Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend Rule 14.11, Other Securities, 27254-27258 [2020-09712]
Download as PDF
27254
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 89 / Thursday, May 7, 2020 / Notices
approximately 0.5 hours creating a
record of its determination whether it
must register as an investment adviser
with each of the 15 states required to
rely on the exemption, and
approximately 0.5 hours to maintain
these records. Accordingly, we estimate
that rule 203A–2(d) results in an annual
aggregate burden of collection for SECregistered investment advisers of a total
of 848 hours. Estimates of average
burden hours are made solely for the
purposes of the Paperwork Reduction
Act, and are not derived from a
comprehensive or even a representative
survey or study of the costs of
Commission rules and forms.
Written comments are invited on: (a)
Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility;
(b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate
of the burden of the collection of
information; (c) ways to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the
information collected; and (d) ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of
information on respondents, including
through the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information
technology. Consideration will be given
to comments and suggestions submitted
in writing within 60 days of this
publication.
Please direct your written comments
to David Bottom, Director/Chief
Information Officer, Securities and
Exchange Commission, C/O Cynthia
Roscoe, 100 F Street NE, Washington,
DC 20549; or send an email to: PRA_
Mailbox@sec.gov.
Dated: May 4, 2020.
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020–09796 Filed 5–6–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Proposed Collection; Comment
Request
Upon Written Request, Copies Available
From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of FOIA Services,
100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549–2736
Extension:
Rule 0–2, Form ADV–NR, SEC File No.
270–214, OMB Control No. 3235–0240
Notice is hereby given that, pursuant
to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities
and Exchange Commission
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:45 May 06, 2020
Jkt 250001
(‘‘Commission’’) is soliciting comments
on the collection of information
summarized below. The Commission
plans to submit this existing collection
of information to the Office of
Management and Budget for extension
and approval.
The title for the collection of
information is ‘‘Rule 0–2 and Form
ADV–NR under the Investment Advisers
Act of 1940.’’ Rule 0–2 and Form ADV–
NR facilitate service of process on a
non-resident investment adviser, or on a
non-resident general partner or nonresident managing agent of an
investment adviser. Form ADV–NR
designates the Secretary of the
Commission, among others, as the nonresident general partner’s or nonresident managing agent’s agent for
service of process. The collection of
information is necessary for us to obtain
appropriate consent to permit the
Commission and other parties to bring
actions against non-resident partners
and agents for violations of the federal
securities laws and to enable the
commencement of legal and/or
regulatory actions against investment
advisers that are doing business in the
United States, but are not residents.
The respondents to this information
collection would be each non-resident
general partner or non-resident
managing agent of an SEC-registered
investment adviser and each nonresident general partner or non-resident
managing agent of an exempt reporting
adviser. The Commission has estimated
that compliance with the requirement to
complete Form ADV–NR imposes a total
burden of approximately 1.0 hours for
an adviser. Based on our experience
with these filings, we estimate that we
will receive 53 Form ADV–NR filings
annually. Based on the 1.0 hours per
respondent estimate, the Commission
staff estimates a total annual burden of
53 hours for this collection of
information.
Rule 0–2 and Form ADV–NR do not
require recordkeeping or records
retention. The collection of information
requirements under the rule and form is
mandatory. The information collected
pursuant to Rule 0–2 and Form ADV–
NR is a filing with the Commission.
This filing is not kept confidential and
must be preserved until at least three
years after termination of the enterprise.
An agency may not conduct or sponsor,
and a person is not required to respond
to, a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid control
number.
Written comments are invited on: (a)
Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility;
(b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate
of the burden of the collection of
information; (c) ways to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the
information collected; and (d) ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of
information on respondents, including
through the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information
technology. Consideration will be given
to comments and suggestions submitted
in writing within 60 days of this
publication. An agency may not conduct
or sponsor a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number. No person shall be
subject to any penalty for failing to
comply with a collection of information
subject to the PRA that does not display
a valid OMB control number.
Please direct your written comments
to David Bottom, Director/Chief
Information Officer, Securities and
Exchange Commission, C/O Cynthia
Roscoe, 100 F Street NE, Washington,
DC 20549; or send an email to: PRA_
Mailbox@sec.gov.
Dated: May 4, 2020.
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020–09797 Filed 5–6–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–88795; File No. SR–
CboeBZX–2020–036]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe
BZX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing of
a Proposed Rule Change To Amend
Rule 14.11, Other Securities
May 1, 2020.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2
notice is hereby given that on April 29,
2020, Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (the
‘‘Exchange’’ or ‘‘BZX’’) filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission
(the ‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule
change as described in Items I, II, and
III below, which Items have been
prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule
change from interested persons.
1 15
2 17
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
CFR 240.19b–4.
E:\FR\FM\07MYN1.SGM
07MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 89 / Thursday, May 7, 2020 / Notices
I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Terms of Substance of
the Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange proposes rule changes
in several places in Exchange Rule
14.11, Other Securities, to amend the
initial period after commencement of
trading of an ETP, as defined below, on
the Exchange as it specifically relates to
holders of record and/or beneficial
holders. The text of the proposed rule
change is provided in Exhibit 5.
The text of the proposed rule change
is also available on the Exchange’s
website (https://markets.cboe.com/us/
equities/regulation/rule_filings/bzx/), at
the Exchange’s Office of the Secretary,
and at the Commission’s Public
Reference Room.
II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
In its filing with the Commission, the
Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for
the proposed rule change and discussed
any comments it received on the
proposed rule change. The text of these
statements may be examined at the
places specified in Item IV below. The
Exchange has prepared summaries, set
forth in sections A, B, and C below, of
the most significant aspects of such
statements.
A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
1. Purpose
The Exchange proposes to make
several changes to Rule 14.11 in order
to amend the continued listing
standards applicable to ETPs 3 listed on
the Exchange. Specifically, the
Exchange is proposing to amend its
rules such that they would provide
additional time for an ETP to meet the
applicable Beneficial Holders 4
standards in the Exchange’s listing rules
(the ‘‘Beneficial Holders Rules’’).5
3 For the purpose of this filing, the term ETP
means securities listed pursuant to Rule 14.11(c)
(Index Fund Shares), Rule 14.11(i) (Managed Fund
Shares), and Rule 14.11(l) (Exchange-Traded Fund
Shares (‘‘ETF Shares’’)).
4 As it relates to this filing, ‘‘Beneficial Holders’’
shall mean beneficial holders and, where applicable
in a particular continued listing standard, record
holders.
5 The Exchange notes that its Rules related to the
listing and trading of other product types (that is,
products that are not ETPs as defined above) have
similar requirements related to Beneficial Holders
which the Exchange is not proposing to eliminate
at this time. Specifically, the Exchange is only
proposing to amend the Beneficial Holders Rules as
it pertains to Index Fund Shares, Managed Fund
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:45 May 06, 2020
Jkt 250001
Currently, the Exchange’s continued
listing standards for ETPs generally
require that, following the initial 12
month period after commencement of
trading on the Exchange, the Exchange
shall consider the suspension of trading
in and will commence delisting
proceedings under Rule 14.12 for an
ETP for which there are fewer than 50
Beneficial Holders for 30 or more
consecutive trading days. The Exchange
is proposing to change the date at which
an ETP would need to have at least 50
Beneficial Holders or be subject to
delisting proceedings under Rule 14.12
from 12 months after commencement of
trading on the Exchange to 36 months
after commencement of trading on the
Exchange.
As further described below, the
Exchange believes it is appropriate to
increase the period of time for an ETP
to comply with the applicable Beneficial
Holders Rule from 12 months to 36
months because: (i) It would bring the
rule more in line with the life cycle of
an ETP; (ii) the economic and
competitive structures in place in the
ETP ecosystem naturally incentivize
issuers to de-list products rather than
continuing to list products that do not
garner investor interest; and (iii)
extending the period from 12 to 36
months will not meaningfully impact
the manipulation concerns that the
Beneficial Holders Rules are intended to
address.
First, the ETP space is more
competitive than it has ever been—with
more than 2,000 ETPs listed on U.S.
national securities exchanges competing
for investor assets, the natural cycle for
an average ETP to gain traction in the
market is growing longer and longer. As
more and more ETPs have come to
market, many distribution platforms
have become more restrictive about the
ETPs that they allow on their systems,
often requiring a minimum existing
track record (e.g., at least 12 months)
and meeting certain thresholds for
assets under management (e.g., at least
$100 million) for an ETP to be added.
Similarly, many larger entities are
unwilling to invest in ETPs that do not
have at least one calendar year track
record. All of these factors have
contributed to the natural slowing of the
average ETP’s growth cycle and,
unsurprisingly, the Exchange has seen a
significant number of deficiencies based
on a failure to meet the applicable
Shares, and ETF Shares because such product types
represent the vast majority of products listed on the
Exchange. The Exchange may consider proposing to
amend the Beneficial Holders Rules for other
product types in a future proposal.
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
27255
Beneficial Holders Rule over the last
several years.6
Changing the timeline for meeting the
Beneficial Holders Rules from 12
months to 36 months would provide
ETPs with a more reasonable runway to
establish a track record and grow assets
under management, both of which
generally precede the accumulation of
Beneficial Holders. Further, the
Exchange believes that extending that
runway will encourage smaller issuers
to make the necessary capital
expenditures to launch additional ETPs,
as well as help both large and small
issuers by allowing them to continue to
list and promote products that they
believe can succeed and that they are
willing to continue paying for, all of
which will help to foster competition
and innovation in the ETP
marketplace.7
Second, the economic and
competitive structures in place in the
ETP ecosystem naturally incentivize
issuers to de-list products rather than
continuing to list products that do not
garner investor interest, meaning that
the rule does not provide any
meaningful ‘‘pruning’’ function for the
industry. Rather, the Exchange has
found that, as currently constructed, the
12 month Beneficial Holders Rules have
instead resulted in the forced
termination of ETPs that issuers
believed were still economically viable.
While some observers might argue that
forced delisting of an ETP based on a
failure to meet the Beneficial Holders
Rule is a good way to reduce the
number of ETPs in the marketplace that
have not drawn meaningful market
interest, the Exchange vehemently
disagrees with this sentiment. First,
there are significant costs associated
with both the initial launch and
continued operation of an ETP and the
Exchange has found that the ecosystem
6 The Exchange has issued deficiency
notifications to 34 ETPs for non-compliance with
Beneficial Holders Rules in the last five years. In
addition, 22 ETPs have voluntarily delisted within
their first year listed on the Exchange. While this
isn’t specifically attributable to non-compliance
with the Beneficial Holder Rules, the most likely
reasons for voluntarily delisting an ETP in its first
year would be either: (i) Failure or anticipated
failure to meet the Beneficial Holders Rules; or (ii)
the issuer believing that the ETP was not
economically viable.
7 The Exchange notes that of the 34 ETPs that
received deficiency notifications for noncompliance with Beneficial Holders Rules, 27
reached compliance while going through the
delisting process under Rule 14.12 and continued
to list on the Exchange. As such, the 12 month
threshold for the Beneficial Holders Rules had no
meaningful impact on whether such ETPs could list
on the Exchange and only served as regulatory and
administrative burdens for issuers to manage,
which the Exchange believes makes it more difficult
for smaller issuers to compete.
E:\FR\FM\07MYN1.SGM
07MYN1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
27256
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 89 / Thursday, May 7, 2020 / Notices
tends to prune itself of ETPs without
meaningful investor interest. In fact, the
Exchange has had 69 products that have
voluntarily delisted in the last two
years,8 creating meaningful turnover in
products which issuers believe are not
economically viable. Second, the
Exchange contests the underlying
assumption that the number of
Beneficial Holders is even a meaningful
measure of market interest in an ETP.
While a very high Beneficial Holder
count would most certainly indicate an
ETP’s success, the absence of Beneficial
Holders is not necessarily a good
measure of market interest or the
amount of assets held by the ETP.
Further to this point, the Beneficial
Holders Rules are not rules that an ETP
issuer is incentivized to cut close or
exceed by the smallest amount possible.
Unlike most other quantitative or
disclosure based listing requirements,
an ETP issuer is incentivized to have as
many Beneficial Holders as possible and
would almost certainly prefer that they
were able to meet and exceed the
applicable Beneficial Holders Rule as
soon as possible after beginning trading
on the Exchange. As such, extending the
time period from 12 months to 36
months will not provide issuers with a
longer window to intentionally keep the
number of Beneficial Holders lower,
but, rather, will only extend the period
during which an ETP could have fewer
than 50 Beneficial Holders in specific
instances where an issuer is unable to
meet the 50 Beneficial Holders
threshold but still believes that the ETP
is viable and worth the cost of
continued operation. Again, it takes
money and resources to launch and
operate an ETP and where an issuer
does not believe that an ETP is
economically viable, both common
sense and prior experience point to
issuers delisting these products.
Finally, the Exchange believes that
making this change does not create any
significant change in the risk of
manipulation for ETPs listed on the
Exchange for several reasons. First, the
Exchange does not believe that there is
anything particularly important about
the 50th Beneficial Holder that reduces
the manipulation risk associated with
an ETP as compared to the 49th, nor is
there any manipulation concern that
arises on the 366th day after an ETP
began trading on the Exchange that
didn’t otherwise exist on the 1st, 2nd,
or 365th day. Rather, the Exchange
believes that the rule is generally
8 There
are currently 357 ETPs listed on the
Exchange, meaning that there’s been a nearly 20%
voluntary turnover of ETPs listed on the Exchange
over the last two years.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:45 May 06, 2020
Jkt 250001
intended to ensure that products that do
not have broad ownership and could be
susceptible to manipulation by a few
parties are not able to list on the
Exchange after they’ve had sufficient
time to diversify their ownership base.
Leaving aside the issue of whether an
open-ended ETP with creation and
redemption processes would really be
subject to manipulation by virtue of
narrow ownership, the Exchange
believes that, for all of the reasons
explained above, 36 months is a more
appropriate amount of time to consider
sufficient time to diversify an ETP’s
ownership base.
Further to this point, the Exchange
has in place a robust surveillance
program for ETPs that allows it to
monitor trading of ETPs during all
trading sessions on the Exchange and it
believes are sufficient to deter and
detect violations of Exchange rules and
the applicable federal securities laws.
These surveillances generally focus on
detecting securities trading outside of
their normal patterns, which could be
indicative of manipulative or other
violative activity. When such situations
are detected, surveillance analysis
follows and investigations are opened,
where appropriate, to review the
behavior of all relevant parties for all
relevant trading violations. Further, the
Exchange or the Financial Industry
Regulatory Authority (‘‘FINRA’’),9 on
behalf of the Exchange, or both,
communicate as needed regarding
trading in ETPs with other markets and
other entities that are members of the
Intermarket Surveillance Group (‘‘ISG’’),
and the Exchange or FINRA, on behalf
of the Exchange, or both, may obtain
trading information in ETPs from such
markets and other entities. The
Exchange believes that these robust
surveillance procedures will further act
to mitigate any manipulation concerns
that arise from extending the
compliance period for the Beneficial
Holders Rules from 12 months to 36
months.
The Exchange also believes that the
other continued listing standards in the
Exchange’s rules or representations that
constitute continued listing standards in
Exchange rule filings (either the
disclosure obligations applicable under
Rule 6c–11 of the Investment Company
Act of 1940 for series of ETF Shares or
the diversity, liquidity, and size of an
ETP’s holdings or reference assets
applicable to Index Fund Shares and
Managed Fund Shares) are generally
9 FINRA conducts cross-market surveillances on
behalf of the Exchange pursuant to a regulatory
services agreement. The Exchange is responsible for
FINRA’s performance under this regulatory services
agreement.
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
sufficient to mitigate manipulation
concerns associated with the applicable
ETP. During the first 12 months of
trading on the Exchange when the
Beneficial Holders Rules do not apply,
these disclosure and quantitative
obligations, in conjunction with the
Exchange’s surveillance program (as
discussed above), are generally deemed
sufficient to prevent any manipulation
concerns in Exchange-listed ETPs. As
such, the Exchange believes that
extending the period from 12 months to
36 months does not significantly
increase any risk of manipulation that
wasn’t already generally deemed
acceptable for the first 12 months that
an ETP was listed. Again, the Exchange
is not proposing to eliminate the
Beneficial Holders Rules, but merely to
extend the period for an ETP to meet the
50 Beneficial Holder requirement.
2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes that the
proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)
of the Act 10 in general and Section
6(b)(5) of the Act 11 in particular in that
it is designed to promote just and
equitable principles of trade, to remove
impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market
and a national market system and, in
general, to protect investors and the
public interest.
The proposed rule changes are
designed to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, to remove
impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market
and, in general, to protect investors and
the public interest because it would
prevent the premature delisting of ETPs
that have not had sufficient time to
build up to 50 Beneficial Holders
without significantly impacting the
manipulation concerns that the
Beneficial Holders Rules are intended to
address.
The Exchange believes it is
appropriate to increase the period of
time for an ETP to comply with the
applicable Beneficial Holders Rule from
12 months to 36 months because: (i) It
would bring the rule more in line with
the life cycle of an ETP; (ii) the
economic and competitive structures in
place in the ETP ecosystem naturally
incentivize issuers to de-list products
rather than continuing to list products
that do not garner investor interest; and
(iii) extending the period from 12 to 36
months will not meaningfully impact
the manipulation concerns that the
Beneficial Holders Rules are intended to
address.
10 15
11 15
E:\FR\FM\07MYN1.SGM
U.S.C. 78f.
U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
07MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 89 / Thursday, May 7, 2020 / Notices
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
First, the ETP space is more
competitive than it has ever been—with
more than 2,000 ETPs listed on U.S.
national securities exchanges competing
for investor assets, the natural cycle for
an average ETP to gain traction in the
market is growing longer and longer. As
more and more ETPs have come to
market, many distribution platforms
have become more restrictive about the
ETPs that they allow on their systems,
often requiring a minimum existing
track record (e.g., at least 12 months)
and meeting certain thresholds for
assets under management (e.g., at least
$100 million) for an ETP to be added.
Similarly, many larger entities are
unwilling to invest in ETPs that do not
have at least one calendar year track
record. All of these factors have
contributed to the natural slowing of the
average ETP’s growth cycle and,
unsurprisingly, the Exchange has seen a
significant number of deficiencies based
on a failure to meet the applicable
Beneficial Holders Rule over the last
several years.12
Changing the timeline for meeting the
Beneficial Holders Rules from 12
months to 36 months would provide
ETPs with a more reasonable runway to
establish a track record and grow assets
under management, both of which
generally precede the accumulation of
Beneficial Holders. Further, the
Exchange believes that extending that
runway will encourage smaller issuers
to make the necessary capital
expenditures to launch additional ETPs,
as well as help both large and small
issuers by allowing them to continue to
list and promote products that they
believe can succeed and that they are
willing to continue paying for, all of
which will help to foster competition
and innovation in the ETP
marketplace.13
12 The Exchange has issued deficiency
notifications to 34 ETPs for non-compliance with
Beneficial Holders Rules in the last five years. In
addition, 22 ETPs have voluntarily delisted within
their first year listed on the Exchange. While this
isn’t specifically attributable to non-compliance
with the Beneficial Holder Rules, the most likely
reasons for voluntarily delisting an ETP in its first
year would be either: (i) Failure or anticipated
failure to meet the Beneficial Holders Rules; or (ii)
the issuer believing that the ETP was not
economically viable.
13 The Exchange notes that of the 34 ETPs that
received deficiency notifications for noncompliance with Beneficial Holders Rules, 27
reached compliance while going through the
delisting process under Rule 14.12 and continued
to list on the Exchange. As such, the 12 month
threshold for the Beneficial Holders Rules had no
meaningful impact on whether such ETPs could list
on the Exchange and only served as regulatory and
administrative burdens for issuers to manage,
which the Exchange believes makes it more difficult
for smaller issuers to compete.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:45 May 06, 2020
Jkt 250001
Second, the economic and
competitive structures in place in the
ETP ecosystem naturally incentivize
issuers to de-list products rather than
continuing to list products that do not
garner investor interest, meaning that
the rule does not provide any
meaningful ‘‘pruning’’ function for the
industry. Rather, the Exchange has
found that, as currently constructed, the
12 month Beneficial Holders Rules have
instead resulted in the forced
termination of ETPs that issuers
believed were still economically viable.
While some observers might argue that
forced delisting of an ETP based on a
failure to meet the Beneficial Holders
Rule is a good way to reduce the
number of ETPs in the marketplace that
have not drawn meaningful market
interest, the Exchange vehemently
disagrees with this sentiment. First,
there are significant costs associated
with both the initial launch and
continued operation of an ETP and the
Exchange has found that the ecosystem
tends to prune itself of ETPs without
meaningful investor interest. In fact, the
Exchange has had 69 products that have
voluntarily delisted in the last two
years,14 creating meaningful turnover in
products which issuers believe are not
economically viable. Second, the
Exchange contests the underlying
assumption that the number of
Beneficial Holders is even a meaningful
measure of market interest in an ETP.
While a very high Beneficial Holder
count would most certainly indicate an
ETP’s success, the absence of Beneficial
Holders is not necessarily a good
measure of market interest or the
amount of assets held by the ETP.
Further to this point, the Beneficial
Holders Rules are not rules that an ETP
issuer is incentivized to cut close or
exceed by the smallest amount possible.
Unlike most other quantitative or
disclosure based listing requirements,
an ETP issuer is incentivized to have as
many Beneficial Holders as possible and
would almost certainly prefer that they
were able to meet and exceed the
applicable Beneficial Holders Rule as
soon as possible after beginning trading
on the Exchange. As such, extending the
time period from 12 months to 36
months will not provide issuers with a
longer window to intentionally keep the
number of Beneficial Holders lower,
but, rather, will only extend the period
during which an ETP could have fewer
than 50 Beneficial Holders in specific
instances where an issuer is unable to
14 There
are currently 357 ETPs listed on the
Exchange, meaning that there’s been a nearly 20%
voluntary turnover of ETPs listed on the Exchange
over the last two years.
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
27257
meet the 50 Beneficial Holders
threshold but still believes that the ETP
is viable and worth the cost of
continued operation. Again, it takes
money and resources to launch and
operate an ETP and where an issuer
does not believe that an ETP is
economically viable, both common
sense and prior experience point to
issuers delisting these products.
Finally, the Exchange believes that
making this change does not create any
significant change in the risk of
manipulation for ETPs listed on the
Exchange for several reasons. First, the
Exchange does not believe that there is
anything particularly important about
the 50th Beneficial Holder that reduces
the manipulation risk associated with
an ETP as compared to the 49th, nor is
there any manipulation concern that
arises on the 366th day after an ETP
began trading on the Exchange that
didn’t otherwise exist on the 1st, 2nd,
or 365th day. Rather, the Exchange
believes that the rule is generally
intended to ensure that products that do
not have broad ownership and could be
susceptible to manipulation by a few
parties are not able to list on the
Exchange after they’ve had sufficient
time to diversify their ownership base.
Leaving aside the issue of whether an
open-ended ETP with creation and
redemption processes would really be
subject to manipulation by virtue of
narrow ownership, the Exchange
believes that, for all of the reasons
explained above, 36 months is a more
appropriate amount of time to consider
sufficient time to diversify an ETP’s
ownership base.
Further to this point, the Exchange
has in place a robust surveillance
program for ETPs that allows it to
monitor trading of ETPs during all
trading sessions on the Exchange and it
believes are sufficient to deter and
detect violations of Exchange rules and
the applicable federal securities laws.
These surveillances generally focus on
detecting securities trading outside of
their normal patterns, which could be
indicative of manipulative or other
violative activity. When such situations
are detected, surveillance analysis
follows and investigations are opened,
where appropriate, to review the
behavior of all relevant parties for all
relevant trading violations. Further, the
Exchange or the FINRA,15 on behalf of
the Exchange, or both, communicate as
needed regarding trading in ETPs with
other markets and other entities that are
15 FINRA conducts cross-market surveillances on
behalf of the Exchange pursuant to a regulatory
services agreement. The Exchange is responsible for
FINRA’s performance under this regulatory services
agreement.
E:\FR\FM\07MYN1.SGM
07MYN1
27258
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 89 / Thursday, May 7, 2020 / Notices
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
members of the ISG, and the Exchange
or FINRA, on behalf of the Exchange, or
both, may obtain trading information in
ETPs from such markets and other
entities. The Exchange believes that
these robust surveillance procedures
will further act to mitigate any
manipulation concerns that arise from
extending the compliance period for the
Beneficial Holders Rules from 12
months to 36 months.
The Exchange also believes that the
other continued listing standards in the
Exchange’s rules or representations that
constitute continued listing standards in
Exchange rule filings (either the
disclosure obligations applicable under
Rule 6c–11 of the Investment Company
Act of 1940 for series of ETF Shares or
the diversity, liquidity, and size of an
ETP’s holdings or reference assets
applicable to Index Fund Shares and
Managed Fund Shares) are generally
sufficient to mitigate manipulation
concerns associated with the applicable
ETP. During the first 12 months of
trading on the Exchange when the
Beneficial Holders Rules do not apply,
these disclosure and quantitative
obligations, in conjunction with the
Exchange’s surveillance program (as
discussed above), are generally deemed
sufficient to prevent any manipulation
concerns in Exchange-listed ETPs. As
such, the Exchange believes that
extending the period from 12 months to
36 months will not significantly
increase any risk of manipulation that
wasn’t already generally deemed
acceptable for the first 12 months that
an ETP was listed. Again, the Exchange
is not proposing to eliminate the
Beneficial Holders Rules, but merely to
extend the period for an ETP to meet the
50 Beneficial Holder requirement.
The proposed rule change is also
designed to protect investors and the
public interest because the Exchange is
only proposing to amend the continued
listing requirement related to Beneficial
Holders and all ETPs listed on the
Exchange would continue to be subject
to the full panoply of Exchange rules
and procedures that currently govern
the trading of equity securities on the
Exchange.
For the above reasons, the Exchange
believes that the proposed rule change
is consistent with the requirements of
Section 6(b)(5) of the Act.
B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Burden on Competition
The Exchange does not believe that
the proposed rule change will impose
any burden on competition that is not
necessary or appropriate in furtherance
of the purpose of the Act. Instead, the
Exchange believes that the proposed
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:45 May 06, 2020
Jkt 250001
rule change would help to encourage
smaller issuers to make the necessary
capital expenditures to launch
additional ETPs, as well as help both
large and small issuers by allowing
them to continue to list and promote
products that they believe can succeed
and that they are willing to continue
paying for, which will enhance
competition among market participants,
to the benefit of investors and the
marketplace.
C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Comments on the
Proposed Rule Change Received From
Members, Participants, or Others
The Exchange neither solicited nor
received comments on the proposed
rule change.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the
Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
Within 45 days of the date of
publication of this notice in the Federal
Register or within such longer period
up to 90 days (i) as the Commission may
designate if it finds such longer period
to be appropriate and publishes its
reasons for so finding or (ii) as to which
the Exchange consents, the Commission
will:
A. By order approve or disapprove
such proposed rule change, or
B. institute proceedings to determine
whether the proposed rule change
should be disapproved.
IV. Solicitation of Comments
Interested persons are invited to
submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing,
including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act.
Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:
Electronic Comments
• Use the Commission’s internet
comment form (https://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml); or
• Send an email to rule-comments@
sec.gov. Please include File Number SR–
CboeBZX–2020–036 on the subject line.
Paper Comments
• Send paper comments in triplicate
to Secretary, Securities and Exchange
Commission, 100 F Street NE,
Washington, DC 20549–1090.
All submissions should refer to File
Number SR–CboeBZX–2020–036. This
file number should be included on the
subject line if email is used. To help the
Commission process and review your
comments more efficiently, please use
only one method. The Commission will
post all comments on the Commission’s
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
internet website (https://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the
submission, all subsequent
amendments, all written statements
with respect to the proposed rule
change that are filed with the
Commission, and all written
communications relating to the
proposed rule change between the
Commission and any person, other than
those that may be withheld from the
public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be
available for website viewing and
printing in the Commission’s Public
Reference Room, 100 F Street NE,
Washington, DC 20549 on official
business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the
filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal
office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change.
Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit
personal identifying information from
comment submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish
to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File
Number SR–CboeBZX–2020–036, and
should be submitted on or before May
28, 2020.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.16
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020–09712 Filed 5–6–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. IA–5493]
Notice of Intention To Cancel
Registration Pursuant to Section
203(H) of the Investment Advisers Act
of 1940
May 1, 2020.
Notice is given that the Securities and
Exchange Commission (the
‘‘Commission’’) intends to issue an
order, pursuant to Section 203(h) of the
Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (the
‘‘Act’’), cancelling the registration of
Cheswold Lane Asset Management, LLC
[File No. 801–6664], hereinafter referred
to as the ‘‘registrant.’’
Section 203(h) provides, in pertinent
part, that if the Commission finds that
any person registered under Section
203, or who has pending an application
for registration filed under that section,
16 17
E:\FR\FM\07MYN1.SGM
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
07MYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 89 (Thursday, May 7, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27254-27258]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-09712]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-88795; File No. SR-CboeBZX-2020-036]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend Rule 14.11, Other Securities
May 1, 2020.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on April 29, 2020, Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``BZX'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
\2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 27255]]
I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange proposes rule changes in several places in Exchange
Rule 14.11, Other Securities, to amend the initial period after
commencement of trading of an ETP, as defined below, on the Exchange as
it specifically relates to holders of record and/or beneficial holders.
The text of the proposed rule change is provided in Exhibit 5.
The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the
Exchange's website (https://markets.cboe.com/us/equities/regulation/rule_filings/bzx/), at the Exchange's Office of the Secretary, and at
the Commission's Public Reference Room.
II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.
A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
1. Purpose
The Exchange proposes to make several changes to Rule 14.11 in
order to amend the continued listing standards applicable to ETPs \3\
listed on the Exchange. Specifically, the Exchange is proposing to
amend its rules such that they would provide additional time for an ETP
to meet the applicable Beneficial Holders \4\ standards in the
Exchange's listing rules (the ``Beneficial Holders Rules'').\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ For the purpose of this filing, the term ETP means
securities listed pursuant to Rule 14.11(c) (Index Fund Shares),
Rule 14.11(i) (Managed Fund Shares), and Rule 14.11(l) (Exchange-
Traded Fund Shares (``ETF Shares'')).
\4\ As it relates to this filing, ``Beneficial Holders'' shall
mean beneficial holders and, where applicable in a particular
continued listing standard, record holders.
\5\ The Exchange notes that its Rules related to the listing and
trading of other product types (that is, products that are not ETPs
as defined above) have similar requirements related to Beneficial
Holders which the Exchange is not proposing to eliminate at this
time. Specifically, the Exchange is only proposing to amend the
Beneficial Holders Rules as it pertains to Index Fund Shares,
Managed Fund Shares, and ETF Shares because such product types
represent the vast majority of products listed on the Exchange. The
Exchange may consider proposing to amend the Beneficial Holders
Rules for other product types in a future proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Currently, the Exchange's continued listing standards for ETPs
generally require that, following the initial 12 month period after
commencement of trading on the Exchange, the Exchange shall consider
the suspension of trading in and will commence delisting proceedings
under Rule 14.12 for an ETP for which there are fewer than 50
Beneficial Holders for 30 or more consecutive trading days. The
Exchange is proposing to change the date at which an ETP would need to
have at least 50 Beneficial Holders or be subject to delisting
proceedings under Rule 14.12 from 12 months after commencement of
trading on the Exchange to 36 months after commencement of trading on
the Exchange.
As further described below, the Exchange believes it is appropriate
to increase the period of time for an ETP to comply with the applicable
Beneficial Holders Rule from 12 months to 36 months because: (i) It
would bring the rule more in line with the life cycle of an ETP; (ii)
the economic and competitive structures in place in the ETP ecosystem
naturally incentivize issuers to de-list products rather than
continuing to list products that do not garner investor interest; and
(iii) extending the period from 12 to 36 months will not meaningfully
impact the manipulation concerns that the Beneficial Holders Rules are
intended to address.
First, the ETP space is more competitive than it has ever been--
with more than 2,000 ETPs listed on U.S. national securities exchanges
competing for investor assets, the natural cycle for an average ETP to
gain traction in the market is growing longer and longer. As more and
more ETPs have come to market, many distribution platforms have become
more restrictive about the ETPs that they allow on their systems, often
requiring a minimum existing track record (e.g., at least 12 months)
and meeting certain thresholds for assets under management (e.g., at
least $100 million) for an ETP to be added. Similarly, many larger
entities are unwilling to invest in ETPs that do not have at least one
calendar year track record. All of these factors have contributed to
the natural slowing of the average ETP's growth cycle and,
unsurprisingly, the Exchange has seen a significant number of
deficiencies based on a failure to meet the applicable Beneficial
Holders Rule over the last several years.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ The Exchange has issued deficiency notifications to 34 ETPs
for non-compliance with Beneficial Holders Rules in the last five
years. In addition, 22 ETPs have voluntarily delisted within their
first year listed on the Exchange. While this isn't specifically
attributable to non-compliance with the Beneficial Holder Rules, the
most likely reasons for voluntarily delisting an ETP in its first
year would be either: (i) Failure or anticipated failure to meet the
Beneficial Holders Rules; or (ii) the issuer believing that the ETP
was not economically viable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Changing the timeline for meeting the Beneficial Holders Rules from
12 months to 36 months would provide ETPs with a more reasonable runway
to establish a track record and grow assets under management, both of
which generally precede the accumulation of Beneficial Holders.
Further, the Exchange believes that extending that runway will
encourage smaller issuers to make the necessary capital expenditures to
launch additional ETPs, as well as help both large and small issuers by
allowing them to continue to list and promote products that they
believe can succeed and that they are willing to continue paying for,
all of which will help to foster competition and innovation in the ETP
marketplace.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ The Exchange notes that of the 34 ETPs that received
deficiency notifications for non-compliance with Beneficial Holders
Rules, 27 reached compliance while going through the delisting
process under Rule 14.12 and continued to list on the Exchange. As
such, the 12 month threshold for the Beneficial Holders Rules had no
meaningful impact on whether such ETPs could list on the Exchange
and only served as regulatory and administrative burdens for issuers
to manage, which the Exchange believes makes it more difficult for
smaller issuers to compete.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Second, the economic and competitive structures in place in the ETP
ecosystem naturally incentivize issuers to de-list products rather than
continuing to list products that do not garner investor interest,
meaning that the rule does not provide any meaningful ``pruning''
function for the industry. Rather, the Exchange has found that, as
currently constructed, the 12 month Beneficial Holders Rules have
instead resulted in the forced termination of ETPs that issuers
believed were still economically viable. While some observers might
argue that forced delisting of an ETP based on a failure to meet the
Beneficial Holders Rule is a good way to reduce the number of ETPs in
the marketplace that have not drawn meaningful market interest, the
Exchange vehemently disagrees with this sentiment. First, there are
significant costs associated with both the initial launch and continued
operation of an ETP and the Exchange has found that the ecosystem
[[Page 27256]]
tends to prune itself of ETPs without meaningful investor interest. In
fact, the Exchange has had 69 products that have voluntarily delisted
in the last two years,\8\ creating meaningful turnover in products
which issuers believe are not economically viable. Second, the Exchange
contests the underlying assumption that the number of Beneficial
Holders is even a meaningful measure of market interest in an ETP.
While a very high Beneficial Holder count would most certainly indicate
an ETP's success, the absence of Beneficial Holders is not necessarily
a good measure of market interest or the amount of assets held by the
ETP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ There are currently 357 ETPs listed on the Exchange, meaning
that there's been a nearly 20% voluntary turnover of ETPs listed on
the Exchange over the last two years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Further to this point, the Beneficial Holders Rules are not rules
that an ETP issuer is incentivized to cut close or exceed by the
smallest amount possible. Unlike most other quantitative or disclosure
based listing requirements, an ETP issuer is incentivized to have as
many Beneficial Holders as possible and would almost certainly prefer
that they were able to meet and exceed the applicable Beneficial
Holders Rule as soon as possible after beginning trading on the
Exchange. As such, extending the time period from 12 months to 36
months will not provide issuers with a longer window to intentionally
keep the number of Beneficial Holders lower, but, rather, will only
extend the period during which an ETP could have fewer than 50
Beneficial Holders in specific instances where an issuer is unable to
meet the 50 Beneficial Holders threshold but still believes that the
ETP is viable and worth the cost of continued operation. Again, it
takes money and resources to launch and operate an ETP and where an
issuer does not believe that an ETP is economically viable, both common
sense and prior experience point to issuers delisting these products.
Finally, the Exchange believes that making this change does not
create any significant change in the risk of manipulation for ETPs
listed on the Exchange for several reasons. First, the Exchange does
not believe that there is anything particularly important about the
50th Beneficial Holder that reduces the manipulation risk associated
with an ETP as compared to the 49th, nor is there any manipulation
concern that arises on the 366th day after an ETP began trading on the
Exchange that didn't otherwise exist on the 1st, 2nd, or 365th day.
Rather, the Exchange believes that the rule is generally intended to
ensure that products that do not have broad ownership and could be
susceptible to manipulation by a few parties are not able to list on
the Exchange after they've had sufficient time to diversify their
ownership base. Leaving aside the issue of whether an open-ended ETP
with creation and redemption processes would really be subject to
manipulation by virtue of narrow ownership, the Exchange believes that,
for all of the reasons explained above, 36 months is a more appropriate
amount of time to consider sufficient time to diversify an ETP's
ownership base.
Further to this point, the Exchange has in place a robust
surveillance program for ETPs that allows it to monitor trading of ETPs
during all trading sessions on the Exchange and it believes are
sufficient to deter and detect violations of Exchange rules and the
applicable federal securities laws. These surveillances generally focus
on detecting securities trading outside of their normal patterns, which
could be indicative of manipulative or other violative activity. When
such situations are detected, surveillance analysis follows and
investigations are opened, where appropriate, to review the behavior of
all relevant parties for all relevant trading violations. Further, the
Exchange or the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (``FINRA''),\9\
on behalf of the Exchange, or both, communicate as needed regarding
trading in ETPs with other markets and other entities that are members
of the Intermarket Surveillance Group (``ISG''), and the Exchange or
FINRA, on behalf of the Exchange, or both, may obtain trading
information in ETPs from such markets and other entities. The Exchange
believes that these robust surveillance procedures will further act to
mitigate any manipulation concerns that arise from extending the
compliance period for the Beneficial Holders Rules from 12 months to 36
months.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ FINRA conducts cross-market surveillances on behalf of the
Exchange pursuant to a regulatory services agreement. The Exchange
is responsible for FINRA's performance under this regulatory
services agreement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange also believes that the other continued listing
standards in the Exchange's rules or representations that constitute
continued listing standards in Exchange rule filings (either the
disclosure obligations applicable under Rule 6c-11 of the Investment
Company Act of 1940 for series of ETF Shares or the diversity,
liquidity, and size of an ETP's holdings or reference assets applicable
to Index Fund Shares and Managed Fund Shares) are generally sufficient
to mitigate manipulation concerns associated with the applicable ETP.
During the first 12 months of trading on the Exchange when the
Beneficial Holders Rules do not apply, these disclosure and
quantitative obligations, in conjunction with the Exchange's
surveillance program (as discussed above), are generally deemed
sufficient to prevent any manipulation concerns in Exchange-listed
ETPs. As such, the Exchange believes that extending the period from 12
months to 36 months does not significantly increase any risk of
manipulation that wasn't already generally deemed acceptable for the
first 12 months that an ETP was listed. Again, the Exchange is not
proposing to eliminate the Beneficial Holders Rules, but merely to
extend the period for an ETP to meet the 50 Beneficial Holder
requirement.
2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes that the proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act \10\ in general and Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \11\ in
particular in that it is designed to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism
of a free and open market and a national market system and, in general,
to protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
\11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposed rule changes are designed to promote just and
equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and, in general, to protect
investors and the public interest because it would prevent the
premature delisting of ETPs that have not had sufficient time to build
up to 50 Beneficial Holders without significantly impacting the
manipulation concerns that the Beneficial Holders Rules are intended to
address.
The Exchange believes it is appropriate to increase the period of
time for an ETP to comply with the applicable Beneficial Holders Rule
from 12 months to 36 months because: (i) It would bring the rule more
in line with the life cycle of an ETP; (ii) the economic and
competitive structures in place in the ETP ecosystem naturally
incentivize issuers to de-list products rather than continuing to list
products that do not garner investor interest; and (iii) extending the
period from 12 to 36 months will not meaningfully impact the
manipulation concerns that the Beneficial Holders Rules are intended to
address.
[[Page 27257]]
First, the ETP space is more competitive than it has ever been--
with more than 2,000 ETPs listed on U.S. national securities exchanges
competing for investor assets, the natural cycle for an average ETP to
gain traction in the market is growing longer and longer. As more and
more ETPs have come to market, many distribution platforms have become
more restrictive about the ETPs that they allow on their systems, often
requiring a minimum existing track record (e.g., at least 12 months)
and meeting certain thresholds for assets under management (e.g., at
least $100 million) for an ETP to be added. Similarly, many larger
entities are unwilling to invest in ETPs that do not have at least one
calendar year track record. All of these factors have contributed to
the natural slowing of the average ETP's growth cycle and,
unsurprisingly, the Exchange has seen a significant number of
deficiencies based on a failure to meet the applicable Beneficial
Holders Rule over the last several years.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ The Exchange has issued deficiency notifications to 34 ETPs
for non-compliance with Beneficial Holders Rules in the last five
years. In addition, 22 ETPs have voluntarily delisted within their
first year listed on the Exchange. While this isn't specifically
attributable to non-compliance with the Beneficial Holder Rules, the
most likely reasons for voluntarily delisting an ETP in its first
year would be either: (i) Failure or anticipated failure to meet the
Beneficial Holders Rules; or (ii) the issuer believing that the ETP
was not economically viable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Changing the timeline for meeting the Beneficial Holders Rules from
12 months to 36 months would provide ETPs with a more reasonable runway
to establish a track record and grow assets under management, both of
which generally precede the accumulation of Beneficial Holders.
Further, the Exchange believes that extending that runway will
encourage smaller issuers to make the necessary capital expenditures to
launch additional ETPs, as well as help both large and small issuers by
allowing them to continue to list and promote products that they
believe can succeed and that they are willing to continue paying for,
all of which will help to foster competition and innovation in the ETP
marketplace.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ The Exchange notes that of the 34 ETPs that received
deficiency notifications for non-compliance with Beneficial Holders
Rules, 27 reached compliance while going through the delisting
process under Rule 14.12 and continued to list on the Exchange. As
such, the 12 month threshold for the Beneficial Holders Rules had no
meaningful impact on whether such ETPs could list on the Exchange
and only served as regulatory and administrative burdens for issuers
to manage, which the Exchange believes makes it more difficult for
smaller issuers to compete.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Second, the economic and competitive structures in place in the ETP
ecosystem naturally incentivize issuers to de-list products rather than
continuing to list products that do not garner investor interest,
meaning that the rule does not provide any meaningful ``pruning''
function for the industry. Rather, the Exchange has found that, as
currently constructed, the 12 month Beneficial Holders Rules have
instead resulted in the forced termination of ETPs that issuers
believed were still economically viable. While some observers might
argue that forced delisting of an ETP based on a failure to meet the
Beneficial Holders Rule is a good way to reduce the number of ETPs in
the marketplace that have not drawn meaningful market interest, the
Exchange vehemently disagrees with this sentiment. First, there are
significant costs associated with both the initial launch and continued
operation of an ETP and the Exchange has found that the ecosystem tends
to prune itself of ETPs without meaningful investor interest. In fact,
the Exchange has had 69 products that have voluntarily delisted in the
last two years,\14\ creating meaningful turnover in products which
issuers believe are not economically viable. Second, the Exchange
contests the underlying assumption that the number of Beneficial
Holders is even a meaningful measure of market interest in an ETP.
While a very high Beneficial Holder count would most certainly indicate
an ETP's success, the absence of Beneficial Holders is not necessarily
a good measure of market interest or the amount of assets held by the
ETP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ There are currently 357 ETPs listed on the Exchange,
meaning that there's been a nearly 20% voluntary turnover of ETPs
listed on the Exchange over the last two years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Further to this point, the Beneficial Holders Rules are not rules
that an ETP issuer is incentivized to cut close or exceed by the
smallest amount possible. Unlike most other quantitative or disclosure
based listing requirements, an ETP issuer is incentivized to have as
many Beneficial Holders as possible and would almost certainly prefer
that they were able to meet and exceed the applicable Beneficial
Holders Rule as soon as possible after beginning trading on the
Exchange. As such, extending the time period from 12 months to 36
months will not provide issuers with a longer window to intentionally
keep the number of Beneficial Holders lower, but, rather, will only
extend the period during which an ETP could have fewer than 50
Beneficial Holders in specific instances where an issuer is unable to
meet the 50 Beneficial Holders threshold but still believes that the
ETP is viable and worth the cost of continued operation. Again, it
takes money and resources to launch and operate an ETP and where an
issuer does not believe that an ETP is economically viable, both common
sense and prior experience point to issuers delisting these products.
Finally, the Exchange believes that making this change does not
create any significant change in the risk of manipulation for ETPs
listed on the Exchange for several reasons. First, the Exchange does
not believe that there is anything particularly important about the
50th Beneficial Holder that reduces the manipulation risk associated
with an ETP as compared to the 49th, nor is there any manipulation
concern that arises on the 366th day after an ETP began trading on the
Exchange that didn't otherwise exist on the 1st, 2nd, or 365th day.
Rather, the Exchange believes that the rule is generally intended to
ensure that products that do not have broad ownership and could be
susceptible to manipulation by a few parties are not able to list on
the Exchange after they've had sufficient time to diversify their
ownership base. Leaving aside the issue of whether an open-ended ETP
with creation and redemption processes would really be subject to
manipulation by virtue of narrow ownership, the Exchange believes that,
for all of the reasons explained above, 36 months is a more appropriate
amount of time to consider sufficient time to diversify an ETP's
ownership base.
Further to this point, the Exchange has in place a robust
surveillance program for ETPs that allows it to monitor trading of ETPs
during all trading sessions on the Exchange and it believes are
sufficient to deter and detect violations of Exchange rules and the
applicable federal securities laws. These surveillances generally focus
on detecting securities trading outside of their normal patterns, which
could be indicative of manipulative or other violative activity. When
such situations are detected, surveillance analysis follows and
investigations are opened, where appropriate, to review the behavior of
all relevant parties for all relevant trading violations. Further, the
Exchange or the FINRA,\15\ on behalf of the Exchange, or both,
communicate as needed regarding trading in ETPs with other markets and
other entities that are
[[Page 27258]]
members of the ISG, and the Exchange or FINRA, on behalf of the
Exchange, or both, may obtain trading information in ETPs from such
markets and other entities. The Exchange believes that these robust
surveillance procedures will further act to mitigate any manipulation
concerns that arise from extending the compliance period for the
Beneficial Holders Rules from 12 months to 36 months.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ FINRA conducts cross-market surveillances on behalf of the
Exchange pursuant to a regulatory services agreement. The Exchange
is responsible for FINRA's performance under this regulatory
services agreement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange also believes that the other continued listing
standards in the Exchange's rules or representations that constitute
continued listing standards in Exchange rule filings (either the
disclosure obligations applicable under Rule 6c-11 of the Investment
Company Act of 1940 for series of ETF Shares or the diversity,
liquidity, and size of an ETP's holdings or reference assets applicable
to Index Fund Shares and Managed Fund Shares) are generally sufficient
to mitigate manipulation concerns associated with the applicable ETP.
During the first 12 months of trading on the Exchange when the
Beneficial Holders Rules do not apply, these disclosure and
quantitative obligations, in conjunction with the Exchange's
surveillance program (as discussed above), are generally deemed
sufficient to prevent any manipulation concerns in Exchange-listed
ETPs. As such, the Exchange believes that extending the period from 12
months to 36 months will not significantly increase any risk of
manipulation that wasn't already generally deemed acceptable for the
first 12 months that an ETP was listed. Again, the Exchange is not
proposing to eliminate the Beneficial Holders Rules, but merely to
extend the period for an ETP to meet the 50 Beneficial Holder
requirement.
The proposed rule change is also designed to protect investors and
the public interest because the Exchange is only proposing to amend the
continued listing requirement related to Beneficial Holders and all
ETPs listed on the Exchange would continue to be subject to the full
panoply of Exchange rules and procedures that currently govern the
trading of equity securities on the Exchange.
For the above reasons, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule
change is consistent with the requirements of Section 6(b)(5) of the
Act.
B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purpose of the Act. Instead, the Exchange
believes that the proposed rule change would help to encourage smaller
issuers to make the necessary capital expenditures to launch additional
ETPs, as well as help both large and small issuers by allowing them to
continue to list and promote products that they believe can succeed and
that they are willing to continue paying for, which will enhance
competition among market participants, to the benefit of investors and
the marketplace.
C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others
The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the
proposed rule change.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period up to 90 days (i) as the
Commission may designate if it finds such longer period to be
appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the Exchange consents, the Commission will:
A. By order approve or disapprove such proposed rule change, or
B. institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.
IV. Solicitation of Comments
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:
Electronic Comments
Use the Commission's internet comment form (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-CboeBZX-2020-036 on the subject line.
Paper Comments
Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.
All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CboeBZX-2020-036. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-CboeBZX-2020-036, and should be
submitted on or before May 28, 2020.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-09712 Filed 5-6-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P