financial markets.STAC Summit Tokyo 2026 is scheduled to be held as follows: Event Overview Event Name STAC Summit Tokyo 2026 Date September 15, 2026, 10:00-17:00 Venue KABUTO ONE Hall & Conference Organizer Strategic Technology Analysis Center Language Japanese and English (simultaneous interpretation available) Participation Fee Free of charge (advance registration required) About STAC Summit Tokyo 2026 STAC Summit Tokyo 2026 is expected to cover a wide range of topics related to financial technology, including trading infrastructure, market data, artificial intelligence, cloud technologies, high-performance computing, and the modernization of market infrastructure.JPX Group will support the event as a sponsor and plans to participate through speaking engagements by JPX Group representatives. Registration and Details For event details and registration information, please visit the STAC website below. STAC Summit – Tokyo Information regarding sponsorship opportunities and participation as a speaker or panelist is also available through the STAC website. Contact Information For inquiries regarding event registration, sponsorship opportunities, or participation as a speaker: Contact Strategic Technology Analysis Center　E-mail:info@stacresearch.com

Key points When it comes to retirement and member services, we are seeing a widening gap between leaders and laggards. Trustees need to treat retirement as a ‘whole-of-business’ issue. Framing it as an isolated challenge is part of the problem. Trustees need to ensure that every part of their business is delivering for their members up to and into retirement. Joint session with APRA Executive Director, Life, Private Health Insurance and Superannuation, Jane Magill. Ms Magill’s remarks are available on the APRA website. I would like to acknowledge the Ngunnawal people's ongoing connection to and custodianship of the lands on which we meet today and pay my respects to elders past and present. I extend that respect to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people who are here today. It’s great to be back with you again this afternoon. Hopefully it’s clear how much both ASIC and APRA value the opportunity to be part of this summit by the fact we return each year. And the fact that it attracts such strong senior representation from across the sector speaks volumes about the importance of the retirement and services challenge, and the interest in it. For ASIC this event is an opportunity to take stock of where we are and to determine whether this is the year that interest turns into demonstrably improved outcomes. A story of inconsistency When I spoke at this event last year, I told a story of inconsistency in how trustees were implementing the Retirement Income Covenant. There were leaders and laggards. Some doing it well. Others, less so. I challenged all trustees to step up. A year later, where do we find ourselves? Unfortunately, this year’s story is too much like the last - which is far worse than dull and repetitive. It is outright disappointing. In fact, the gap between the leaders and the laggards in both retirement and member services is widening. We are seeing some doing certain things well, but far too few are delivering a strong performance across all aspects of their business. And too many are falling short on core responsibilities. Take our recent follow-up review of death benefit claims, for example. Many trustees had taken steps to strengthen their claims processes, but too many had not done enough to address deficiencies. And it’s those stragglers who risk undermining confidence in the industry’s readiness to serve our ageing population. When we stepped back, we found that despite all the action and focus from us and the work of some – but certainly not all – of you in the industry, the number of claims paid inside six months only moved 3% across the period. It was, again, not just repetitive but outright disappointing. Similarly, when it comes to retirement, Australians need action now, not aspiration. An estimated 2.5 million Australians are expected to transition into retirement over the next decade – that’s roughly the population of Perth. And our consumer research shows that many of those people feel overwhelmed, unprepared and anxious about the future. 48% of Australians aged between 50 and 66 are worried that they will run out of money in retirement[1] and - even more concerning – 14% of people over 65 who are still working believe they will never be able to retire – largely due to financial reasons. This shows you that our retirement system is still not working for everyone. Policy makers and regulators need to grapple with that challenge – but trustees have the most important role to play. They can do more to educate their members, to encourage them to engage with their super, to consider their contributions and to actively plan their retirement. Many in this room will be aware of ASIC’s independent inquiry into ASX. When I look at what’s happening in super - it might surprise you - but I see clear parallels. Both ASX and trustees are critical to the economy – and critical to all Australians. ASX as the custodian of regulated monopoly critical market infrastructure, and trustees as stewards of the country’s $3.1 trillion[2] of APRA-regulated retirement funds. Both have had failings that have impacted the public’s confidence in their ability to provide critical services. And in both cases, these failings are the result of whole-of-business issues, which took years to develop and will take time, investment and most importantly, governance and leadership commitment - to resolve. As I’ve said before, as superannuation funds become larger and more systemically important, trustees need to materially improve and scale their internal capabilities to match their growing size and influence. Retirement is a whole-of-business issue Which brings me to retirement – the whole point of superannuation and another whole-of-business issue. We often talk about it as an isolated challenge, but that framing is part of the problem. Good retirement outcomes require more than just good retirement products. Every part of your business should deliver for members. That includes how you deal with complaints, how you communicate with members, and, crucially, how you use the information available to you to improve your service. And it’s this last point I’d really like to emphasise. Trustees have access to a huge amount of data. One of the messages we repeat most often is that we expect you to use it – and use it well. Not just to understand who your members are, but to understand what they – your customers - need, including as they move towards and through retirement. That means using your data to shape clearer, more targeted retirement communications. It means using your data to improve claims handling and member services. And, critically, it means using your data to identify risks early and safeguard members’ retirement savings and their confidence. Because from what we’re seeing, and despite all of our warnings, some trustees are still using their data like they were stuck in the 90s - relying on almost entirely manual indicators to monitor potential harm. At the end of June, we released Report 833 Safeguarding Super which details how well platform trustees are monitoring potential risks to members’ retirement savings. The findings were decidedly mixed. Once again, we see leaders and laggards, and once again we see repetition of prior findings, which is downright disappointing. Some of the poorer performers are arguably even worse than they were two years ago. On the other hand, the better performers are considerably better and with some “new joiners” to the better performers club, we can see that a turnaround is possible. But of course, a system characterised by outliers is not good enough - we need to see all platform trustees consistently meeting expectations. When we looked at the poorer performers, we saw a concerning lack of strategic monitoring. Oversight was, at times, almost completely manual, and there were clear gaps in both controls – like fee caps set far too high to meaningfully protect savings from fee erosion – and also in action. One trustee took more than a year to take any meaningful action after placing an advice licensee on a watchlist for suspicious activity by one of their representatives. During that time, another representative of that licensee submitted applications to rollover superannuation balances using fake signatures from a deceased adviser. That’s alarming – especially in the wake of the Shield and First Guardian collapses. Oversight isn’t optional – it’s your job as a trustee and it’s what Australians expect. Some trustees are doing it well. We saw one trustee who commenced an investigation immediately after becoming aware of unusual activity relating to an advice licensee. Within two weeks, they had suspended all advice fees payable and refunded any fees already paid. Within two months, the licensee agreement had been terminated[3]. That’s a trustee doing their job. Learning from complaints One area where we believe trustees could be doing more is learning from their customers’ complaints. ASIC has repeatedly called on trustees to put in place systems and processes to ensure that they can learn from complaints - and yet many continue to fall short. In an ongoing review to be released later this year, we found that close to a quarter of trustees do not undertake regular complaints analysis to detect systemic issues, despite it being an enforceable requirement. You need to have robust arrangements in place to manage complaints, to properly interrogate complaint data and ensure that systemic issues are being identified and addressed. Even beyond these being enforceable requirements, it’s what your members would expect. As I said last year, complaints are your canary in the coalmine. Some trustees are doing it well and again, encouragingly, this now includes some former laggards joining the leaders. One trustee, for example, noticed a trend in complaints from existing allocated pension members wanting to add extra money into their pension account. The trustee reviewed those complaints. They identified where the common pain points were and they took action to address them. That’s a win for the trustee and a win for their members. We want to see more of that: more internal analysis and more trustees benchmarking complaints so that they can properly measure their performance. And they shouldn’t stop at complaints. We want to see trustees benchmarking every aspect of their business. Member services are whole-of-business challenge. Don’t benchmark in your backyard For those who want to be among the better trustees – the member and retirement service ‘winners’ for your customers - that’s what you need to be doing. We know some trustees are beginning to make better use of data and to benchmark their performance. But we see firms focusing on relative positioning, when the real issue is baseline capability. It’s not about being slightly better than your peers. It’s about whether the system itself is good enough. We can all see the same digitally-fuelled acceleration of the globalisation of markets and investments that is the hallmark of 2026. If trustees are benchmarking only against domestic peers, they’re already behind. Competition is global and cross-industry – you need to benchmark against best practice. To again use ASX as an example, 28,000 Australian retail investors invested directly in the SpaceX IPO. They didn’t do that through the ASX – they did it through Nasdaq, via Commsec. Australians are looking globally – so trustees should be looking globally too. Capital is mobile – if we stop competing for it, we risk becoming irrelevant. Private credit in super Before finishing up, I want to touch on private credit, because any discussion about improving retirement or investment outcomes would be incomplete without considering the implications of this growing asset class. As you’ll be aware, ASIC has recently voiced our concern about the risks private credit poses to Australians through their super. We’re not saying don’t invest in private credit. We recognise that private credit has a legitimate place in diversified portfolios, but it comes with responsibility. Trustees need to be able to demonstrate that private assets are valued appropriately, that liquidity risks are understood and managed, and that disclosures to members are accurate, transparent and effective. Just like with member services, these responsibilities are yours, as trustees, however you arrange your business and investment services – including when you outsource to fund managers. When we look at practices across the sector, including the findings of our recent surveillances in areas like auditing of trustees, we’re not yet satisfied that trustees are doing that sufficiently well. Closing I often say it is rare to find a trustee whose intent is not to help Australians enjoy a good retirement – today’s attendance is, again, proof of that. For me, the question isn’t one of intent, nor of whether the system can deliver better retirement outcomes – it can. The question is whether trustees can ensure the whole of their business is delivering for their customers up to and into retirement. Thank you.   [1] Pg 2 Moneysmart Key Research Findings [2] Quarterly superannuation performance statistics highlights - March 2026 | APRA [3] Pg. 19 Report REP 833

NZX Limited today published its financial results and Interim Report for the six months ended 30 June 2026. Please find attached the following materials:  NZX Limited Interim Report 2026  PDF 6.62 MB NZX H1 2026 - Results Announcement  PDF134.31 KB NZX H1 2026 - Distribution Notice  PDF159.46 KB NZX H1 2026 Results - Investor Presentation  PDF2.65 MB NZX H1 2026 Results - News Release  PDF114.50 KB NZX H1 2026 Results - Shareholder Letter  PDF88.27 KB

Comptroller of the Currency Jonathan V. Gould today discussed the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency’s (OCC) work under the leadership of President Donald J. Trump and U.S. Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent to support the Administration’s efforts to grow the economy and lead the global digital currency revolution, in a Fireside Chat at the Wyoming Blockchain Symposium in Jackson Hole, Wyoming. Excerpts from Comptroller Gould’s discussion are below. His full discussion can be found here. On de novo chartering and digital assets Since President Trump took office, so over the last 18 or so months, we have received 40 applications for new bank charters in this country. Over half of those bank charters in the business plans for those bank charters involve some form of digital asset activity. So that's 23 out of 40. That's an eightfold increase from the four years of the Biden administration. So that tells you about where the puck is going. We are now seeing when we look out further, when I look out further to the pipeline of potential applicants for bank charters, it is becoming ordinary course to involve and integrate payment stablecoins, etc. in the business plans that we are now seeing presented to the OCC for consideration. On the GENIUS Act We were working on the rule even before the President actually signed the bill into law. We will have a final rule out by November, so we are working with great speed here. We are witnessing the birth of a new industry in the form of payment stablecoins. Looking ahead We're very excited about the prospect of stablecoins and our role in that regulatory and supervisory landscape. It actually brings us back to our original mission back in the 1860s when we were created, which is ensuring that the reserve assets backing then national bank issued notes were of the same level of quality. That's exactly analogous to what Congress has tasked us with doing with respect to payment stablecoins. Related Link Comptroller Fireside Chat at the Wyoming Blockchain Association

On Friday, September 4, 2026, MIAX Options will remove the initiating price from Request for Response messages and will only disseminate option, side, and size for PRIME and cPRIME Auctions. Please refer to the following Regulatory Circular for more information: MIAX Options RC 2026-130 For additional information, please contact MIAX Trading Operations at TradingOperations@miaxglobal.com or (609) 897-7302. Please direct questions to the Regulatory Department at Regulatory@miaxglobal.com or (609) 897-7309.

The Federal Reserve on Wednesday released the minutes of the Federal Open Market Committee meeting that was held on July 28–29, 2026. The minutes for each regularly scheduled meeting of the Committee are generally published three weeks after the day of the policy decision. The descriptions of economic and financial conditions contained in these minutes are based solely on the information that was available to the Committee at the time of the meeting. The minutes can be viewed on the Board’s website. Minutes of Federal Open Market CommitteeJuly 28–29, 2026: HTML | PDF