Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq PHLX LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Exchange's Pricing Schedule at Equity 7, Section 3, 6383-6385 [2021-01136]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 12 / Thursday, January 21, 2021 / Notices
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–90918; File No. SR-Phlx2021–01]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq
PHLX LLC; Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed
Rule Change To Amend the
Exchange’s Pricing Schedule at Equity
7, Section 3
January 13, 2021.
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 January 4,
2021, Nasdaq PHLX LLC (‘‘Phlx’’ or
‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission (‘‘SEC’’ or
‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule
change as described in Items I, II, and
III, below, which Items have been
prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule
change from interested persons.
I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Terms of Substance of
the Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange proposes to amend the
Exchange’s pricing schedule at Equity 7,
Section 3, as described further below.
The text of the proposed rule change
is available on the Exchange’s website at
https://listingcenter.nasdaq.com/
rulebook/phlx/rules, at the principal
office of the Exchange, 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.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
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 its
pricing schedule, at Equity 7, Section 3,
to make several changes to its Qualified
1 15
2 17
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
CFR 240.19b–4.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:44 Jan 19, 2021
Jkt 253001
Market Maker (‘‘QMM’’) Program. The
QMM Program provides supplemental
incentives to member organizations that
meet certain quality standards in acting
as market makers for securities on the
Exchange.
Specifically, the Exchange proposes to
adjust upward the average number of
securities for which a member
organization that qualifies as a QMM
must quote at the national best bid and
offer (‘‘NBBO’’) during a month to
receive a supplemental credit of $0.0002
per share executed, as set forth in Equity
7, Section 3(c)(3). Currently, a member
organization must quote at the NBBO at
least 10% of the time for an average of
at least 500 securities per day to qualify
for the $0.0002 per share executed
supplemental credit. The Exchange
proposes to increase this number to 650
securities.
The Exchange proposes to increase
the threshold number of securities in
which a member organization must
quote at the NBBO during a month to
qualify for this supplemental credit as a
means of encouraging QMMs to broaden
the scope of their quoting activities on
the Exchange. The Exchange believes
that QMM activity on the Exchange is
already robust enough to accommodate
the establishment of a higher
qualification threshold without
compromising the ability of existing
QMMs to maintain their current statuses
in the program.
Second, the Exchange proposes to
adjust downward the average number of
securities for which a member
organization must quote at the NBBO at
least 10% of the time during market
hours during a month to receive a
supplemental credit of $0.0003 per
share executed in Tape A securities or
$0.0002 per share executed in Tape B
and Tape C securities, as set forth in
Equity 7, Section 3(c)(4). Currently, a
member organization must quote at the
NBBO at least 10% of the time for an
average of at least 850 securities per
day, and provide 0.12% or more of total
Consolidated Volume during a month,
to qualify for this supplemental credit.
The Exchange proposes to reduce the
threshold number of securities that must
be quoted to 800 securities.
The Exchange proposes to lower the
number of securities in which a member
organization must quote at the NBBO
during a month to qualify for this
supplemental credit so as to render this
credit more readily attainable for
QMMs. The Exchange hopes that the
proposal will lead to additional member
organizations qualifying for the credit,
which in turn would entail more QMMs
quoting at the NBBO at least 10% of the
time during the trading day in more
PO 00000
Frm 00095
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
6383
securities than they do now, to the
benefit of market quality.
2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes that its
proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)
of the Act,3 in general, and furthers the
objectives of Sections 6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5)
of the Act,4 in particular, in that it
provides for the equitable allocation of
reasonable dues, fees and other charges
among members and issuers and other
persons using any facility, and is not
designed to permit unfair
discrimination between customers,
issuers, brokers, or dealers.
The Proposal is Reasonable
The Exchange’s proposed changes to
its schedule of credits and QMM
Program are reasonable in several
respects. As a threshold matter, the
Exchange is subject to significant
competitive forces in the market for
equity securities transaction services
that constrain its pricing determinations
in that market. The fact that this market
is competitive has long been recognized
by the courts. In NetCoalition v.
Securities and Exchange Commission,
the D.C. Circuit stated as follows: ‘‘[n]o
one disputes that competition for order
flow is ‘fierce.’ . . . As the SEC
explained, ‘[i]n the U.S. national market
system, buyers and sellers of securities,
and the broker-dealers that act as their
order-routing agents, have a wide range
of choices of where to route orders for
execution’; [and] ‘no exchange can
afford to take its market share
percentages for granted’ because ‘no
exchange possesses a monopoly,
regulatory or otherwise, in the execution
of order flow from broker
dealers’. . . .’’ 5
The Commission and the courts have
repeatedly expressed their preference
for competition over regulatory
intervention in determining prices,
products, and services in the securities
markets. In Regulation NMS, while
adopting a series of steps to improve the
current market model, the Commission
highlighted the importance of market
forces in determining prices and SRO
revenues and, also, recognized that
current regulation of the market system
‘‘has been remarkably successful in
promoting market competition in its
3 15
U.S.C. 78f(b).
U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
5 NetCoalition v. SEC, 615 F.3d 525, 539 (DC Cir.
2010) (quoting Securities Exchange Act Release No.
59039 (December 2, 2008), 73 FR 74770, 74782–83
(December 9, 2008) (SR–NYSEArca–2006–21)).
4 15
E:\FR\FM\21JAN1.SGM
21JAN1
6384
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 12 / Thursday, January 21, 2021 / Notices
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
broader forms that are most important to
investors and listed companies.’’ 6
Numerous indicia demonstrate the
competitive nature of this market. For
example, clear substitutes to the
Exchange exist in the market for equity
security transaction services. The
Exchange is only one of several equity
venues to which market participants
may direct their order flow. Competing
equity exchanges offer similar tiered
pricing structures to that of the
Exchange, including schedules of
rebates and fees that apply based upon
members achieving certain volume
thresholds.7
Within this environment, market
participants can freely and often do shift
their order flow among the Exchange
and competing venues in response to
changes in their respective pricing
schedules.8 Within the foregoing
context, the proposal represents a
reasonable attempt by the Exchange to
increase its market share relative to its
competitors.
The Exchange’s proposal to increase
the threshold numbers of securities in
which QMMs must quote at the NBBO
during a month to qualify for the
supplemental credit at Equity 7, Section
3(c)(2) [sic] will encourage QMMs to
broaden the scope of their quoting
activities on the Exchange. The
Exchange believes that it is appropriate
to periodically reassess and recalibrate
the baselines for its pricing tiers when
participant activity is adequate to
support doing so. In this instance, QMM
activity on the Exchange is robust
enough to accommodate the
establishment of a higher qualification
threshold without compromising the
ability of existing QMMs to maintain
their current statuses in the program.
Additionally, the Exchange’s proposal
to ease one of its qualifications for the
$0.0003/$0.0002 per share executed
supplemental credit set forth in Equity
7, Section 3(c)(4) is also a reasonable
attempt to improve the accessibility of
that supplemental credit and will
encourage member organizations to try
to qualify for it.
6 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808
(June 9, 2005), 70 FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005)
(‘‘Regulation NMS Adopting Release’’).
7 See Cboe EDGX U.S. Equities Exchange Fee
Schedule, available at https://markets.cboe.com/us/
equities/membership/fee_schedule/edgx/.
8 The Exchange perceives no regulatory,
structural, or cost impediments to market
participants shifting order flow away from it. In
particular, the Exchange notes that such shifts in
liquidity and market share occur within the context
of market participants’ existing duties of Best
Execution and obligations under the Order
Protection Rule under Regulation NMS.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:44 Jan 19, 2021
Jkt 253001
The Proposals Are an Equitable
Allocation of Credits
The Exchange believes its proposals
will allocate its proposed credits fairly
among its market participants.
The Exchange believes its proposal to
raise the qualification criteria applicable
its QMM supplemental credit, at Equity
7, Section 3(c)(2) [sic], is equitable
because the proposal will encourage
member organizations to quote
significantly at the NBBO for a larger
number of securities, which in turn will
contribute to market quality in a
meaningful way. At the same time, the
proposed recalibrated qualification
threshold will not compromise the
ability of QMMs that currently qualify
for this supplemental credit to continue
to do so.
The Exchange also believes that it is
equitable to lower a qualification
threshold for its highest supplemental
credit, at Equity 7, Section 3(c)(4),
because the proposal will render the
credit more readily attainable to
member organizations. It is equitable for
the Exchange to make it easier for
member organizations to qualify for this
supplemental credit because doing so
may encourage member organizations to
broaden the extent to which they quote
securities at the NBBO, which in turn
stands to improve the quality of the
Exchange’s equity market and increase
its attractiveness to existing and
prospective participants.
The Proposal Is Not Unfairly
Discriminatory
The Exchange believes that the
proposals are not unfairly
discriminatory. As an initial matter, the
Exchange believes that nothing about its
volume-based tiered pricing model is
inherently unfair; instead, it is a rational
pricing model that is well-established
and ubiquitous in today’s economy
among firms in various industries—from
co-branded credit cards to grocery stores
to cellular telephone data plans—that
use it to reward the loyalty of their best
customers that provide high levels of
business activity and incent other
customers to increase the extent of their
business activity. It is also a pricing
model that the Exchange and its
competitors have long employed with
the assent of the Commission. It is fair
because it incentivizes customer activity
that increases liquidity, enhances price
discovery, and improves the overall
quality of the equity markets.
The Exchange intends for its
proposals to increase participation and
the extent of participation in its QMM
program, which in turn would improve
PO 00000
Frm 00096
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
market quality for all member
organizations on the Exchange.
The Exchange’s proposal to raise the
qualification requirements for its
supplemental QMM credit, at Equity 7,
Section 3(c)(2) [sic], is not unfairly
discriminatory because no member
organization that presently qualifies for
this supplemental credit will fail to
qualify for it upon raising the
requirements. Although any member
organization that newly qualifies for this
credit will need to quote at the NBBO
for a larger number of securities than
they would need to do now, this is fair
because meeting the heightened
requirement will improve market
quality. Meanwhile, the proposal to
lower the qualification criteria for the
highest supplemental QMM credit, at
Equity 7, Section 3(c)(4), will improve
the accessibility of that credit to
member organizations. Again, if this
proposal results in more member
organizations meeting the requirements
for this supplemental credit, then
market quality will improve.
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 not
necessary or appropriate in furtherance
of the purposes of the Act.
Intramarket Competition
The Exchange does not believe that its
proposals will place any category of
Exchange participants at a competitive
disadvantage. As noted above, all
members of the Exchange will benefit
from an increase in the addition of
liquidity by those that choose to meet
the criteria. Members may grow their
businesses so that they have the
capacity to receive credits for providing
liquidity. Moreover, members are free to
trade on other venues to the extent they
believe that the credits provided are not
attractive. As one can observe by
looking at any market share chart, price
competition between exchanges is
fierce, with liquidity and market share
moving freely between exchanges in
reaction to fee and credit changes. The
Exchange notes that the tier structure is
consistent with broker-dealer fee
practices as well as the other industries,
as described above.
Moreover, the Exchange’s proposal to
modify its QMM program will not
burden intramarket competition because
the QMM Program, as modified, will
continue to provide all member
organizations with an opportunity to
obtain supplemental credits for
transactions if they improve the market
by providing significant quoting at the
E:\FR\FM\21JAN1.SGM
21JAN1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 12 / Thursday, January 21, 2021 / Notices
NBBO in a large number of securities
which the Exchange believes will
improve market quality. By relaxing the
qualification criteria, the modifications
will make the Program more accessible
to new member organizations and easier
for existing QMMs to remain in the
Program.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
Intermarket Competition
Addressing whether the proposed fee
could impose a burden on competition
on other SROs that is not necessary or
appropriate, the Exchange believes that
its proposed modifications to its
schedule of credits and charges will not
impose a burden on competition
because the Exchange’s execution
services are completely voluntary and
subject to extensive competition both
from the other live exchanges and from
off-exchange venues, which include
alternative trading systems that trade
national market system stock. The
Exchange notes that it operates in a
highly competitive market in which
market participants can readily favor
competing venues if they deem fee
levels at a particular venue to be
excessive, or rebate opportunities
available at other venues to be more
favorable. In such an environment, the
Exchange must continually adjust its
fees to remain competitive with other
exchanges and with alternative trading
systems that have been exempted from
compliance with the statutory standards
applicable to exchanges. Because
competitors are free to modify their own
fees in response, and because market
participants may readily adjust their
order routing practices, the Exchange
believes that the degree to which fee
changes in this market may impose any
burden on competition is extremely
limited.
The proposed credit for adding
liquidity and the proposed
modifications to the QMM Program are
reflective of this competition because, as
a threshold issue, the Exchange is a
relatively small market so its ability to
burden intermarket competition is
limited. In this regard, even the largest
U.S. equities exchange by volume only
has 17–18% market share, which in
most markets could hardly be
categorized as having enough market
power to burden competition. Moreover,
as noted above, price competition
between exchanges is fierce, with
liquidity and market share moving
freely between exchanges in reaction to
fee and credit changes. This is in
addition to free flow of order flow to
and among off-exchange venues which
comprises more than 40% of industry
volume in recent months.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:44 Jan 19, 2021
Jkt 253001
In sum, the Exchange intends for the
modified QMM Program to increase
member organizations incentives to
quote more securities at the NBBO for
at least 10 percent of the day, which
stands to improve the quality of the
Exchange’s market and its attractiveness
to participants; however, if the
proposals are unattractive to market
participants, it is likely that the
Exchange will either fail to increase its
market share or even lose market share
as a result. Accordingly, the Exchange
does not believe that the proposed
amended credits will impair the ability
of members or competing order
execution venues to maintain their
competitive standing in the financial
markets.
C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Comments on the
Proposed Rule Change Received From
Members, Participants, or Others
No written comments were either
solicited or received.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the
Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
The foregoing rule change has become
effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act.9
At any time within 60 days of the
filing of the proposed rule change, the
Commission summarily may
temporarily suspend such rule change if
it appears to the Commission that such
action is: (i) Necessary or appropriate in
the public interest; (ii) for the protection
of investors; or (iii) otherwise in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
If the Commission takes such action, the
Commission shall institute proceedings
to determine whether the proposed rule
should be approved or disapproved.
IV. Solicitation of Comments
Interested persons are invited to
submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing,
including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act.
Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:
Electronic Comments
• Use the Commission’s internet
comment form (https://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml); or
• Send an email to rule-comments@
sec.gov. Please include File Number SR–
Phlx–2021–01 on the subject line.
Paper Comments
• Send paper comments in triplicate
to Secretary, Securities and Exchange
9 15
PO 00000
U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
Frm 00097
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
6385
Commission, 100 F Street NE,
Washington, DC 20549–1090.
All submissions should refer to File
Number SR–Phlx–2021–01. This file
number should be included on the
subject line if email is used. To help the
Commission process and review your
comments more efficiently, please use
only one method. The Commission will
post all comments on the Commission’s
internet website (https://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the
submission, all subsequent
amendments, all written statements
with respect to the proposed rule
change that are filed with the
Commission, and all written
communications relating to the
proposed rule change between the
Commission and any person, other than
those that may be withheld from the
public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be
available for website viewing and
printing in the Commission’s Public
Reference Room, 100 F Street NE,
Washington, DC 20549, on official
business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the
filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal
office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change.
Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit
personal identifying information from
comment submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish
to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File
Number SR–Phlx–2021–01 and should
be submitted on or before February 9,
2021.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.10
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021–01136 Filed 1–19–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–90910; File No. SR–
CboeBZX–2021–005]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe
BZX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of a
Proposed Rule Change Relating To
Amend Its Fees Schedule
January 13, 2021.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
10 17
E:\FR\FM\21JAN1.SGM
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
21JAN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 12 (Thursday, January 21, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6383-6385]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-01136]
[[Page 6383]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-90918; File No. SR-Phlx-2021-01]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq PHLX LLC; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend the
Exchange's Pricing Schedule at Equity 7, Section 3
January 13, 2021.
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 January 4, 2021, Nasdaq PHLX LLC (``Phlx'' or ``Exchange'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC'' or
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III, below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
\2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange proposes to amend the Exchange's pricing schedule at
Equity 7, Section 3, as described further below.
The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at https://listingcenter.nasdaq.com/rulebook/phlx/rules, at the
principal office of the Exchange, 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 its pricing schedule, at Equity 7,
Section 3, to make several changes to its Qualified Market Maker
(``QMM'') Program. The QMM Program provides supplemental incentives to
member organizations that meet certain quality standards in acting as
market makers for securities on the Exchange.
Specifically, the Exchange proposes to adjust upward the average
number of securities for which a member organization that qualifies as
a QMM must quote at the national best bid and offer (``NBBO'') during a
month to receive a supplemental credit of $0.0002 per share executed,
as set forth in Equity 7, Section 3(c)(3). Currently, a member
organization must quote at the NBBO at least 10% of the time for an
average of at least 500 securities per day to qualify for the $0.0002
per share executed supplemental credit. The Exchange proposes to
increase this number to 650 securities.
The Exchange proposes to increase the threshold number of
securities in which a member organization must quote at the NBBO during
a month to qualify for this supplemental credit as a means of
encouraging QMMs to broaden the scope of their quoting activities on
the Exchange. The Exchange believes that QMM activity on the Exchange
is already robust enough to accommodate the establishment of a higher
qualification threshold without compromising the ability of existing
QMMs to maintain their current statuses in the program.
Second, the Exchange proposes to adjust downward the average number
of securities for which a member organization must quote at the NBBO at
least 10% of the time during market hours during a month to receive a
supplemental credit of $0.0003 per share executed in Tape A securities
or $0.0002 per share executed in Tape B and Tape C securities, as set
forth in Equity 7, Section 3(c)(4). Currently, a member organization
must quote at the NBBO at least 10% of the time for an average of at
least 850 securities per day, and provide 0.12% or more of total
Consolidated Volume during a month, to qualify for this supplemental
credit. The Exchange proposes to reduce the threshold number of
securities that must be quoted to 800 securities.
The Exchange proposes to lower the number of securities in which a
member organization must quote at the NBBO during a month to qualify
for this supplemental credit so as to render this credit more readily
attainable for QMMs. The Exchange hopes that the proposal will lead to
additional member organizations qualifying for the credit, which in
turn would entail more QMMs quoting at the NBBO at least 10% of the
time during the trading day in more securities than they do now, to the
benefit of market quality.
2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act,\3\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Sections
6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the Act,\4\ in particular, in that it provides
for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges
among members and issuers and other persons using any facility, and is
not designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers,
issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
\4\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Proposal is Reasonable
The Exchange's proposed changes to its schedule of credits and QMM
Program are reasonable in several respects. As a threshold matter, the
Exchange is subject to significant competitive forces in the market for
equity securities transaction services that constrain its pricing
determinations in that market. The fact that this market is competitive
has long been recognized by the courts. In NetCoalition v. Securities
and Exchange Commission, the D.C. Circuit stated as follows: ``[n]o one
disputes that competition for order flow is `fierce.' . . . As the SEC
explained, `[i]n the U.S. national market system, buyers and sellers of
securities, and the broker-dealers that act as their order-routing
agents, have a wide range of choices of where to route orders for
execution'; [and] `no exchange can afford to take its market share
percentages for granted' because `no exchange possesses a monopoly,
regulatory or otherwise, in the execution of order flow from broker
dealers'. . . .'' \5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ NetCoalition v. SEC, 615 F.3d 525, 539 (DC Cir. 2010)
(quoting Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59039 (December 2,
2008), 73 FR 74770, 74782-83 (December 9, 2008) (SR-NYSEArca-2006-
21)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission and the courts have repeatedly expressed their
preference for competition over regulatory intervention in determining
prices, products, and services in the securities markets. In Regulation
NMS, while adopting a series of steps to improve the current market
model, the Commission highlighted the importance of market forces in
determining prices and SRO revenues and, also, recognized that current
regulation of the market system ``has been remarkably successful in
promoting market competition in its
[[Page 6384]]
broader forms that are most important to investors and listed
companies.'' \6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9, 2005), 70
FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005) (``Regulation NMS Adopting
Release'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Numerous indicia demonstrate the competitive nature of this market.
For example, clear substitutes to the Exchange exist in the market for
equity security transaction services. The Exchange is only one of
several equity venues to which market participants may direct their
order flow. Competing equity exchanges offer similar tiered pricing
structures to that of the Exchange, including schedules of rebates and
fees that apply based upon members achieving certain volume
thresholds.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See Cboe EDGX U.S. Equities Exchange Fee Schedule, available
at https://markets.cboe.com/us/equities/membership/fee_schedule/edgx/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Within this environment, market participants can freely and often
do shift their order flow among the Exchange and competing venues in
response to changes in their respective pricing schedules.\8\ Within
the foregoing context, the proposal represents a reasonable attempt by
the Exchange to increase its market share relative to its competitors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ The Exchange perceives no regulatory, structural, or cost
impediments to market participants shifting order flow away from it.
In particular, the Exchange notes that such shifts in liquidity and
market share occur within the context of market participants'
existing duties of Best Execution and obligations under the Order
Protection Rule under Regulation NMS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange's proposal to increase the threshold numbers of
securities in which QMMs must quote at the NBBO during a month to
qualify for the supplemental credit at Equity 7, Section 3(c)(2) [sic]
will encourage QMMs to broaden the scope of their quoting activities on
the Exchange. The Exchange believes that it is appropriate to
periodically reassess and recalibrate the baselines for its pricing
tiers when participant activity is adequate to support doing so. In
this instance, QMM activity on the Exchange is robust enough to
accommodate the establishment of a higher qualification threshold
without compromising the ability of existing QMMs to maintain their
current statuses in the program.
Additionally, the Exchange's proposal to ease one of its
qualifications for the $0.0003/$0.0002 per share executed supplemental
credit set forth in Equity 7, Section 3(c)(4) is also a reasonable
attempt to improve the accessibility of that supplemental credit and
will encourage member organizations to try to qualify for it.
The Proposals Are an Equitable Allocation of Credits
The Exchange believes its proposals will allocate its proposed
credits fairly among its market participants.
The Exchange believes its proposal to raise the qualification
criteria applicable its QMM supplemental credit, at Equity 7, Section
3(c)(2) [sic], is equitable because the proposal will encourage member
organizations to quote significantly at the NBBO for a larger number of
securities, which in turn will contribute to market quality in a
meaningful way. At the same time, the proposed recalibrated
qualification threshold will not compromise the ability of QMMs that
currently qualify for this supplemental credit to continue to do so.
The Exchange also believes that it is equitable to lower a
qualification threshold for its highest supplemental credit, at Equity
7, Section 3(c)(4), because the proposal will render the credit more
readily attainable to member organizations. It is equitable for the
Exchange to make it easier for member organizations to qualify for this
supplemental credit because doing so may encourage member organizations
to broaden the extent to which they quote securities at the NBBO, which
in turn stands to improve the quality of the Exchange's equity market
and increase its attractiveness to existing and prospective
participants.
The Proposal Is Not Unfairly Discriminatory
The Exchange believes that the proposals are not unfairly
discriminatory. As an initial matter, the Exchange believes that
nothing about its volume-based tiered pricing model is inherently
unfair; instead, it is a rational pricing model that is well-
established and ubiquitous in today's economy among firms in various
industries--from co-branded credit cards to grocery stores to cellular
telephone data plans--that use it to reward the loyalty of their best
customers that provide high levels of business activity and incent
other customers to increase the extent of their business activity. It
is also a pricing model that the Exchange and its competitors have long
employed with the assent of the Commission. It is fair because it
incentivizes customer activity that increases liquidity, enhances price
discovery, and improves the overall quality of the equity markets.
The Exchange intends for its proposals to increase participation
and the extent of participation in its QMM program, which in turn would
improve market quality for all member organizations on the Exchange.
The Exchange's proposal to raise the qualification requirements for
its supplemental QMM credit, at Equity 7, Section 3(c)(2) [sic], is not
unfairly discriminatory because no member organization that presently
qualifies for this supplemental credit will fail to qualify for it upon
raising the requirements. Although any member organization that newly
qualifies for this credit will need to quote at the NBBO for a larger
number of securities than they would need to do now, this is fair
because meeting the heightened requirement will improve market quality.
Meanwhile, the proposal to lower the qualification criteria for the
highest supplemental QMM credit, at Equity 7, Section 3(c)(4), will
improve the accessibility of that credit to member organizations.
Again, if this proposal results in more member organizations meeting
the requirements for this supplemental credit, then market quality will
improve.
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 not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
Intramarket Competition
The Exchange does not believe that its proposals will place any
category of Exchange participants at a competitive disadvantage. As
noted above, all members of the Exchange will benefit from an increase
in the addition of liquidity by those that choose to meet the criteria.
Members may grow their businesses so that they have the capacity to
receive credits for providing liquidity. Moreover, members are free to
trade on other venues to the extent they believe that the credits
provided are not attractive. As one can observe by looking at any
market share chart, price competition between exchanges is fierce, with
liquidity and market share moving freely between exchanges in reaction
to fee and credit changes. The Exchange notes that the tier structure
is consistent with broker-dealer fee practices as well as the other
industries, as described above.
Moreover, the Exchange's proposal to modify its QMM program will
not burden intramarket competition because the QMM Program, as
modified, will continue to provide all member organizations with an
opportunity to obtain supplemental credits for transactions if they
improve the market by providing significant quoting at the
[[Page 6385]]
NBBO in a large number of securities which the Exchange believes will
improve market quality. By relaxing the qualification criteria, the
modifications will make the Program more accessible to new member
organizations and easier for existing QMMs to remain in the Program.
Intermarket Competition
Addressing whether the proposed fee could impose a burden on
competition on other SROs that is not necessary or appropriate, the
Exchange believes that its proposed modifications to its schedule of
credits and charges will not impose a burden on competition because the
Exchange's execution services are completely voluntary and subject to
extensive competition both from the other live exchanges and from off-
exchange venues, which include alternative trading systems that trade
national market system stock. The Exchange notes that it operates in a
highly competitive market in which market participants can readily
favor competing venues if they deem fee levels at a particular venue to
be excessive, or rebate opportunities available at other venues to be
more favorable. In such an environment, the Exchange must continually
adjust its fees to remain competitive with other exchanges and with
alternative trading systems that have been exempted from compliance
with the statutory standards applicable to exchanges. Because
competitors are free to modify their own fees in response, and because
market participants may readily adjust their order routing practices,
the Exchange believes that the degree to which fee changes in this
market may impose any burden on competition is extremely limited.
The proposed credit for adding liquidity and the proposed
modifications to the QMM Program are reflective of this competition
because, as a threshold issue, the Exchange is a relatively small
market so its ability to burden intermarket competition is limited. In
this regard, even the largest U.S. equities exchange by volume only has
17-18% market share, which in most markets could hardly be categorized
as having enough market power to burden competition. Moreover, as noted
above, price competition between exchanges is fierce, with liquidity
and market share moving freely between exchanges in reaction to fee and
credit changes. This is in addition to free flow of order flow to and
among off-exchange venues which comprises more than 40% of industry
volume in recent months.
In sum, the Exchange intends for the modified QMM Program to
increase member organizations incentives to quote more securities at
the NBBO for at least 10 percent of the day, which stands to improve
the quality of the Exchange's market and its attractiveness to
participants; however, if the proposals are unattractive to market
participants, it is likely that the Exchange will either fail to
increase its market share or even lose market share as a result.
Accordingly, the Exchange does not believe that the proposed amended
credits will impair the ability of members or competing order execution
venues to maintain their competitive standing in the financial markets.
C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others
No written comments were either solicited or received.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is: (i)
Necessary or appropriate in the public interest; (ii) for the
protection of investors; or (iii) otherwise in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the
Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the
proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.
IV. Solicitation of Comments
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:
Electronic Comments
Use the Commission's internet comment form (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-Phlx-2021-01 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-Phlx-2021-01. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2021-01 and should be submitted on
or before February 9, 2021.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-01136 Filed 1-19-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P