Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing of Amendment No. 1 and Order Instituting Proceedings to Determine Whether to Approve or Disapprove a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 1, to Make Qualified Contingent Cross Orders Available for FLEX Option Trading, 75071-75079 [2020-25909]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 227 / Tuesday, November 24, 2020 / Notices
under certain conditions, would not
lose its exclusion if it notifies the
Commission on Form N–6F of its intent
to make an election to be regulated as
a business development company. The
company only has to file a Form N–6F
once.
The Commission estimates that on
average approximately 4 companies file
these notifications each year. Each of
those companies need only make a
single filing of Form N–6F. The
Commission further estimates that this
information collection imposes burden
of 0.5 hours, resulting in a total annual
PRA burden of 2 hours. Based on the
estimated wage rate, the total cost to the
industry of the hour burden for
complying with Form N–6F would be
approximately $736.
The collection of information under
Form N–6F is mandatory. The
information provided under the form is
not kept confidential. 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 OMB 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
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.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
Dated: November 18, 2020.
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe
Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing of
Amendment No. 1 and Order Instituting
Proceedings to Determine Whether to
Approve or Disapprove a Proposed
Rule Change, as Modified by
Amendment No. 1, to Make Qualified
Contingent Cross Orders Available for
FLEX Option Trading
November 18, 2020.
On August 3, 2020, Cboe Exchange,
Inc. (the ‘‘Exchange’’ or ‘‘CBOE’’) filed
with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (‘‘Commission’’), pursuant
to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (‘‘Act’’),1 and
Rule 19b-4 thereunder,2 a proposed rule
change to make Qualified Contingent
Cross Orders available for FLEX option
trading. The proposed rule change was
published for comment in the Federal
Register on August 20, 2020.3 On
October 1, 2020, the Commission
designated a longer period for
Commission action on the proposed rule
change, until November 18, 2020.4 On
October 23, 2020, the Exchange filed
Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule
change, which replaced and superseded
the proposed rule change.5 The
Commission has not received any
comments on the proposal. The
Commission is publishing this notice
and order to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change, as modified by
Amendment No. 1, from interested
persons and to institute proceedings
pursuant to Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the
Act 6 to determine whether to approve
or disapprove the proposed rule change,
as modified by Amendment No. 1.
I. The Exchange’s Description of the
Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by
Amendment No. 1
The Exchange proposes to amend
Rule 5.70 and Rule 5.72, as well as Rule
5.33, to make Qualified Contingent
Cross (‘‘QCC’’) Orders available for
FLEX trading. 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
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
CFR 240.19b–4.
3 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 89564
(August 14, 2020), 85 FR 51531.
4 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 90062
(October 1, 2020), 85 FR 63312 (October 7, 2020).
5 Amendment No. 1 is available on the
Commission’s website at: https://www.sec.gov/
comments/sr-cboe-2020-075/srcboe20200757940531-224727.pdf.
6 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
2 17
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
17:48 Nov 23, 2020
[Release No. 34–90457; File No. SR–CBOE–
2020–075]
1 15
[FR Doc. 2020–25894 Filed 11–23–20; 8:45 am]
VerDate Sep<11>2014
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
Jkt 253001
PO 00000
Frm 00100
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
75071
website (https://www.cboe.com/
AboutCBOE/
CBOELegalRegulatoryHome.aspx), 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 amend
Rule 5.70 and Rule 5.72, as well as Rule
5.33, to make QCC Orders, which
includes Complex QCC Orders and QCC
with Stock Orders, available for
electronic FLEX trading. Currently, QCC
Orders are available only for electronic
non-FLEX trading.
QCC Orders facilitate the execution of
option orders that are part of Qualified
Contingent Trades (‘‘QCTs’’),7 by
permitting Trading Permit Holders
(‘‘TPHs’’) to cross options orders
without exposure while effecting the
trade in the equities leg in another
market at a price necessary to achieve
the net price. Currently, TPHs may
choose to submit the options component
7 See Rule 5.6(c), definition of ‘‘Qualified
Contingent Cross or QCC’’, paragraph (1), which
defines a ‘‘qualified contingent trade’’ as a
transaction consisting of two or more component
orders, executed as agent or principal, where: (A)
At least one component is an NMS stock, as defined
in Rule 600 of Regulation NMS under the Exchange
Act; (B) all components are effected with a product
or price contingency that either has been agreed to
by all the respective counterparties or arranged for
by a broker-dealer as principal or agent; (C) the
execution of one component is contingent upon the
execution of all other components at or near the
same time; (D) the specific relationship between the
component orders (e.g., the spread between the
prices of the component orders) is determined by
the time the contingent order is placed; (E) the
component orders bear a derivative relationship to
one another, represent different classes of shares of
the same issuer, or involve the securities of
participants in mergers or with intentions to merge
that have been announced or cancelled; and (F) the
transaction is fully hedged (without regard to any
prior existing position) as a result of other
components of the contingent trade.
E:\FR\FM\24NON1.SGM
24NON1
75072
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 227 / Tuesday, November 24, 2020 / Notices
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
of a QCT as a FLEX Option, yet, are
currently unable to execute a FLEX
Options component of a QCT on the
Exchange in the same efficient,
unexposed manner as they may execute
a non-FLEX option component of a QCT
on the Exchange. The Exchange now
seeks to provide TPHs and their
customers with the same QCC trading
capabilities for FLEX trading that are
currently available for non-FLEX
trading, thus providing TPHs with the
same capability to execute the options
parts of QCTs that are comprised of
FLEX Options.
Rule 5.6(c) currently provides for the
non-FLEX definition of a QCC Order.
Specifically, a QCC order is comprised
of an originating order to buy or sell at
least 1,000 contracts (or 10,000 minioption contracts) that is identified as
being part of a QCT coupled with a
contra-side order or orders totaling an
equal number of contracts. If a QCC
Order has more than one option leg (a
‘‘Complex QCC Order’’), each option leg
must have at least 1,000 standard option
contracts (or 10,000 mini-option
contracts). A QCC order represents one
component of a QCT, which must be
paired with a stock order. When a User
enters a QCC Order, the User is
responsible for executing the associated
stock component of the QCT at or near
the same time of the QCC order
execution, just as a User is ultimately
responsible for complying with
execution requirements for any order a
User submits. Indeed, the Exchange
requires TPHs to properly mark all QCC
Orders as such, and has a surveillance
program in place which assesses TPH
compliance with the requirements
applicable to QCC Orders, including the
requirement that the stock leg of the
transaction be executed at or near the
same time as the options leg.8 To
execute the associated stock, a User may
choose to either (1) separately submit an
option order to the Exchange and the
stock order to a stock execution venue
in time to be executed at or near the
same time of each other, or (2) submit
a QCC with Stock Order. A QCC with
Stock Order is a type of QCC Order
(including a Complex QCC Order)
entered with a stock component to be
electronically communicated by the
Exchange to a designated broker-dealer
for execution on behalf of the
submitting User and, as indicated, are
available to Users on a voluntary basis.9
8 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 15058
(June 17, 2011), 76 FR 35491 (Order Granting
Approval of Proposed Rule Change Establishing
Qualified Contingent Cross Orders) (‘‘QCC
Approval Order’’).
9 See Rule 5.33(a), definition of ‘‘QCC with Stock
Order’’.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:48 Nov 23, 2020
Jkt 253001
The Exchange proposes to adopt Rule
5.72(e) 10 to govern FLEX QCC Orders.
The proposed rule is simply making
QCC Order available for FLEX, and as
such, the definition of FLEX QCC
Orders is substantively identical as nonFLEX QCC Orders in Rule 5.6(c) and
FLEX QCC Orders will execute in
substantially the same manner with few
differences unique to trading in FLEX
Trading. Proposed Rule 5.72(e) provides
that a ‘‘FLEX QCC’’ order is comprised
of an originating order to buy or sell at
least 1,000 standard FLEX Option
contracts (or 10,000 mini FLEX option
contracts) that is identified as being part
of a QCT (as defined in Rule 5.6(c))
coupled with a contra-side order or
orders totaling an equal number of
contracts. If a FLEX QCC order has more
than one option leg (a ‘‘Complex FLEX
QCC’’ order), each option leg must have
at least 1,000 standard FLEX option
contracts (or 10,000 mini FLEX option
contracts). This is substantively
identical to the non-FLEX QCC
definition in Rule 5.6(c). The Exchange
notes that Users will enter into the
System all FLEX QCC Orders as they
would any other FLEX Order pursuant
to 5.72(b) (governing the order entry of
FLEX Orders) and the applicable FLEX
auction rules. As such, the Exchange
points out that FLEX QCC Orders may
only be submitted for series consistent
with the FLEX Rules.11 Like QCC Orders
submitted for non-FLEX trading,12 FLEX
QCC Orders will execute automatically
upon entry without exposure pursuant
to proposed Rule 5.72(e)(1). The
Exchange notes, as there is no FLEX
Order Book, the corresponding
provisions in Rule 5.6(c) 13 and
5.33(f)(2) regarding QCC Order
execution requirements in connection
with yielding to prices at which Priority
Customer Orders may be resting in the
Simple Book 14 and Complex Order
Book (‘‘COB’’),15 and in Rule 5.6(c) 16 in
connection with pricing QCC Orders at
or between the NBBO 17 would not be
applicable to QCC Orders submitted to
FLEX.18 Proposed Rule 5.72(e)(1) also
10 The Exchange also moves current paragraph (e)
to paragraph (f).
11 See Rules 5.72(b), (c), and (d).
12 See Rule 5.6(c), definition of ‘‘Qualified
Contingent Cross or QCC’’, paragraph (2).
13 See id.
14 See Rule 5.6(c), definition of ‘‘Qualified
Contingent Cross or QCC’’, subparagraph (2)(A)(i).
15 See Rule 5.6(c), definition of ‘‘Qualified
Contingent Cross or QCC’’, subparagraph (2)(B)(i)
and (iii).
16 See Rule 5.6(c), definition of ‘‘Qualified
Contingent Cross or QCC’’, subparagraph (2).
17 See Rule 5.6(c), definition of ‘‘Qualified
Contingent Cross or QCC’’, subparagraph (2)(A)(ii)
and (B)(ii).
18 This is true for any FLEX Order.
PO 00000
Frm 00101
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
provides that a FLEX QCC Order is
cancelled if it cannot execute, and that
Rule 5.9 (related to exposure of orders
on the Exchange) does not apply to
FLEX QCC orders, both of which are
consistent with the current non-FLEX
QCC Rules.19 Like QCC Orders
submitted in non-FLEX classes,20 QCC
orders submitted in FLEX classes must
be entered in the standard increment for
the class.21 Therefore, the proposed rule
change adds in proposed Rule 5.72(e)(2)
that FLEX QCC may only be entered in
the increments applicable to FLEX
Orders under Rule 5.4(c)(4).
Proposed Rule 5.72(e)(1) also provides
that a FLEX QCC with Stock order
executes pursuant to Rule 5.33(l). The
proposed rule change amends Rule
5.33(1) to specify that the provisions
governing QCC with Stock include
FLEX QCC with Stock. As such,
pursuant to Rule 5.33(l), for a FLEX
QCC with Stock Order, a User must
include the same requisite information
as they must include when submitting
such orders for non-FLEX trading
pursuant to Rule 5.33(l)(3)(A),22 and the
System will process the option and
stock components of such orders in the
same manner as it does for non-FLEX
QCC orders pursuant to Rule
5.33(l)(3)(B) and (C).23
The Exchange seeks to make QCC
Orders available for FLEX trading due to
the growing customer demand it has
received for QCC functionality for FLEX
trading. The Exchange notes that a
number of TPHs have expressed to the
Exchange that use of QCC for FLEX
19 See Rule 5.6(c), definition of ‘‘Qualified
Contingent Cross or QCC’’, subparagraph (2)(C) and
(2)(C), respectively.
20 See 5.6(c), definition of ‘‘Qualified Contingent
Cross or QCC’’, paragraph (3).
21 See Rule 5.4(c)(4) (which sets forth minimum
increments for FLEX options).
22 Rule 5.33(l)(3)(A) requires a User to include a
net price for the stock and option components in
accordance with the minimum increments for
stock-option orders and (ii) identify the designated
broker-dealer as set forth in Rule 5.33 (l)(2).
23 Rule 5.33(l)(3)(B) provides that the System
executes the option component in accordance with
Rule 5.6(c), but does not immediately send the User
a trade execution report, and automatically
communicates the stock component to the
designated broker-dealer for execution at a stock
trading venue. If the option component(s) of a QCC
with Stock Order cannot execute, the System
cancels the QCC with Stock Order, including both
the stock and option components. Rule 5.33(l)(3)(C)
provides that, if the System receives an execution
report for the stock component of a QCC with Stock
Order from the designated broker-dealer, the
Exchange sends the User the trade execution report
for the QCC with Stock order, including execution
information for both the stock and option
components. If the System receives a report from
the designated broker-dealer that the stock
component of a QCC with Stock Order cannot
execute, the Exchange nullifies the option
component trade and notifies the User of the reason
for the nullification.
E:\FR\FM\24NON1.SGM
24NON1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 227 / Tuesday, November 24, 2020 / Notices
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
options would increase the efficiency of
their executions of the options
component of a QCT if the options
component consists of a FLEX Option.
An investor may seek to use a FLEX
Option as an appropriate hedge for a
stock order but is currently unable to
execute a FLEX Option that is part of a
QCT on the Exchange in the same
unexposed manner as it may execute a
non-FLEX option on the Exchange.
Currently, if a TPH wants to execute a
FLEX Option that is intended to be part
of a QCT, it would have to enter the
FLEX Option as a FLEX Order separate
from the stock portion or as a stockoption order, which must be exposed for
at least three seconds prior to
execution.24 Indeed, a clean cross of the
FLEX Option component of a stockoption QCT would provide assurance to
the parties to the QCT that their hedge
will be maintained.25 This is
particularly significant for a variety of
managed funds that recognize the
benefits to their investors in employing
certain hedging strategies through FLEX
Options that allow for their investors to
mitigate risk and meet their objectives.
For example, a strategy may have an
investment goal of protecting potential
losses down to a certain amount with
the ability to participate in return up to
a certain cap in a reference asset (e.g.,
underlying index or ETF) over a target
outcome period that is usually a year or
more out. Such a strategy may utilize a
combination of FLEX call and put
options in which expiration
corresponds to the target outcome
period overlaid on an exposure to the
reference asset. On the seed day (or, the
day in which the strategy is created and
funded), the options package would
reflect customized strikes, necessary to
target the strategy’s trading objectives a
year or more in advance and for which
existing standard strikes are typically
unavailable. The customized FLEX
strikes are used for the duration of the
life of the strategy and it is key that the
appropriate combination of options is
guaranteed to maintain the hedge.
Additionally, the Exchange notes that
the Rules currently permit Compression
orders, which execute without exposure
against another Compression order(s)
totaling an equal number of options
contracts, for trading in FLEX SPX
options.26 That is, like the proposed
24 See Rule 5.72(c)(1)(F); Rule 5.73(c)(3); and Rule
5.74(c)(3).
25 Amendment No. 1 adds additional explanation
and detail in support the use of QCC Orders in
FLEX trading.
26 Amendment No. 1 adds explanation regarding
another order type that may already execute
without exposure in FLEX Options in support of
FLEX QCC Orders.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:48 Nov 23, 2020
Jkt 253001
FLEX QCC Orders, FLEX Compression
orders are not exposed in a FLEX
Auction pursuant to Rule 5.72.27
As noted above, to qualify as a QCT,
the execution of one component is
contingent upon the execution of all
other components at or near the same
time. The Exchange conducts
surveillance of TPHs to ensure that
TPHs execute the options component of
a QCT at or near the same time as the
stock component, in accordance with
the QCT exemption.28 Therefore, there
is compliance risk for TPHs if they do
not execute the options component at or
near the same time of execution of the
stock component. Providing TPHs with
QCC Order functionality for FLEX
Options will reduce the compliance
burden on TPHs by providing a more
efficient means of executing the options
component of a QCT if the options
component consists of a FLEX Option,
as QCC Orders did for non-FLEX
options.
2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes the proposed
rule change is consistent with the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
‘‘Act’’) and the rules and regulations
thereunder applicable to the Exchange
and, in particular, the requirements of
Section 6(b) of the Act.29 Specifically,
the Exchange believes the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Section
6(b)(5) 30 requirements that the rules of
an exchange be designed to prevent
fraudulent and manipulative acts and
practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, to foster cooperation
and coordination with persons engaged
in regulating, clearing, settling,
processing information with respect to,
and facilitating transactions in
securities, 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.
Additionally, the Exchange believes the
proposed rule change is consistent with
the Section 6(b)(5) 31 requirement that
the rules of an exchange not be designed
27 See Securities Exchange Release Nos. 89707
(August 28, 2020), 85 FR 55040 (September 3, 2020)
(SR–CBOE–2020–074) (Notice of Filing of a
Proposed Rule Change Relating To Adopt
Compression Orders); and 90179 (October 14,
2020), 85 FR 66590 (October 20, 2020) (SR–CBOE–
2020–074) (Order Granting Approval of a Proposed
Rule Change To Adopt Position Compression Cross
(‘‘PCC’’) Orders for SPX). As is the case with the
proposed FLEX QCC orders, there would be no
NBBO or protection of customer orders for the
recently approved compression orders for FLEX
Options.
28 See supra note 1; see also infra note 34.
29 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
30 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
31 Id.
PO 00000
Frm 00102
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
75073
to permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
In particular, the proposal to make the
QCC Order type available for electronic
FLEX trading will facilitate TPHs’
execution of the options component of
QCTs that are comprised of FLEX
Options in the same manner that TPHs
may currently execute the options
component of QCTs that are comprised
of non-FLEX options, thereby removing
impediments to and perfecting the
mechanism of a free and open market
and national market system and, in
general, protecting investors. QCC
Orders for FLEX Options will execute in
the same manner as QCC Orders for
non-FLEX options; the proposed rule
change merely expands the classes in
which the Exchange may make QCC
Orders available and provides a specific
definition of FLEX QCC Orders for
clarity. Moreover, the Exchange notes
that stock-option orders (which, by
definition, must also be a QCT) 32 are
already permitted under the Rules for
FLEX Options, and thus, the FLEX
Options components of QCTs submitted
as stock-option orders may currently
execute at any price in FLEX (i.e., are
not subject to an NBBO or yielding to
Customer orders). The proposed rule
change merely provides an alternative,
more efficient manner of execution for
the option component of larger-sized
QCTs.
The Exchange believes the availability
of QCC Orders for FLEX Options will
allow for a more efficient execution of
the options component of a QCT on the
Exchange. As noted above, to qualify as
a QCT, the execution of one component
is contingent upon the execution of all
other components at or near the same
time. The Exchange conducts
surveillance to ensure a TPH executes
the stock and option components of a
QCT at or near the same time.33 As a
result, if the option component does not
execute when initially submitted to the
Exchange, a TPH may be subject to
compliance risk if it does not execute
the option component at or near the
same time of the execution of the stock
component. Indeed, the Exchange notes
that the compliance risk of not being
able to execute a FLEX Options portion
of a QCT at or near the same time of the
execution of the stock component is
greater in a FLEX auction, where it must
be exposed for at least three seconds
prior to execution, than for non-FLEX
option orders that must be exposed for
at least one second 34 unless submitted
32 See
Interpretation and Policy .03 to Rule 5.33.
QCC Approval Order.
34 See Rule 5.9.
33 See
E:\FR\FM\24NON1.SGM
24NON1
75074
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 227 / Tuesday, November 24, 2020 / Notices
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
into an auction with a shorter exposure
period. The Exchange believes the
proposed rule change will reduce this
compliance risk for TPHs executing
FLEX Options that are components of
QCTs, which will protect investors and
the public interest. Since the purpose of
a QCT order is for all components to
trade at or near the same time, the
Exchange believes it is appropriate to
provide TPHs with a mechanism to
facilitate immediate execution of FLEX
Options that comprise the options
component of a QCT to reduce the
compliance burden on TPHs when
effecting QCTs with a FLEX Option
component.
The Exchange believes that proposed
Rule 5.72(e), while substantially the
same in almost all aspects to Rule 5.6(c)
governing non-FLEX QCC, will provide
clarity to TPHs regarding the
submission of their QCC FLEX Options.
The only difference between the FLEX
and non-FLEX QCC Orders is that FLEX
QCC Orders are not subject to the NBBO
or prices of customers in the book. The
Exchange notes this difference exists for
any order type in non-FLEX trading
versus FLEX trading.35 The Exchange
notes that the proposed rule changes do
not alter any of the current increments
applicable to FLEX Options but merely
provide additional detail within the
specific provision covering QCC Orders
regarding the standard increments
already permissible for FLEX Options
that will also apply to QCC FLEX
Orders.
As the Commission has previously
found,36 the execution of QCTs is
beneficial to the market as a whole as it
contributes to the efficient functioning
of the securities markets and the price
discovery process. Pursuant to the QCT
Release, the options portion of a QCT
may consist of non-FLEX or FLEX
Options [sic]. However, as noted above,
without the availability of QCC Orders
for FLEX Options, TPHs are subject to
higher compliance risk with respect to
QCTs with a FLEX Option component
than TPHs who execute QCTs with a
non-FLEX option component. The
Exchange submits this proposed rule
change in response to demand from
TPHs and their institutional
customers 37 to be able to execute the
35 The Exchange also notes that the requirement
that a QCC order execute at a price at or better than
the NBBO is not a unique execution requirement—
every option order type approved by the
Commission must execute at a price at or better
than the NBBO in accordance with the linkage plan.
See Rule 5.66.
36 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57620
(April 4, 2008), 73 FR 19271 (April 9, 2008) (‘‘QCT
Release’’); and see QCC Approval Order.
37 Amendment No. 1 specifies the customer base
for FLEX trading.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:48 Nov 23, 2020
Jkt 253001
options components of QCTs comprised
of a FLEX Option in the same manner
that they are currently able to execute
the options components of QCTs
comprised of non-FLEX options.
Therefore, the proposed rule change
will provide TPHs whose hedging
strategies involve FLEX Options with
the same functionality currently
available to TPHs whose hedging
strategies involve non-FLEX Options.
The Exchange believes this will provide
investors with additional flexibility
regarding execution of their hedging
strategies related to stock positions,
which flexibility ultimately benefits
investors.
Moreover, the Commission has stated
that, while it believes that order
exposure is generally beneficial to
options markets, it recognizes that
contingent trades can be useful trading
tools for investors and other market
participants, particularly those who
trade the securities of issuers involved
in mergers, different classes of shares of
the same issuers, convertible securities,
and equity derivatives such as options
and that those who engage in contingent
trades can benefit the market as a whole
by studying the relationships between
prices of such securities and executing
contingent trades when they believe
such relationships are out of line with
what they believe to be fair value.38
The requirement that a non-FLEX
QCC must execute at a price at or
between the NBBO merely incorporates
an execution requirement applicable to
all option order types, as all options
must execute at price at or better than
the NBBO in accordance with linkage
rules.39 Therefore, this execution
requirement is not a heightened
execution requirement for an unexposed
option order. The additional
requirement that a QCC order not
execute at the same price as a Priority
Customer incorporates the general
principle of customer protection in the
options markets.40 If the market model
38 See
QCC Approval Order.
Rule 5.66. In other words, if the definition
of a QCC order did not include the provision that
it must execute at a price at or better than the
NBBO, QCC orders would still be required to
execute at a price at or better than the NBBO. The
Exchange believes inclusion of this explicit
requirement for QCC orders was intended to
highlight the difference between execution of the
options component and the stock component,
which may execute at any price, but was not a
unique price requirement necessary for execution of
an unexposed order. Every order type on the
Exchange approved for non-FLEX trading and FLEX
trading has this same distinction.
40 If there was not a customer order resting at the
top of the book, then the second pricing
requirement for QCC orders is simply ignored. As
there is no book in the FLEX market, the proposed
FLEX QCC order is equivalent to a non-FLEX QCC
39 See
PO 00000
Frm 00103
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
for a class does not include customer
priority, this is a heightened execution
requirement for execution of an
unexposed order.41 Even without this
additional protection, the Exchange
believes the proposed FLEX QCC order
will protect investors, as it will provide
Users of FLEX Options with the same
functionality as Users of non-FLEX
options. While the Exchange again notes
that there is no FLEX book in which
Customer orders (or any FLEX orders)
may rest, and therefore the principles of
customer priority are not currently
applicable to FLEX trading, the
Exchange observed the top of Book
orders in non-FLEX symbols as a
comparison point.42 In a random sample
of data drawn from orders resting at the
top of the Book,43 the Exchange
observed that, on average, only 0.34% of
all orders resting at the top of the Book
were Customer orders. As such, the
Exchange believes that, even if there
was a book for FLEX Options, there
would be minimal risk of executing a
FLEX QCC at the same price as a
Customer order in the Book.
Additionally, primarily broker-dealers
and institutional investors engage in
FLEX trading. Indeed, executions in
FLEX Options are generally larger and
held long-term for strategies utilized by
broker-dealers and institutional
investors, as opposed to the smaller,
more frequent trades with shorter
expiration durations typically executed
by retail investors. The Exchange also
understands that many large retail
brokerage firms do not accept FLEX
Options or otherwise have high
minimums which may discourage retail
trading in FLEX Options.44 Therefore,
there are minimal retail customer orders
submitted into the FLEX market and
thus it would be unlikely any would be
resting at the top of a FLEX book if one
existed for a de minimis (if any) amount
order submitted when there is no customer order
resting at the top of the book.
41 The Exchange has enabled customer priority
for all equity option classes that trade on the
Exchange (and thus for all classes in which TPHs
may submit QCC orders). Therefore, all QCC orders
submitted on the Exchange are subject to the same
execution pricing requirements as non-QCC orders.
42 Amendment No. 1 adds a description of the top
of Book data sample and the Exchange’s
observations in connection with the data sample in
support of QCC for FLEX trading and that, as
proposed, FLEX QCC orders are consistent with the
protection of investors.
43 The random sample was drawn over three days
(September 25, September 30, and October 1, 2020)
from a different Match Engine each sample day (one
of which includes SPY). The sampling of data
across different Match Engines is representative of
the symbols that trade on the Exchange.
44 Amendment No. 1 adds additional detail
regarding the de minimis amount of retail customer
orders submitted into the FLEX market that would
require additional protection.
E:\FR\FM\24NON1.SGM
24NON1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 227 / Tuesday, November 24, 2020 / Notices
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
of time that would require additional
protection. As discussed above, the
Exchange believes the benefits of
exposure on an order on the Exchange
are outweighed by the benefits offered
by immediate execution of these
contingent order types. The Exchange
does not believe market participants
that engage in hedging strategies
involving FLEX Options should not
have access to the same functionality as
market participants with hedging
strategies involving non-FLEX options.
The Exchange does not believe the
propose rule change raises price
protection concerns that market
participants may submit FLEX QCC
Orders for a FLEX series with slightly
different terms than a non-FLEX series
in order to get better pricing. Such risk,
if any, exists today with respect to all
FLEX trading. The Exchange again
points out that the linkage rules and
customer priority are currently not
applicable to any orders submitted to
FLEX, wherein there is no order book.
The Exchange has observed no trends of
TPHs submitting FLEX orders in order
to avoid trading in the non-FLEX
market. The Exchange believes the risk
(if any) of a market participant trading
a FLEX Option rather than a non-FLEX
option with slightly different terms to
use the FLEX market as a substitute for
the non-FLEX market and achieve such
a result is minimal. This possibility
exists today with respect to all options
the Exchange lists for FLEX and nonFLEX trading. The Exchange has not
observed market participants attempting
to trade in the FLEX market rather than
the non-FLEX market for this purpose in
classes in which this is possible today
and believes there would be minimal, if
any, benefit to do so. The Exchange
compiled a dataset of all FLEX series
listed on the Exchange in the last year 45
that matched non-FLEX series on the
underlying, expiration date, put/call
and exercise-style, but had different
strikes. From the dataset, the Exchange
was able to observe the differences in
strike prices between FLEX series and
listed series.46 The Exchange found that
99.90% of all SPX and SPXW FLEX
series created were over $1.00 away
from the matching SPX/SPXW listed
series strikes, and that 90.10% of these
were over $100.00 away from the
matching listed series strikes. It also
found that 97.61% of all equity and ETP
45 From October 14, 2019 through October 9,
2020.
46 Amendment No. 1 provides additional data in
support of QCC Orders for FLEX trading,
particularly demonstrating that there is minimal
risk of trading in the FLEX market as a substitute
for trading an economically equivalent option in the
non-FLEX market.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:48 Nov 23, 2020
Jkt 253001
FLEX series created were over $1.00
away from the matching listed series
strikes, and that 83% of these were over
$10.00 away from the matching listed
series strikes and 44.97% of these were
over $100.00 away from the matching
listed series strikes. As a result, the
Exchange believes that there is minimal
(if any) risk that market participants
desire or attempt to use the FLEX
market as a substitute to avoid trading
in the non-FLEX market.
The Exchange believes attempting to
execute an order in the FLEX market as
a substitute for the non-FLEX market
would minimize execution
opportunities for that order. Such
trading would be inefficient for market
participants and could introduce price
and execution risk to market
participants’ trading strategies given the
reduced liquidity, participation, and
price discovery in the FLEX market
compared to the non-FLEX market.47
Additionally, series with different terms
have different prices and serve different
investment purposes, so trading a
‘‘similar’’ FLEX series may not achieve
the same investment objective as the
non-FLEX series a TPH initially sought
to trade. The Exchange notes if a FLEX
QCC Orders execute at a price through
the book of the ‘‘similar’’ non-FLEX
series, while that would be a better price
for one transaction participant, it would
be a worse price for the participant on
the opposite side, and thus it may be
more difficult for the TPH to find
sufficient contra party interest. For
example, suppose the market for Aug
ABC 800 call with a multiplier of 100
is 10.20–11.00. If a market participant
sought interest from counterparties to
execute a FLEX QCC Order to buy an
Aug ABC 795 call with at 10.00, it is
unlikely another market participant
would sell at that price if they were
looking to sell the Aug ABC 800 call,
given that participant could sell the
‘‘similar’’ non-FLEX option series at
10.20, which would be a better price for
that seller. Given the likely difficulties
(such as reduced liquidity and
potentially longer timeframe to receive
execution) of trading in the FLEX
market as a substitute for trading an
economically equivalent option in the
non-FLEX market (such as to obtain a
better execution price), the Exchange
believes the risk of this occurring is de
minimis. The Exchange believes that
any such risk is even lower for FLEX
QCC Orders given the additional
requirements that apply to FLEX QCC
Orders, even without the heightened
execution price requirement that a QCC
47 See Sections VII and X of the ODD regarding
risks associated with FLEX Options.
PO 00000
Frm 00104
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
75075
Order cannot execute at the same price
as a Priority Customer. The benefits of
QCC Orders apply to FLEX options in
the same manner as they do for nonFLEX options, which benefits the
Exchange believes significantly
outweigh any price protection risk that
may exist in the FLEX market.
Ultimately, as noted above, QCC
Orders in FLEX Options will execute in
a substantially similar manner as QCC
Orders in non-FLEX options. In addition
to this, the Exchange notes that the
Rules currently permit Compression
orders in FLEX SPX options which, like
QCC Orders for FLEX trading, may
execute immediately without exposure
as opposed to being submitted to a
FLEX Auction despite there being no
NBBO or customer priority in the FLEX
market. Finally, the Exchange notes that
QCC functionality is a widely adopted
industry order type wherein multiple
other options exchanges currently have
QCC functionality in place.48
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 purposes of the Act. The
Exchange does not believe that the
proposed rule change will impose any
burden on intramarket competition that
is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act
because QCC functionality is already
available for non-FLEX options. The
Exchange is simply proposing to make
QCC Orders available for additional
classes (FLEX Option classes). The
Exchange notes that the proposed order
type will be available to all Users on a
voluntary basis, and Users are not
required to use QCC Orders when
executing QCTs. Users may continue to
execute the options component of QCTs
that are comprised of FLEX Options in
the same manner as they do today. The
proposed rule change will provide FLEX
Traders with the same functionality that
is currently available to non-FLEX
Traders with respect to execution of
option components of QCTs. The
Exchange believes all TPHs should have
access to this functionality so they can
all execute option components of QCTs
in the same manner, regardless of
whether they choose to hedge the stock
portions of QCTs with FLEX or nonFLEX options.
48 See e.g. Nasdaq Phlx Rules Options 3, Section
12 (electronic QCC orders), and Options 8, Section
32(e) (open outcry QCC orders); Nasdaq ISE Options
3, Section 12; BOX Options Rule 7110(c)(6); MIAX
Options Rule 516(j); and NYSE Arca Options Rule
6.90–O.
E:\FR\FM\24NON1.SGM
24NON1
75076
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 227 / Tuesday, November 24, 2020 / Notices
The Exchange does not believe the
proposed rule change will impose any
burden on intermarket competition that
is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act
because the proposed rule change is
merely making functionality currently
available on the Exchange to additional
option classes. As noted above, QCC
Order functionality is currently
available at other options exchanges,
which may determine make QCC
functionality available to additional
option classes as well, including flexible
options. To the extent the proposed rule
change makes the Exchange a more
attractive trading venue for market
participants on other exchanges, those
market participants may elect to become
Exchange market participants.
Overall, the Exchange believes the
proposed rule change is appropriate for
the protection of investors and the
maintenance of fair and orderly markets
to assure, among other things, the
economically efficient execution of
securities transactions.
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.
II. Proceedings To Determine Whether
To Approve or Disapprove SR–CBOE–
2020–075, as Modified by Amendment
No. 1, and Grounds for Disapproval
Under Consideration
The Commission is instituting
proceedings pursuant to Section
19(b)(2)(B) of the Act 49 to determine
whether the proposed rule change, as
modified by Amendment No. 1, should
be approved or disapproved. Institution
of such proceedings is appropriate at
this time in view of the legal and policy
issues raised by the proposal. Institution
of proceedings does not indicate that the
Commission has reached any
conclusions with respect to any of the
issues involved. Rather, as stated below,
the Commission seeks and encourages
interested persons to provide comments
on the proposed rule change to inform
the Commission’s analysis of whether to
approve or disapprove the proposal.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
49 15
U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B). Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act also provides that proceedings to determine
whether to disapprove a proposed rule change must
be concluded within 180 days of the date of
publication of notice of the filing of the proposed
rule change. See id. The time for conclusion of the
proceedings may be extended for up to 60 days if
the Commission finds good cause for such
extension and publishes its reasons for so finding.
See id.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:48 Nov 23, 2020
Jkt 253001
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the
Act,50 the Commission is providing
notice of the grounds for disapproval
under consideration. The Commission is
instituting proceedings to allow for
additional analysis of the proposed rule
change’s consistency with the Act, and,
in particular, with Section 6(b)(5) of the
Act, which requires, among other
things, that the rules of a national
securities exchange be designed to
prevent fraudulent and manipulative
acts and practices, 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.51
The Exchange’s proposal would
expand the use of QCC Orders to
electronic FLEX options. A QCC Order
is comprised of an originating order to
buy or sell at least 1,000 standard option
contracts (or 10,000 mini-option
contracts) that is identified as being part
of a qualified contingent trade (‘‘QCT’’)
coupled with a contra-side order or
orders totaling an equal number of
contracts and meeting the other
conditions described below. As the
Exchange stated in its proposal, QCC
Orders facilitate the execution of option
orders that are part of a QCT,52 by
permitting TPHs to cross non-FLEX
options orders without exposure to the
market while effecting a trade in the
NMS stock component of the order at a
price necessary to achieve a net price.
The Commission granted an exemption
for QCTs that meet certain requirements
from Rule 611(a) of Regulation NMS
(‘‘QCT Exemption Order’’).53 The QCT
Exemption Order enables each NMS
stock component of a QCT trade to be
exempt from Rule 611(a) of Regulation
NMS for any trade-throughs.54 As the
Commission previously stated in the
QCC Approval Order, QCC Orders are
permitted if the QCC Order is (1) part of
a QCT under Regulation NMS; (2) for at
least 1,000 contracts; (3) executed at a
50 Id.
51 15
U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
QCT is a transaction consisting of two or
more component orders that involve both an option
and equity stock component where the execution of
one component is contingent upon the execution of
all the other components at or near the same time.
See supra note 7 (defining a QCT, which requires,
among other things, that ‘‘at least one component
must be an NMS stock, as defined in Rule 600 of
Regulation NMS . . .’’).
53 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57620
(April 4, 2008), 73 FR 19271 (April 9, 2008) (‘‘QCT
Exemption Release’’), which modifies a release
initially granting the QCT exemption, Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 54389 (August 31, 2006),
71 FR 52829 (September 7, 2006) (‘‘Original QCT
Exemption Release’’).
54 See id.
52 A
PO 00000
Frm 00105
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
price at or between the NBBO; and (4)
cancelled if there is a public customer
on the electronic book.55
The Commission also stated in the
QCC Approval Order that the four
required elements of the QCC Order
‘‘strikes an appropriate balance for the
options market in that it is narrowly
drawn and establishes a limited
exception to the general principle of
exposure and retains the general
principle of customer priority in the
options markets.’’ 56 The Exchange has
stated that due to the structure of the
FLEX options market, such as the lack
of a customer order book and that FLEX
options have no NBBO, that the
applicable QCC Order requirements as
to these matters are not applicable to
FLEX orders and therefore are not
applicable to the proposed FLEX QCC
Order. The requirements for a QCC
Order to execute at or between the
NBBO and that a QCC Order cannot be
executed at the same price as a customer
order on the book are intended to
mitigate the risks to market quality in
both the options and underlying equity
markets. The Exchange, however, has
not detailed why such protections, and
the underlying rationale for such
protections, are unnecessary
considering that FLEX options market
participants would be granted an
exception to the FLEX options
electronic auction order exposure
requirements, as well as the equity
market trade-through rules, when
executing a FLEX QCC Order under its
proposal. The Commission therefore
believes, as discussed in more detail
below, that the Exchange’s proposal
raises questions as to whether its
proposal is consistent with the
protection of investors and other
requirements of Section 6(b)(5) of the
Act, in addition to the maintenance of
fair and orderly markets.57
Electronic FLEX options trading
differs from electronic non-FLEX
options because they allow TPHs to
customize terms of the option contract
(e.g., exercise style, expiration date, and
strike price). Notably, FLEX options lack
an order book and a requirement to
yield to public customer interest.
Electronic FLEX option transactions are
also conducted through auctions which
require an exposure interval that may
55 See QCC Approval Order, supra note 8, 76 FR
at 35492. See also CBOE Rule 5.6(c)(2), which
states, among things, that a ‘‘QCC Order with one
option leg may execute automatically upon entry
without exposure if the execution price: (i) Is not
at the same price as a Priority Customer order
resting in the Book; and (ii) is at or between the
NBBO.’’
56 See QCC Approval Order, supra note 8, 76 FR
at 35492.
57 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
E:\FR\FM\24NON1.SGM
24NON1
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 227 / Tuesday, November 24, 2020 / Notices
not be less than three seconds prior to
execution.58 As the Commission has
stated in the past, order exposure in the
options markets provides an incentive
to options market makers to provide
liquidity and therefore plays an
important role in ensuring competition
and price discovery in the options
markets.59 The proposed FLEX QCC
Order would permit TPHs to execute a
FLEX options component of a QCT
without the regular FLEX auction
exposure requirement. Therefore, when
applying the unique characteristics of
the FLEX options market to the current
QCC Order framework, the Commission
believes there are questions as to
whether the Exchange’s proposal is
consistent with the guidance in the QCC
Approval Order and the principles
underlying the order, and whether the
proposal is consistent with Section
6(b)(5) of the Act.
In particular, the Commission is
concerned that the proposed design of
the QCC FLEX Order may negatively
impact market quality in the options
market by removing certain constraints
required under the QCC Approval
Order. The Exchange states that stockoption orders are already permitted to
include FLEX options and ‘‘the FLEX
Options components of QCTs submitted
as stock-option orders may currently
execute at any price in FLEX (i.e., are
not subject to an NBBO or yielding to
[c]ustomer orders on the book).’’
However, the Exchange fails to address
that FLEX options that are currently part
of a stock-option order are able to
achieve potential price improvement
through the electronic FLEX auction
exposure process,60 while the proposed
FLEX QCC Orders eliminates the
exposure requirement. As a result, the
proposal to allow FLEX QCC Orders
will eliminate the opportunity for any
price improvement for the option
component, thereby allowing the TPH to
set the price at which the FLEX options
component of the QCT will cross
without being subject to any limits such
as an NBBO. Furthermore, the
elimination of the exposure requirement
reduces the overall transparency of the
price discovery process within the FLEX
market, which potentially harms a
wider range of participants, for example,
if participants are less able to use
historical FLEX option prices to inform
about the prices of other, similar FLEX
options.
The proposed FLEX QCC Order also
raises concerns about its impact to
58 See
CBOE Rule 5.72(c)(1)(F).
QCC Approval Order, supra note 8, 76 FR
at 35492.
60 See CBOE Rule 5.72(c).
59 See
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:48 Nov 23, 2020
Jkt 253001
market quality in the underlying stock
leg of a QCC Order. In general, tradethroughs not only harm the individual
participants who may receive worse
prices, but they also increase wait times
and execution risk for limit orders on
the book, thereby reducing incentives
for market participants to submit limit
orders. In this respect, the Commission
has previously recognized that any
exemption to equity trade-through
protection needs to be narrowly drawn.
The QCT Exemption Order, in
determining the scope of the exemption,
states that defining the set of
exemptions to trade-through protection
too broadly ‘‘could unduly detract from
the objectives of Rule 611’’; 61 these
objectives include assuring ‘‘that
markets effect trades at the best
available prices,’’ but also
‘‘encourag[ing] the display of limit
orders by increasing the likelihood that
they will receive an execution in a
timely manner.’’ 62 Thus, the
Commission has determined that the
exemption to trade-through prohibition
should only be granted if strictly
necessary so as to promote these equity
market quality goals. In the FLEX
market, the Exchange has not provided
justification for why the exemption to
equity trade-through protection is
strictly necessary. Note that, to qualify
as a QCT, only ‘‘the spread between the
prices of the component orders’’ needs
to be defined, not the prices
themselves.63 In the non-FLEX market,
if the facilitator of a QCT would be
constrained to price both the option and
stock legs at their respective NBBOs, the
spread between the prices of the two
legs would be pre-defined according to
the spread between the option NBBO
and the stock NBBO. However, in the
FLEX market, given the flexibility in
determining the price of the FLEX
option leg (particularly if not subject to
exposure), the Exchange has not
explained why a broker could not
simply determine a spread, and
subsequently adjust the price of the
option leg according to the realized
price of the stock leg, thus avoiding the
need to trade-through the equity market.
Likewise, and potentially more
concerning, since neither leg of the
proposed FLEX QCC Order is
constrained to execute at an NBBO, the
Exchange has not explained what would
prevent a facilitator from determining a
spread and setting the price for the
61 See Original QCT Exemption Release, supra
note 53, 71 FR at 52830.
62 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808
(June 9, 2005), 70 FR 37496, 37505 (June 29, 2005)
(Regulation NMS).
63 See QCT Exemption Release, supra note 53, 73
FR at 19272.
PO 00000
Frm 00106
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
75077
FLEX option leg such that the
corresponding stock leg price results in
a trade-through.
In addition to the significant concerns
discussed above regarding the
proposal’s consistency with the
guidance in the QCC Approval Order,
and the principles underlying the order,
that need to be addressed, the Exchange
provided data on retail orders and
market participation in FLEX and nonFLEX options in support of its proposal.
The Exchange believes that the limited
retail customer participation in the
FLEX options market would mitigate the
requirement for additional customer
protections that exist for QCC Orders in
the non-FLEX options market.
Specifically, the Exchange states that
‘‘there are minimal retail customer
orders submitted into the FLEX market
and thus it would be unlikely any
would be resting at the top of a FLEX
book if one existed for a de minimis (if
any) amount of time that would require
additional protection.’’ The Commission
is concerned that the proposal does not
address how the lack of additional
customer protections would be
appropriate. The Commission notes that
the Exchange did not provide specific
data on the level of retail participation
or whether that conclusion was based
solely on the size of the orders in the
FLEX options market. In addition, the
Commission notes that the Exchange
has stated previously in proposing
certain changes to the FLEX options
market that they were intended to
broaden the base of investors that use
FLEX options, including more retail
participation.64 The Commission
believes the Exchange has not provided
sufficient data to support the conclusion
that additional customer protections are
unnecessary under the proposal.
The Exchange also stated that it
believes that the risk of market
participants trading in the FLEX market
as a substitute for the non-FLEX market
is minimal. The Exchange has provided
a summary of data that showed the
64 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 66934
(May 7, 2012), 77 FR 27822, 27824 (May 11, 2012)
(SR–CBOE–2012–040) (Notice of Proposed Rule
Change Related to Permanent Approval of its Pilot
on FLEX Minimum Value Sizes) (stating that
‘‘eliminating the minimum value size requirement
would further broaden the base of investors that use
FLEX [o]ptions to manage their trading and
investment risk, including investors that current
trade in OTC market for customized options, where
similar size restrictions do not apply. The Exchange
also believes that this may open up FLEX [o]ptions
to more retail investors.’’). The pilot was
permanently approved in Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 67624 (August 8, 2012), 77 FR 48580
(August 14, 2012) (SR–CBOE–2012–040) (Order
Granting Approval of Proposed Rule Change
Related to Permanent Approval of its Pilot on FLEX
Minimum Value Sizes).
E:\FR\FM\24NON1.SGM
24NON1
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
75078
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 227 / Tuesday, November 24, 2020 / Notices
number of customer orders resting in
non-FLEX options at the top of the book
and differences in strike prices in terms
of dollar values between the FLEX and
non-FLEX options that had similar
terms. However, the data provided still
raises questions as to whether the
proposal would incentivize market
participants to use FLEX options as a
substitute for non-FLEX options in order
to circumvent price and public
customer priority constraints under the
QCC Approval Order. For example, the
data on strike prices for index options
only compared SPX and SPXW listed
series with SPX and SPXW FLEX series
without considering a broader set of
FLEX index options that would apply to
the proposed FLEX QCC Order,
including less liquid index options. In
addition, the data sample on FLEX
option strike price values would be
more appropriately considered if the
price differences between the FLEX and
non-FLEX options market were
described in proportion to the stock
price rather than in dollar values.
Moreover, the Exchange’s proposal does
not provide any information on the
market share between FLEX and nonFLEX index options and FLEX and nonFLEX equity and ETP options and its
variation over time, which could help
inform on whether traders have been
steadily migrating between the nonFLEX and FLEX market.
Furthermore, the Exchange stated that
the proposed FLEX QCC Order would
‘‘reduce compliance burden on TPHs by
providing a more efficient means of
executing the options component of a
QCT if the options component consists
of a FLEX [o]ption.’’ The Exchange
asserted in its proposal that the
compliance risk of not being able to
execute a FLEX options portion of a
QCT at or near the same time of the
execution of the stock component is
greater in a FLEX auction where the
FLEX order must be exposed for at least
three second prior to execution.
However, the Exchange has not
provided any evidence or data on the
number of violations or compliance
issues that occurred as a result of
needing to execute the FLEX option
component after the minimum three
second exposure period. Accordingly,
the Commission requests data to
support the Exchange’s assertion on
compliance issues, including any
information on the overall number of
FLEX orders that are part of a stockoption order and the number of
compliance issues occurring, including
those in relation to the timing of
execution of the stock and FLEX option
component of the order.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:48 Nov 23, 2020
Jkt 253001
Based on the above, the Commission
believes there are questions as to
whether the proposal is consistent with
Section 6(b)(5) of the Act and the
requirements that the rules of the
exchange be designed to prevent
fraudulent and manipulative acts and
practices, promote just and equitable
principles of trade, and in general, to
protect investors and the public interest,
and whether the proposal is consistent
with the maintenance of fair and orderly
markets under the Act.
Under the Commission’s Rules of
Practice, the ‘‘burden to demonstrate
that a proposed rule change is rule
change is consistent with the [Act] and
the rules and regulations issued
thereunder . . . is on the [SRO] that
proposed the rule change.’’ 65 The
description of a proposed rule change,
its purpose and operation, its effect, and
a legal analysis of its consistency with
applicable requirements must all be
sufficiently detailed and specific to
support an affirmative Commission
finding,66 and any failure of an SRO to
provide this information may result in
the Commission not having a sufficient
basis to make an affirmative finding that
a proposed rule change is consistent
with the Act and the applicable rules
and regulations.67 Moreover,
‘‘unquestioning reliance’’ on an SRO’s
representations in a proposed rule
change would not be sufficient to justify
Commission approval of a proposed rule
change.68
For the reasons discussed above, the
Commission believes it is appropriate to
institute proceedings pursuant to
Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Act to
determine whether the proposal should
be approved or disapproved.
III. Procedure: Request for Written
Comments
The Commission requests that
interested persons provide written
submissions of their views, data, and
arguments with respect to the concerns
identified above, as well as any others
they may have with the proposal. In
particular, the Commission invites the
written views of interested persons
concerning whether the proposed rule
change, as modified by Amendment No.
1, is inconsistent with Section 6(b)(5) 69
or any other provision of the Act, or the
65 Rule 700(b)(3), Commission Rules of Practice,
17 CFR 201.700(b)(3).
66 See id.
67 See id.
68 See Susquehanna Int’l Group, LLP v. Securities
and Exchange Commission, 866 F.3d 442, 446–47
(D.C. Cir. 2017) (rejecting the Commission’s reliance
on an SRO’s own determinations without sufficient
evidence of the basis for such determinations).
69 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
PO 00000
Frm 00107
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
rules and regulation thereunder.
Although there do not appear to be any
issues relevant to approval or
disapproval that would be facilitated by
an oral presentation of views, data, and
arguments, the Commission will
consider, pursuant to Rule 19b–4 under
the Act, any request for an opportunity
to make an oral presentation.70
Interested persons are invited to
submit written data, views, and
arguments regarding whether the
proposed rule change, as modified by
Amendment No. 1, should be approved
or disapproved by December 15, 2020.
Any person who wishes to file a rebuttal
to any other person’s submission must
file that rebuttal by December 29, 2020.
The Commission asks that
commenters address the sufficiency and
merit of the Exchange’s statements in
support of the proposed rule change, in
addition to any other comments they
may wish to submit about the proposed
rule change. In particular, the
Commission seeks comment on the
statements of the Exchange contained in
Amendment No. 1, and any other issues
raised by the proposed rule change.
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–
CBOE–2020–075 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–CBOE–2020–075. 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
70 Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, as amended by the
Securities Act Amendments of 1975, Public Law
94–29 (June 4, 1975), grants the Commission
flexibility to determine what type of proceeding—
either oral or notice and opportunity for written
comments—is appropriate for consideration of a
particular proposal by a self-regulatory
organization. See Securities Act Amendments of
1975, Senate Comm. on Banking, Housing & Urban
Affairs, S. Rep. No. 75, 94th Cong., 1st Sess. 30
(1975).
E:\FR\FM\24NON1.SGM
24NON1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 227 / Tuesday, November 24, 2020 / Notices
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–CBOE–2020–075 and
should be submitted by December 15,
2020. Rebuttal comments should be
submitted by December 29, 2020.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.71
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020–25909 Filed 11–23–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–90409; File No. SR–
NYSEArca–2020–95]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE
Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed
Rule Change Amending the Fees for
NYSE Arca BBO and NYSE Arca
Trades by Modifying the Application of
the Access Fee and Amending the
Fees for NYSE Arca Trades by
Adopting a Waiver Applicable to the
Redistribution Fee
November 12, 2020.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
Correction
In Notice document 2020–25391,
appearing on pages 73522–73533, in the
issue of Wednesday, November 18,
2020, make the following correction:
On page 73533, in the first column, in
the thirty-eighth line, the entry
‘‘December 9, 2021’’ is corrected to read
‘‘December 9, 2020’’.
[FR Doc. C1–2020–25391 Filed 11–23–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1301–00–D
71 17
CFR 200.30–3(a)(57) and (58).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:48 Nov 23, 2020
Jkt 253001
75079
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
the most significant aspects of such
statements.
[Release No. 34–90449; File No. SR–
PEARL–2020–25]
A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
Self-Regulatory Organizations; MIAX
PEARL, LLC; Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed
Rule Change To Amend the MIAX
PEARL Fee Schedule
November 18, 2020.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2
notice is hereby given that on November
5, 2020, MIAX PEARL, LLC (‘‘MIAX
PEARL’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission
(‘‘Commission’’) a 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.
I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Terms of Substance of
the Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange is filing a proposal to
amend the MIAX PEARL Fee Schedule
(the ‘‘Fee Schedule’’) to increase the
number of additional Limited Service
MIAX Express Order Interface (‘‘MEO’’)
Ports available to Members.3 The
Exchange does not propose to amend
the fees for additional Limited Service
MEO Ports.
The text of the proposed rule change
is available on the Exchange’s website at
https://www.miaxoptions.com/rulefilings/pearl at MIAX PEARL’s principal
office, 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
1 15
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
CFR 240.19b–4.
3 The term ‘‘Member’’ means an individual or
organization that is registered with the Exchange
pursuant to Chapter II of these Rules for purposes
of trading on the Exchange as an ‘‘Electronic
Exchange Member’’ or ‘‘Market Maker.’’ Members
are deemed ‘‘members’’ under the Exchange Act.
See Exchange Rule 100.
2 17
PO 00000
Frm 00108
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
1. Purpose
The Exchange proposes to amend the
Fee Schedule to offer two (2) additional
Limited Service MEO Ports to Members.
The Exchange does not propose to
amend the fees charged for the
additional Limited Service MEO Ports.
The Exchange initially filed the
proposal to increase the number of
Limited Service MEO Ports available to
Members on June 30, 2020, with no
change to the actual fee amounts being
charged.4 The First Proposed Rule
Change was published for comment in
the Federal Register on July 20, 2020.5
The Exchange notes that the First
Proposed Rule Change did not receive
any comment letters. Nonetheless, the
Exchange withdrew the First Proposed
Rule Change on August 24, 2020.6 On
August 25, 2020, the Exchange refiled
its proposal to increase the number of
Limited Service MEO Ports available to
Members (without increasing the actual
fee amounts) to provide further
clarification regarding the Exchange’s
annual cost for providing additional
Limited Service MEO Ports.7 The
Second Proposed Rule Change was
published for comment in the Federal
Register on September 11, 2020.8 Like
the First Proposed Rule Change, the
Second Proposed Rule Change did not
receive any comment letters.
Nonetheless, the Exchange withdrew
the Second Proposed Rule Change on
October 23, 2020 9 and submitted SR–
PEARL–2020–21 (‘‘Third Proposed Rule
Change’’). On October 26, 2020, the
Exchange withdrew the Third Proposed
Rule Change and submitted SR–PEARL–
2020–22 (‘‘Fourth Proposed Rule
Change’’). The Fourth Proposed Rule
Change to increase the number of
4 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 89316
(July 14, 2020), 85 FR 43898 (July 20, 2020) (SR–
PEARL–2020–09) (the ‘‘First Proposed Rule
Change’’).
5 Id.
6 See Comment Letter from Christopher Solgan,
VP, Senior Counsel, the Exchange, dated August 24,
2020, notifying the Commission that the Exchange
will withdraw the First Proposed Rule Change.
7 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 89774
(September 4, 2020), 85 FR 56281 (September 11,
2020) (SR–PEARL–2020–12) (the ‘‘Second Proposed
Rule Change’’).
8 Id.
9 See Comment Letter from Christopher Solgan,
VP, Senior Counsel, the Exchange, dated October
19, 2020, notifying the Commission that the
Exchange would withdraw the Second Proposed
Rule Change.
E:\FR\FM\24NON1.SGM
24NON1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 227 (Tuesday, November 24, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 75071-75079]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-25909]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-90457; File No. SR-CBOE-2020-075]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing of Amendment No. 1 and Order Instituting Proceedings to
Determine Whether to Approve or Disapprove a Proposed Rule Change, as
Modified by Amendment No. 1, to Make Qualified Contingent Cross Orders
Available for FLEX Option Trading
November 18, 2020.
On August 3, 2020, Cboe Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``CBOE'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a
proposed rule change to make Qualified Contingent Cross Orders
available for FLEX option trading. The proposed rule change was
published for comment in the Federal Register on August 20, 2020.\3\ On
October 1, 2020, the Commission designated a longer period for
Commission action on the proposed rule change, until November 18,
2020.\4\ On October 23, 2020, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the
proposed rule change, which replaced and superseded the proposed rule
change.\5\ The Commission has not received any comments on the
proposal. The Commission is publishing this notice and order to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1,
from interested persons and to institute proceedings pursuant to
Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Act \6\ to determine whether to approve or
disapprove the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
\2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
\3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 89564 (August 14,
2020), 85 FR 51531.
\4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 90062 (October 1,
2020), 85 FR 63312 (October 7, 2020).
\5\ Amendment No. 1 is available on the Commission's website at:
https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-cboe-2020-075/srcboe2020075-7940531-224727.pdf.
\6\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. The Exchange's Description of the Proposed Rule Change, as Modified
by Amendment No. 1
The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 5.70 and Rule 5.72, as well as
Rule 5.33, to make Qualified Contingent Cross (``QCC'') Orders
available for FLEX trading. 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://www.cboe.com/AboutCBOE/CBOELegalRegulatoryHome.aspx), 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 amend Rule 5.70 and Rule 5.72, as well as
Rule 5.33, to make QCC Orders, which includes Complex QCC Orders and
QCC with Stock Orders, available for electronic FLEX trading.
Currently, QCC Orders are available only for electronic non-FLEX
trading.
QCC Orders facilitate the execution of option orders that are part
of Qualified Contingent Trades (``QCTs''),\7\ by permitting Trading
Permit Holders (``TPHs'') to cross options orders without exposure
while effecting the trade in the equities leg in another market at a
price necessary to achieve the net price. Currently, TPHs may choose to
submit the options component
[[Page 75072]]
of a QCT as a FLEX Option, yet, are currently unable to execute a FLEX
Options component of a QCT on the Exchange in the same efficient,
unexposed manner as they may execute a non-FLEX option component of a
QCT on the Exchange. The Exchange now seeks to provide TPHs and their
customers with the same QCC trading capabilities for FLEX trading that
are currently available for non-FLEX trading, thus providing TPHs with
the same capability to execute the options parts of QCTs that are
comprised of FLEX Options.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See Rule 5.6(c), definition of ``Qualified Contingent Cross
or QCC'', paragraph (1), which defines a ``qualified contingent
trade'' as a transaction consisting of two or more component orders,
executed as agent or principal, where: (A) At least one component is
an NMS stock, as defined in Rule 600 of Regulation NMS under the
Exchange Act; (B) all components are effected with a product or
price contingency that either has been agreed to by all the
respective counterparties or arranged for by a broker-dealer as
principal or agent; (C) the execution of one component is contingent
upon the execution of all other components at or near the same time;
(D) the specific relationship between the component orders (e.g.,
the spread between the prices of the component orders) is determined
by the time the contingent order is placed; (E) the component orders
bear a derivative relationship to one another, represent different
classes of shares of the same issuer, or involve the securities of
participants in mergers or with intentions to merge that have been
announced or cancelled; and (F) the transaction is fully hedged
(without regard to any prior existing position) as a result of other
components of the contingent trade.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule 5.6(c) currently provides for the non-FLEX definition of a QCC
Order. Specifically, a QCC order is comprised of an originating order
to buy or sell at least 1,000 contracts (or 10,000 mini-option
contracts) that is identified as being part of a QCT coupled with a
contra-side order or orders totaling an equal number of contracts. If a
QCC Order has more than one option leg (a ``Complex QCC Order''), each
option leg must have at least 1,000 standard option contracts (or
10,000 mini-option contracts). A QCC order represents one component of
a QCT, which must be paired with a stock order. When a User enters a
QCC Order, the User is responsible for executing the associated stock
component of the QCT at or near the same time of the QCC order
execution, just as a User is ultimately responsible for complying with
execution requirements for any order a User submits. Indeed, the
Exchange requires TPHs to properly mark all QCC Orders as such, and has
a surveillance program in place which assesses TPH compliance with the
requirements applicable to QCC Orders, including the requirement that
the stock leg of the transaction be executed at or near the same time
as the options leg.\8\ To execute the associated stock, a User may
choose to either (1) separately submit an option order to the Exchange
and the stock order to a stock execution venue in time to be executed
at or near the same time of each other, or (2) submit a QCC with Stock
Order. A QCC with Stock Order is a type of QCC Order (including a
Complex QCC Order) entered with a stock component to be electronically
communicated by the Exchange to a designated broker-dealer for
execution on behalf of the submitting User and, as indicated, are
available to Users on a voluntary basis.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 15058 (June 17,
2011), 76 FR 35491 (Order Granting Approval of Proposed Rule Change
Establishing Qualified Contingent Cross Orders) (``QCC Approval
Order'').
\9\ See Rule 5.33(a), definition of ``QCC with Stock Order''.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange proposes to adopt Rule 5.72(e) \10\ to govern FLEX QCC
Orders. The proposed rule is simply making QCC Order available for
FLEX, and as such, the definition of FLEX QCC Orders is substantively
identical as non-FLEX QCC Orders in Rule 5.6(c) and FLEX QCC Orders
will execute in substantially the same manner with few differences
unique to trading in FLEX Trading. Proposed Rule 5.72(e) provides that
a ``FLEX QCC'' order is comprised of an originating order to buy or
sell at least 1,000 standard FLEX Option contracts (or 10,000 mini FLEX
option contracts) that is identified as being part of a QCT (as defined
in Rule 5.6(c)) coupled with a contra-side order or orders totaling an
equal number of contracts. If a FLEX QCC order has more than one option
leg (a ``Complex FLEX QCC'' order), each option leg must have at least
1,000 standard FLEX option contracts (or 10,000 mini FLEX option
contracts). This is substantively identical to the non-FLEX QCC
definition in Rule 5.6(c). The Exchange notes that Users will enter
into the System all FLEX QCC Orders as they would any other FLEX Order
pursuant to 5.72(b) (governing the order entry of FLEX Orders) and the
applicable FLEX auction rules. As such, the Exchange points out that
FLEX QCC Orders may only be submitted for series consistent with the
FLEX Rules.\11\ Like QCC Orders submitted for non-FLEX trading,\12\
FLEX QCC Orders will execute automatically upon entry without exposure
pursuant to proposed Rule 5.72(e)(1). The Exchange notes, as there is
no FLEX Order Book, the corresponding provisions in Rule 5.6(c) \13\
and 5.33(f)(2) regarding QCC Order execution requirements in connection
with yielding to prices at which Priority Customer Orders may be
resting in the Simple Book \14\ and Complex Order Book (``COB''),\15\
and in Rule 5.6(c) \16\ in connection with pricing QCC Orders at or
between the NBBO \17\ would not be applicable to QCC Orders submitted
to FLEX.\18\ Proposed Rule 5.72(e)(1) also provides that a FLEX QCC
Order is cancelled if it cannot execute, and that Rule 5.9 (related to
exposure of orders on the Exchange) does not apply to FLEX QCC orders,
both of which are consistent with the current non-FLEX QCC Rules.\19\
Like QCC Orders submitted in non-FLEX classes,\20\ QCC orders submitted
in FLEX classes must be entered in the standard increment for the
class.\21\ Therefore, the proposed rule change adds in proposed Rule
5.72(e)(2) that FLEX QCC may only be entered in the increments
applicable to FLEX Orders under Rule 5.4(c)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ The Exchange also moves current paragraph (e) to paragraph
(f).
\11\ See Rules 5.72(b), (c), and (d).
\12\ See Rule 5.6(c), definition of ``Qualified Contingent Cross
or QCC'', paragraph (2).
\13\ See id.
\14\ See Rule 5.6(c), definition of ``Qualified Contingent Cross
or QCC'', subparagraph (2)(A)(i).
\15\ See Rule 5.6(c), definition of ``Qualified Contingent Cross
or QCC'', subparagraph (2)(B)(i) and (iii).
\16\ See Rule 5.6(c), definition of ``Qualified Contingent Cross
or QCC'', subparagraph (2).
\17\ See Rule 5.6(c), definition of ``Qualified Contingent Cross
or QCC'', subparagraph (2)(A)(ii) and (B)(ii).
\18\ This is true for any FLEX Order.
\19\ See Rule 5.6(c), definition of ``Qualified Contingent Cross
or QCC'', subparagraph (2)(C) and (2)(C), respectively.
\20\ See 5.6(c), definition of ``Qualified Contingent Cross or
QCC'', paragraph (3).
\21\ See Rule 5.4(c)(4) (which sets forth minimum increments for
FLEX options).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed Rule 5.72(e)(1) also provides that a FLEX QCC with Stock
order executes pursuant to Rule 5.33(l). The proposed rule change
amends Rule 5.33(1) to specify that the provisions governing QCC with
Stock include FLEX QCC with Stock. As such, pursuant to Rule 5.33(l),
for a FLEX QCC with Stock Order, a User must include the same requisite
information as they must include when submitting such orders for non-
FLEX trading pursuant to Rule 5.33(l)(3)(A),\22\ and the System will
process the option and stock components of such orders in the same
manner as it does for non-FLEX QCC orders pursuant to Rule
5.33(l)(3)(B) and (C).\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ Rule 5.33(l)(3)(A) requires a User to include a net price
for the stock and option components in accordance with the minimum
increments for stock-option orders and (ii) identify the designated
broker-dealer as set forth in Rule 5.33 (l)(2).
\23\ Rule 5.33(l)(3)(B) provides that the System executes the
option component in accordance with Rule 5.6(c), but does not
immediately send the User a trade execution report, and
automatically communicates the stock component to the designated
broker-dealer for execution at a stock trading venue. If the option
component(s) of a QCC with Stock Order cannot execute, the System
cancels the QCC with Stock Order, including both the stock and
option components. Rule 5.33(l)(3)(C) provides that, if the System
receives an execution report for the stock component of a QCC with
Stock Order from the designated broker-dealer, the Exchange sends
the User the trade execution report for the QCC with Stock order,
including execution information for both the stock and option
components. If the System receives a report from the designated
broker-dealer that the stock component of a QCC with Stock Order
cannot execute, the Exchange nullifies the option component trade
and notifies the User of the reason for the nullification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange seeks to make QCC Orders available for FLEX trading
due to the growing customer demand it has received for QCC
functionality for FLEX trading. The Exchange notes that a number of
TPHs have expressed to the Exchange that use of QCC for FLEX
[[Page 75073]]
options would increase the efficiency of their executions of the
options component of a QCT if the options component consists of a FLEX
Option. An investor may seek to use a FLEX Option as an appropriate
hedge for a stock order but is currently unable to execute a FLEX
Option that is part of a QCT on the Exchange in the same unexposed
manner as it may execute a non-FLEX option on the Exchange. Currently,
if a TPH wants to execute a FLEX Option that is intended to be part of
a QCT, it would have to enter the FLEX Option as a FLEX Order separate
from the stock portion or as a stock-option order, which must be
exposed for at least three seconds prior to execution.\24\ Indeed, a
clean cross of the FLEX Option component of a stock-option QCT would
provide assurance to the parties to the QCT that their hedge will be
maintained.\25\ This is particularly significant for a variety of
managed funds that recognize the benefits to their investors in
employing certain hedging strategies through FLEX Options that allow
for their investors to mitigate risk and meet their objectives. For
example, a strategy may have an investment goal of protecting potential
losses down to a certain amount with the ability to participate in
return up to a certain cap in a reference asset (e.g., underlying index
or ETF) over a target outcome period that is usually a year or more
out. Such a strategy may utilize a combination of FLEX call and put
options in which expiration corresponds to the target outcome period
overlaid on an exposure to the reference asset. On the seed day (or,
the day in which the strategy is created and funded), the options
package would reflect customized strikes, necessary to target the
strategy's trading objectives a year or more in advance and for which
existing standard strikes are typically unavailable. The customized
FLEX strikes are used for the duration of the life of the strategy and
it is key that the appropriate combination of options is guaranteed to
maintain the hedge.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ See Rule 5.72(c)(1)(F); Rule 5.73(c)(3); and Rule
5.74(c)(3).
\25\ Amendment No. 1 adds additional explanation and detail in
support the use of QCC Orders in FLEX trading.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, the Exchange notes that the Rules currently permit
Compression orders, which execute without exposure against another
Compression order(s) totaling an equal number of options contracts, for
trading in FLEX SPX options.\26\ That is, like the proposed FLEX QCC
Orders, FLEX Compression orders are not exposed in a FLEX Auction
pursuant to Rule 5.72.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ Amendment No. 1 adds explanation regarding another order
type that may already execute without exposure in FLEX Options in
support of FLEX QCC Orders.
\27\ See Securities Exchange Release Nos. 89707 (August 28,
2020), 85 FR 55040 (September 3, 2020) (SR-CBOE-2020-074) (Notice of
Filing of a Proposed Rule Change Relating To Adopt Compression
Orders); and 90179 (October 14, 2020), 85 FR 66590 (October 20,
2020) (SR-CBOE-2020-074) (Order Granting Approval of a Proposed Rule
Change To Adopt Position Compression Cross (``PCC'') Orders for
SPX). As is the case with the proposed FLEX QCC orders, there would
be no NBBO or protection of customer orders for the recently
approved compression orders for FLEX Options.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As noted above, to qualify as a QCT, the execution of one component
is contingent upon the execution of all other components at or near the
same time. The Exchange conducts surveillance of TPHs to ensure that
TPHs execute the options component of a QCT at or near the same time as
the stock component, in accordance with the QCT exemption.\28\
Therefore, there is compliance risk for TPHs if they do not execute the
options component at or near the same time of execution of the stock
component. Providing TPHs with QCC Order functionality for FLEX Options
will reduce the compliance burden on TPHs by providing a more efficient
means of executing the options component of a QCT if the options
component consists of a FLEX Option, as QCC Orders did for non-FLEX
options.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ See supra note 1; see also infra note 34.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act'') and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to the Exchange and, in particular,
the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\29\ Specifically, the
Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \30\ requirements that the rules of an exchange be
designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation
and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing,
settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating
transactions in securities, 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. Additionally,
the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \31\ requirement that the rules of an exchange not be
designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers,
brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
\30\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
\31\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In particular, the proposal to make the QCC Order type available
for electronic FLEX trading will facilitate TPHs' execution of the
options component of QCTs that are comprised of FLEX Options in the
same manner that TPHs may currently execute the options component of
QCTs that are comprised of non-FLEX options, thereby removing
impediments to and perfecting the mechanism of a free and open market
and national market system and, in general, protecting investors. QCC
Orders for FLEX Options will execute in the same manner as QCC Orders
for non-FLEX options; the proposed rule change merely expands the
classes in which the Exchange may make QCC Orders available and
provides a specific definition of FLEX QCC Orders for clarity.
Moreover, the Exchange notes that stock-option orders (which, by
definition, must also be a QCT) \32\ are already permitted under the
Rules for FLEX Options, and thus, the FLEX Options components of QCTs
submitted as stock-option orders may currently execute at any price in
FLEX (i.e., are not subject to an NBBO or yielding to Customer orders).
The proposed rule change merely provides an alternative, more efficient
manner of execution for the option component of larger-sized QCTs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ See Interpretation and Policy .03 to Rule 5.33.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange believes the availability of QCC Orders for FLEX
Options will allow for a more efficient execution of the options
component of a QCT on the Exchange. As noted above, to qualify as a
QCT, the execution of one component is contingent upon the execution of
all other components at or near the same time. The Exchange conducts
surveillance to ensure a TPH executes the stock and option components
of a QCT at or near the same time.\33\ As a result, if the option
component does not execute when initially submitted to the Exchange, a
TPH may be subject to compliance risk if it does not execute the option
component at or near the same time of the execution of the stock
component. Indeed, the Exchange notes that the compliance risk of not
being able to execute a FLEX Options portion of a QCT at or near the
same time of the execution of the stock component is greater in a FLEX
auction, where it must be exposed for at least three seconds prior to
execution, than for non-FLEX option orders that must be exposed for at
least one second \34\ unless submitted
[[Page 75074]]
into an auction with a shorter exposure period. The Exchange believes
the proposed rule change will reduce this compliance risk for TPHs
executing FLEX Options that are components of QCTs, which will protect
investors and the public interest. Since the purpose of a QCT order is
for all components to trade at or near the same time, the Exchange
believes it is appropriate to provide TPHs with a mechanism to
facilitate immediate execution of FLEX Options that comprise the
options component of a QCT to reduce the compliance burden on TPHs when
effecting QCTs with a FLEX Option component.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ See QCC Approval Order.
\34\ See Rule 5.9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange believes that proposed Rule 5.72(e), while
substantially the same in almost all aspects to Rule 5.6(c) governing
non-FLEX QCC, will provide clarity to TPHs regarding the submission of
their QCC FLEX Options. The only difference between the FLEX and non-
FLEX QCC Orders is that FLEX QCC Orders are not subject to the NBBO or
prices of customers in the book. The Exchange notes this difference
exists for any order type in non-FLEX trading versus FLEX trading.\35\
The Exchange notes that the proposed rule changes do not alter any of
the current increments applicable to FLEX Options but merely provide
additional detail within the specific provision covering QCC Orders
regarding the standard increments already permissible for FLEX Options
that will also apply to QCC FLEX Orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ The Exchange also notes that the requirement that a QCC
order execute at a price at or better than the NBBO is not a unique
execution requirement--every option order type approved by the
Commission must execute at a price at or better than the NBBO in
accordance with the linkage plan. See Rule 5.66.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As the Commission has previously found,\36\ the execution of QCTs
is beneficial to the market as a whole as it contributes to the
efficient functioning of the securities markets and the price discovery
process. Pursuant to the QCT Release, the options portion of a QCT may
consist of non-FLEX or FLEX Options [sic]. However, as noted above,
without the availability of QCC Orders for FLEX Options, TPHs are
subject to higher compliance risk with respect to QCTs with a FLEX
Option component than TPHs who execute QCTs with a non-FLEX option
component. The Exchange submits this proposed rule change in response
to demand from TPHs and their institutional customers \37\ to be able
to execute the options components of QCTs comprised of a FLEX Option in
the same manner that they are currently able to execute the options
components of QCTs comprised of non-FLEX options. Therefore, the
proposed rule change will provide TPHs whose hedging strategies involve
FLEX Options with the same functionality currently available to TPHs
whose hedging strategies involve non-FLEX Options. The Exchange
believes this will provide investors with additional flexibility
regarding execution of their hedging strategies related to stock
positions, which flexibility ultimately benefits investors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57620 (April 4,
2008), 73 FR 19271 (April 9, 2008) (``QCT Release''); and see QCC
Approval Order.
\37\ Amendment No. 1 specifies the customer base for FLEX
trading.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Moreover, the Commission has stated that, while it believes that
order exposure is generally beneficial to options markets, it
recognizes that contingent trades can be useful trading tools for
investors and other market participants, particularly those who trade
the securities of issuers involved in mergers, different classes of
shares of the same issuers, convertible securities, and equity
derivatives such as options and that those who engage in contingent
trades can benefit the market as a whole by studying the relationships
between prices of such securities and executing contingent trades when
they believe such relationships are out of line with what they believe
to be fair value.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ See QCC Approval Order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The requirement that a non-FLEX QCC must execute at a price at or
between the NBBO merely incorporates an execution requirement
applicable to all option order types, as all options must execute at
price at or better than the NBBO in accordance with linkage rules.\39\
Therefore, this execution requirement is not a heightened execution
requirement for an unexposed option order. The additional requirement
that a QCC order not execute at the same price as a Priority Customer
incorporates the general principle of customer protection in the
options markets.\40\ If the market model for a class does not include
customer priority, this is a heightened execution requirement for
execution of an unexposed order.\41\ Even without this additional
protection, the Exchange believes the proposed FLEX QCC order will
protect investors, as it will provide Users of FLEX Options with the
same functionality as Users of non-FLEX options. While the Exchange
again notes that there is no FLEX book in which Customer orders (or any
FLEX orders) may rest, and therefore the principles of customer
priority are not currently applicable to FLEX trading, the Exchange
observed the top of Book orders in non-FLEX symbols as a comparison
point.\42\ In a random sample of data drawn from orders resting at the
top of the Book,\43\ the Exchange observed that, on average, only 0.34%
of all orders resting at the top of the Book were Customer orders. As
such, the Exchange believes that, even if there was a book for FLEX
Options, there would be minimal risk of executing a FLEX QCC at the
same price as a Customer order in the Book. Additionally, primarily
broker-dealers and institutional investors engage in FLEX trading.
Indeed, executions in FLEX Options are generally larger and held long-
term for strategies utilized by broker-dealers and institutional
investors, as opposed to the smaller, more frequent trades with shorter
expiration durations typically executed by retail investors. The
Exchange also understands that many large retail brokerage firms do not
accept FLEX Options or otherwise have high minimums which may
discourage retail trading in FLEX Options.\44\ Therefore, there are
minimal retail customer orders submitted into the FLEX market and thus
it would be unlikely any would be resting at the top of a FLEX book if
one existed for a de minimis (if any) amount
[[Page 75075]]
of time that would require additional protection. As discussed above,
the Exchange believes the benefits of exposure on an order on the
Exchange are outweighed by the benefits offered by immediate execution
of these contingent order types. The Exchange does not believe market
participants that engage in hedging strategies involving FLEX Options
should not have access to the same functionality as market participants
with hedging strategies involving non-FLEX options.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\39\ See Rule 5.66. In other words, if the definition of a QCC
order did not include the provision that it must execute at a price
at or better than the NBBO, QCC orders would still be required to
execute at a price at or better than the NBBO. The Exchange believes
inclusion of this explicit requirement for QCC orders was intended
to highlight the difference between execution of the options
component and the stock component, which may execute at any price,
but was not a unique price requirement necessary for execution of an
unexposed order. Every order type on the Exchange approved for non-
FLEX trading and FLEX trading has this same distinction.
\40\ If there was not a customer order resting at the top of the
book, then the second pricing requirement for QCC orders is simply
ignored. As there is no book in the FLEX market, the proposed FLEX
QCC order is equivalent to a non-FLEX QCC order submitted when there
is no customer order resting at the top of the book.
\41\ The Exchange has enabled customer priority for all equity
option classes that trade on the Exchange (and thus for all classes
in which TPHs may submit QCC orders). Therefore, all QCC orders
submitted on the Exchange are subject to the same execution pricing
requirements as non-QCC orders.
\42\ Amendment No. 1 adds a description of the top of Book data
sample and the Exchange's observations in connection with the data
sample in support of QCC for FLEX trading and that, as proposed,
FLEX QCC orders are consistent with the protection of investors.
\43\ The random sample was drawn over three days (September 25,
September 30, and October 1, 2020) from a different Match Engine
each sample day (one of which includes SPY). The sampling of data
across different Match Engines is representative of the symbols that
trade on the Exchange.
\44\ Amendment No. 1 adds additional detail regarding the de
minimis amount of retail customer orders submitted into the FLEX
market that would require additional protection.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange does not believe the propose rule change raises price
protection concerns that market participants may submit FLEX QCC Orders
for a FLEX series with slightly different terms than a non-FLEX series
in order to get better pricing. Such risk, if any, exists today with
respect to all FLEX trading. The Exchange again points out that the
linkage rules and customer priority are currently not applicable to any
orders submitted to FLEX, wherein there is no order book. The Exchange
has observed no trends of TPHs submitting FLEX orders in order to avoid
trading in the non-FLEX market. The Exchange believes the risk (if any)
of a market participant trading a FLEX Option rather than a non-FLEX
option with slightly different terms to use the FLEX market as a
substitute for the non-FLEX market and achieve such a result is
minimal. This possibility exists today with respect to all options the
Exchange lists for FLEX and non-FLEX trading. The Exchange has not
observed market participants attempting to trade in the FLEX market
rather than the non-FLEX market for this purpose in classes in which
this is possible today and believes there would be minimal, if any,
benefit to do so. The Exchange compiled a dataset of all FLEX series
listed on the Exchange in the last year \45\ that matched non-FLEX
series on the underlying, expiration date, put/call and exercise-style,
but had different strikes. From the dataset, the Exchange was able to
observe the differences in strike prices between FLEX series and listed
series.\46\ The Exchange found that 99.90% of all SPX and SPXW FLEX
series created were over $1.00 away from the matching SPX/SPXW listed
series strikes, and that 90.10% of these were over $100.00 away from
the matching listed series strikes. It also found that 97.61% of all
equity and ETP FLEX series created were over $1.00 away from the
matching listed series strikes, and that 83% of these were over $10.00
away from the matching listed series strikes and 44.97% of these were
over $100.00 away from the matching listed series strikes. As a result,
the Exchange believes that there is minimal (if any) risk that market
participants desire or attempt to use the FLEX market as a substitute
to avoid trading in the non-FLEX market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\45\ From October 14, 2019 through October 9, 2020.
\46\ Amendment No. 1 provides additional data in support of QCC
Orders for FLEX trading, particularly demonstrating that there is
minimal risk of trading in the FLEX market as a substitute for
trading an economically equivalent option in the non-FLEX market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange believes attempting to execute an order in the FLEX
market as a substitute for the non-FLEX market would minimize execution
opportunities for that order. Such trading would be inefficient for
market participants and could introduce price and execution risk to
market participants' trading strategies given the reduced liquidity,
participation, and price discovery in the FLEX market compared to the
non-FLEX market.\47\ Additionally, series with different terms have
different prices and serve different investment purposes, so trading a
``similar'' FLEX series may not achieve the same investment objective
as the non-FLEX series a TPH initially sought to trade. The Exchange
notes if a FLEX QCC Orders execute at a price through the book of the
``similar'' non-FLEX series, while that would be a better price for one
transaction participant, it would be a worse price for the participant
on the opposite side, and thus it may be more difficult for the TPH to
find sufficient contra party interest. For example, suppose the market
for Aug ABC 800 call with a multiplier of 100 is 10.20-11.00. If a
market participant sought interest from counterparties to execute a
FLEX QCC Order to buy an Aug ABC 795 call with at 10.00, it is unlikely
another market participant would sell at that price if they were
looking to sell the Aug ABC 800 call, given that participant could sell
the ``similar'' non-FLEX option series at 10.20, which would be a
better price for that seller. Given the likely difficulties (such as
reduced liquidity and potentially longer timeframe to receive
execution) of trading in the FLEX market as a substitute for trading an
economically equivalent option in the non-FLEX market (such as to
obtain a better execution price), the Exchange believes the risk of
this occurring is de minimis. The Exchange believes that any such risk
is even lower for FLEX QCC Orders given the additional requirements
that apply to FLEX QCC Orders, even without the heightened execution
price requirement that a QCC Order cannot execute at the same price as
a Priority Customer. The benefits of QCC Orders apply to FLEX options
in the same manner as they do for non-FLEX options, which benefits the
Exchange believes significantly outweigh any price protection risk that
may exist in the FLEX market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\47\ See Sections VII and X of the ODD regarding risks
associated with FLEX Options.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ultimately, as noted above, QCC Orders in FLEX Options will execute
in a substantially similar manner as QCC Orders in non-FLEX options. In
addition to this, the Exchange notes that the Rules currently permit
Compression orders in FLEX SPX options which, like QCC Orders for FLEX
trading, may execute immediately without exposure as opposed to being
submitted to a FLEX Auction despite there being no NBBO or customer
priority in the FLEX market. Finally, the Exchange notes that QCC
functionality is a widely adopted industry order type wherein multiple
other options exchanges currently have QCC functionality in place.\48\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\48\ See e.g. Nasdaq Phlx Rules Options 3, Section 12
(electronic QCC orders), and Options 8, Section 32(e) (open outcry
QCC orders); Nasdaq ISE Options 3, Section 12; BOX Options Rule
7110(c)(6); MIAX Options Rule 516(j); and NYSE Arca Options Rule
6.90-O.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 purposes of the Act. The Exchange does not
believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on
intramarket competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act because QCC functionality is
already available for non-FLEX options. The Exchange is simply
proposing to make QCC Orders available for additional classes (FLEX
Option classes). The Exchange notes that the proposed order type will
be available to all Users on a voluntary basis, and Users are not
required to use QCC Orders when executing QCTs. Users may continue to
execute the options component of QCTs that are comprised of FLEX
Options in the same manner as they do today. The proposed rule change
will provide FLEX Traders with the same functionality that is currently
available to non-FLEX Traders with respect to execution of option
components of QCTs. The Exchange believes all TPHs should have access
to this functionality so they can all execute option components of QCTs
in the same manner, regardless of whether they choose to hedge the
stock portions of QCTs with FLEX or non-FLEX options.
[[Page 75076]]
The Exchange does not believe the proposed rule change will impose
any burden on intermarket competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act because the
proposed rule change is merely making functionality currently available
on the Exchange to additional option classes. As noted above, QCC Order
functionality is currently available at other options exchanges, which
may determine make QCC functionality available to additional option
classes as well, including flexible options. To the extent the proposed
rule change makes the Exchange a more attractive trading venue for
market participants on other exchanges, those market participants may
elect to become Exchange market participants.
Overall, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is
appropriate for the protection of investors and the maintenance of fair
and orderly markets to assure, among other things, the economically
efficient execution of securities transactions.
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.
II. Proceedings To Determine Whether To Approve or Disapprove SR-CBOE-
2020-075, as Modified by Amendment No. 1, and Grounds for Disapproval
Under Consideration
The Commission is instituting proceedings pursuant to Section
19(b)(2)(B) of the Act \49\ to determine whether the proposed rule
change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, should be approved or
disapproved. Institution of such proceedings is appropriate at this
time in view of the legal and policy issues raised by the proposal.
Institution of proceedings does not indicate that the Commission has
reached any conclusions with respect to any of the issues involved.
Rather, as stated below, the Commission seeks and encourages interested
persons to provide comments on the proposed rule change to inform the
Commission's analysis of whether to approve or disapprove the proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\49\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B). Section 19(b)(2) of the Act also
provides that proceedings to determine whether to disapprove a
proposed rule change must be concluded within 180 days of the date
of publication of notice of the filing of the proposed rule change.
See id. The time for conclusion of the proceedings may be extended
for up to 60 days if the Commission finds good cause for such
extension and publishes its reasons for so finding. See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Act,\50\ the Commission is
providing notice of the grounds for disapproval under consideration.
The Commission is instituting proceedings to allow for additional
analysis of the proposed rule change's consistency with the Act, and,
in particular, with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, which requires, among
other things, that the rules of a national securities exchange be
designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, 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.\51\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\50\ Id.
\51\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange's proposal would expand the use of QCC Orders to
electronic FLEX options. A QCC Order is comprised of an originating
order to buy or sell at least 1,000 standard option contracts (or
10,000 mini-option contracts) that is identified as being part of a
qualified contingent trade (``QCT'') coupled with a contra-side order
or orders totaling an equal number of contracts and meeting the other
conditions described below. As the Exchange stated in its proposal, QCC
Orders facilitate the execution of option orders that are part of a
QCT,\52\ by permitting TPHs to cross non-FLEX options orders without
exposure to the market while effecting a trade in the NMS stock
component of the order at a price necessary to achieve a net price. The
Commission granted an exemption for QCTs that meet certain requirements
from Rule 611(a) of Regulation NMS (``QCT Exemption Order'').\53\ The
QCT Exemption Order enables each NMS stock component of a QCT trade to
be exempt from Rule 611(a) of Regulation NMS for any trade-
throughs.\54\ As the Commission previously stated in the QCC Approval
Order, QCC Orders are permitted if the QCC Order is (1) part of a QCT
under Regulation NMS; (2) for at least 1,000 contracts; (3) executed at
a price at or between the NBBO; and (4) cancelled if there is a public
customer on the electronic book.\55\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\52\ A QCT is a transaction consisting of two or more component
orders that involve both an option and equity stock component where
the execution of one component is contingent upon the execution of
all the other components at or near the same time. See supra note 7
(defining a QCT, which requires, among other things, that ``at least
one component must be an NMS stock, as defined in Rule 600 of
Regulation NMS . . .'').
\53\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57620 (April 4,
2008), 73 FR 19271 (April 9, 2008) (``QCT Exemption Release''),
which modifies a release initially granting the QCT exemption,
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54389 (August 31, 2006), 71 FR
52829 (September 7, 2006) (``Original QCT Exemption Release'').
\54\ See id.
\55\ See QCC Approval Order, supra note 8, 76 FR at 35492. See
also CBOE Rule 5.6(c)(2), which states, among things, that a ``QCC
Order with one option leg may execute automatically upon entry
without exposure if the execution price: (i) Is not at the same
price as a Priority Customer order resting in the Book; and (ii) is
at or between the NBBO.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission also stated in the QCC Approval Order that the four
required elements of the QCC Order ``strikes an appropriate balance for
the options market in that it is narrowly drawn and establishes a
limited exception to the general principle of exposure and retains the
general principle of customer priority in the options markets.'' \56\
The Exchange has stated that due to the structure of the FLEX options
market, such as the lack of a customer order book and that FLEX options
have no NBBO, that the applicable QCC Order requirements as to these
matters are not applicable to FLEX orders and therefore are not
applicable to the proposed FLEX QCC Order. The requirements for a QCC
Order to execute at or between the NBBO and that a QCC Order cannot be
executed at the same price as a customer order on the book are intended
to mitigate the risks to market quality in both the options and
underlying equity markets. The Exchange, however, has not detailed why
such protections, and the underlying rationale for such protections,
are unnecessary considering that FLEX options market participants would
be granted an exception to the FLEX options electronic auction order
exposure requirements, as well as the equity market trade-through
rules, when executing a FLEX QCC Order under its proposal. The
Commission therefore believes, as discussed in more detail below, that
the Exchange's proposal raises questions as to whether its proposal is
consistent with the protection of investors and other requirements of
Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, in addition to the maintenance of fair and
orderly markets.\57\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\56\ See QCC Approval Order, supra note 8, 76 FR at 35492.
\57\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Electronic FLEX options trading differs from electronic non-FLEX
options because they allow TPHs to customize terms of the option
contract (e.g., exercise style, expiration date, and strike price).
Notably, FLEX options lack an order book and a requirement to yield to
public customer interest. Electronic FLEX option transactions are also
conducted through auctions which require an exposure interval that may
[[Page 75077]]
not be less than three seconds prior to execution.\58\ As the
Commission has stated in the past, order exposure in the options
markets provides an incentive to options market makers to provide
liquidity and therefore plays an important role in ensuring competition
and price discovery in the options markets.\59\ The proposed FLEX QCC
Order would permit TPHs to execute a FLEX options component of a QCT
without the regular FLEX auction exposure requirement. Therefore, when
applying the unique characteristics of the FLEX options market to the
current QCC Order framework, the Commission believes there are
questions as to whether the Exchange's proposal is consistent with the
guidance in the QCC Approval Order and the principles underlying the
order, and whether the proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of
the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\58\ See CBOE Rule 5.72(c)(1)(F).
\59\ See QCC Approval Order, supra note 8, 76 FR at 35492.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In particular, the Commission is concerned that the proposed design
of the QCC FLEX Order may negatively impact market quality in the
options market by removing certain constraints required under the QCC
Approval Order. The Exchange states that stock-option orders are
already permitted to include FLEX options and ``the FLEX Options
components of QCTs submitted as stock-option orders may currently
execute at any price in FLEX (i.e., are not subject to an NBBO or
yielding to [c]ustomer orders on the book).'' However, the Exchange
fails to address that FLEX options that are currently part of a stock-
option order are able to achieve potential price improvement through
the electronic FLEX auction exposure process,\60\ while the proposed
FLEX QCC Orders eliminates the exposure requirement. As a result, the
proposal to allow FLEX QCC Orders will eliminate the opportunity for
any price improvement for the option component, thereby allowing the
TPH to set the price at which the FLEX options component of the QCT
will cross without being subject to any limits such as an NBBO.
Furthermore, the elimination of the exposure requirement reduces the
overall transparency of the price discovery process within the FLEX
market, which potentially harms a wider range of participants, for
example, if participants are less able to use historical FLEX option
prices to inform about the prices of other, similar FLEX options.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\60\ See CBOE Rule 5.72(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposed FLEX QCC Order also raises concerns about its impact
to market quality in the underlying stock leg of a QCC Order. In
general, trade-throughs not only harm the individual participants who
may receive worse prices, but they also increase wait times and
execution risk for limit orders on the book, thereby reducing
incentives for market participants to submit limit orders. In this
respect, the Commission has previously recognized that any exemption to
equity trade-through protection needs to be narrowly drawn. The QCT
Exemption Order, in determining the scope of the exemption, states that
defining the set of exemptions to trade-through protection too broadly
``could unduly detract from the objectives of Rule 611''; \61\ these
objectives include assuring ``that markets effect trades at the best
available prices,'' but also ``encourag[ing] the display of limit
orders by increasing the likelihood that they will receive an execution
in a timely manner.'' \62\ Thus, the Commission has determined that the
exemption to trade-through prohibition should only be granted if
strictly necessary so as to promote these equity market quality goals.
In the FLEX market, the Exchange has not provided justification for why
the exemption to equity trade-through protection is strictly necessary.
Note that, to qualify as a QCT, only ``the spread between the prices of
the component orders'' needs to be defined, not the prices
themselves.\63\ In the non-FLEX market, if the facilitator of a QCT
would be constrained to price both the option and stock legs at their
respective NBBOs, the spread between the prices of the two legs would
be pre-defined according to the spread between the option NBBO and the
stock NBBO. However, in the FLEX market, given the flexibility in
determining the price of the FLEX option leg (particularly if not
subject to exposure), the Exchange has not explained why a broker could
not simply determine a spread, and subsequently adjust the price of the
option leg according to the realized price of the stock leg, thus
avoiding the need to trade-through the equity market. Likewise, and
potentially more concerning, since neither leg of the proposed FLEX QCC
Order is constrained to execute at an NBBO, the Exchange has not
explained what would prevent a facilitator from determining a spread
and setting the price for the FLEX option leg such that the
corresponding stock leg price results in a trade-through.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\61\ See Original QCT Exemption Release, supra note 53, 71 FR at
52830.
\62\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37496, 37505 (June 29, 2005) (Regulation NMS).
\63\ See QCT Exemption Release, supra note 53, 73 FR at 19272.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to the significant concerns discussed above regarding
the proposal's consistency with the guidance in the QCC Approval Order,
and the principles underlying the order, that need to be addressed, the
Exchange provided data on retail orders and market participation in
FLEX and non-FLEX options in support of its proposal. The Exchange
believes that the limited retail customer participation in the FLEX
options market would mitigate the requirement for additional customer
protections that exist for QCC Orders in the non-FLEX options market.
Specifically, the Exchange states that ``there are minimal retail
customer orders submitted into the FLEX market and thus it would be
unlikely any would be resting at the top of a FLEX book if one existed
for a de minimis (if any) amount of time that would require additional
protection.'' The Commission is concerned that the proposal does not
address how the lack of additional customer protections would be
appropriate. The Commission notes that the Exchange did not provide
specific data on the level of retail participation or whether that
conclusion was based solely on the size of the orders in the FLEX
options market. In addition, the Commission notes that the Exchange has
stated previously in proposing certain changes to the FLEX options
market that they were intended to broaden the base of investors that
use FLEX options, including more retail participation.\64\ The
Commission believes the Exchange has not provided sufficient data to
support the conclusion that additional customer protections are
unnecessary under the proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\64\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 66934 (May 7,
2012), 77 FR 27822, 27824 (May 11, 2012) (SR-CBOE-2012-040) (Notice
of Proposed Rule Change Related to Permanent Approval of its Pilot
on FLEX Minimum Value Sizes) (stating that ``eliminating the minimum
value size requirement would further broaden the base of investors
that use FLEX [o]ptions to manage their trading and investment risk,
including investors that current trade in OTC market for customized
options, where similar size restrictions do not apply. The Exchange
also believes that this may open up FLEX [o]ptions to more retail
investors.''). The pilot was permanently approved in Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 67624 (August 8, 2012), 77 FR 48580 (August
14, 2012) (SR-CBOE-2012-040) (Order Granting Approval of Proposed
Rule Change Related to Permanent Approval of its Pilot on FLEX
Minimum Value Sizes).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange also stated that it believes that the risk of market
participants trading in the FLEX market as a substitute for the non-
FLEX market is minimal. The Exchange has provided a summary of data
that showed the
[[Page 75078]]
number of customer orders resting in non-FLEX options at the top of the
book and differences in strike prices in terms of dollar values between
the FLEX and non-FLEX options that had similar terms. However, the data
provided still raises questions as to whether the proposal would
incentivize market participants to use FLEX options as a substitute for
non-FLEX options in order to circumvent price and public customer
priority constraints under the QCC Approval Order. For example, the
data on strike prices for index options only compared SPX and SPXW
listed series with SPX and SPXW FLEX series without considering a
broader set of FLEX index options that would apply to the proposed FLEX
QCC Order, including less liquid index options. In addition, the data
sample on FLEX option strike price values would be more appropriately
considered if the price differences between the FLEX and non-FLEX
options market were described in proportion to the stock price rather
than in dollar values. Moreover, the Exchange's proposal does not
provide any information on the market share between FLEX and non-FLEX
index options and FLEX and non-FLEX equity and ETP options and its
variation over time, which could help inform on whether traders have
been steadily migrating between the non-FLEX and FLEX market.
Furthermore, the Exchange stated that the proposed FLEX QCC Order
would ``reduce compliance burden on TPHs by providing a more efficient
means of executing the options component of a QCT if the options
component consists of a FLEX [o]ption.'' The Exchange asserted in its
proposal that the compliance risk of not being able to execute a FLEX
options portion of a QCT at or near the same time of the execution of
the stock component is greater in a FLEX auction where the FLEX order
must be exposed for at least three second prior to execution. However,
the Exchange has not provided any evidence or data on the number of
violations or compliance issues that occurred as a result of needing to
execute the FLEX option component after the minimum three second
exposure period. Accordingly, the Commission requests data to support
the Exchange's assertion on compliance issues, including any
information on the overall number of FLEX orders that are part of a
stock-option order and the number of compliance issues occurring,
including those in relation to the timing of execution of the stock and
FLEX option component of the order.
Based on the above, the Commission believes there are questions as
to whether the proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act
and the requirements that the rules of the exchange be designed to
prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, promote just
and equitable principles of trade, and in general, to protect investors
and the public interest, and whether the proposal is consistent with
the maintenance of fair and orderly markets under the Act.
Under the Commission's Rules of Practice, the ``burden to
demonstrate that a proposed rule change is rule change is consistent
with the [Act] and the rules and regulations issued thereunder . . . is
on the [SRO] that proposed the rule change.'' \65\ The description of a
proposed rule change, its purpose and operation, its effect, and a
legal analysis of its consistency with applicable requirements must all
be sufficiently detailed and specific to support an affirmative
Commission finding,\66\ and any failure of an SRO to provide this
information may result in the Commission not having a sufficient basis
to make an affirmative finding that a proposed rule change is
consistent with the Act and the applicable rules and regulations.\67\
Moreover, ``unquestioning reliance'' on an SRO's representations in a
proposed rule change would not be sufficient to justify Commission
approval of a proposed rule change.\68\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\65\ Rule 700(b)(3), Commission Rules of Practice, 17 CFR
201.700(b)(3).
\66\ See id.
\67\ See id.
\68\ See Susquehanna Int'l Group, LLP v. Securities and Exchange
Commission, 866 F.3d 442, 446-47 (D.C. Cir. 2017) (rejecting the
Commission's reliance on an SRO's own determinations without
sufficient evidence of the basis for such determinations).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the reasons discussed above, the Commission believes it is
appropriate to institute proceedings pursuant to Section 19(b)(2)(B) of
the Act to determine whether the proposal should be approved or
disapproved.
III. Procedure: Request for Written Comments
The Commission requests that interested persons provide written
submissions of their views, data, and arguments with respect to the
concerns identified above, as well as any others they may have with the
proposal. In particular, the Commission invites the written views of
interested persons concerning whether the proposed rule change, as
modified by Amendment No. 1, is inconsistent with Section 6(b)(5) \69\
or any other provision of the Act, or the rules and regulation
thereunder. Although there do not appear to be any issues relevant to
approval or disapproval that would be facilitated by an oral
presentation of views, data, and arguments, the Commission will
consider, pursuant to Rule 19b-4 under the Act, any request for an
opportunity to make an oral presentation.\70\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\69\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
\70\ Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, as amended by the Securities
Act Amendments of 1975, Public Law 94-29 (June 4, 1975), grants the
Commission flexibility to determine what type of proceeding--either
oral or notice and opportunity for written comments--is appropriate
for consideration of a particular proposal by a self-regulatory
organization. See Securities Act Amendments of 1975, Senate Comm. on
Banking, Housing & Urban Affairs, S. Rep. No. 75, 94th Cong., 1st
Sess. 30 (1975).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments regarding whether the proposed rule change, as modified by
Amendment No. 1, should be approved or disapproved by December 15,
2020. Any person who wishes to file a rebuttal to any other person's
submission must file that rebuttal by December 29, 2020.
The Commission asks that commenters address the sufficiency and
merit of the Exchange's statements in support of the proposed rule
change, in addition to any other comments they may wish to submit about
the proposed rule change. In particular, the Commission seeks comment
on the statements of the Exchange contained in Amendment No. 1, and any
other issues raised by the proposed rule change.
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-CBOE-2020-075 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-CBOE-2020-075. 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
[[Page 75079]]
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-CBOE-2020-075 and should be submitted by
December 15, 2020. Rebuttal comments should be submitted by December
29, 2020.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\71\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\71\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(57) and (58).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-25909 Filed 11-23-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P