Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq MRX, LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend MRX's Pricing Schedule at Options 7, Section 6, 63119-63131 [2022-22557]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 18, 2022 / Notices
Exchange must continually adjust its
rebates and fees to remain competitive
with other exchanges and to attract
order flow. The Exchange believes that
the proposed rule changes reflect this
competitive environment because the
proposal modifies the Exchange’s fees in
a manner that encourages market
participants to continue to provide
liquidity and to send order flow to the
Exchange.
C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Comments on the
Proposed Rule Change Received From
Members, Participants, or Others
Written comments were neither
solicited nor 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,24 and Rule
19b–4(f)(2) 25 thereunder. 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
necessary or appropriate in the public
interest, for the protection of investors,
or 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:
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
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–
PEARL–2022–42.
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–PEARL–2022–42. 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–PEARL–2022–42, and
should be submitted on or before
November 8, 2022.
‘‘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.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.26
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Deputy Secretary.
A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
[FR Doc. 2022–22556 Filed 10–17–22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–96046; File No. SR–MRX–
2022–20]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq
MRX, LLC; Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed
Rule Change To Amend MRX’s Pricing
Schedule at Options 7, Section 6
October 12, 2022.
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 October
11, 2022, Nasdaq MRX, LLC (‘‘MRX’’ or
‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission (‘‘SEC’’ or
26 17
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.
24 15
U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
25 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(2).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:52 Oct 17, 2022
1 15
Jkt 259001
63119
PO 00000
Frm 00097
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Terms of Substance of
the Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange proposes to amend
MRX’s Pricing Schedule at Options 7,
section 6.
The text of the proposed rule change
is available on the Exchange’s website at
https://listingcenter.nasdaq.com/
rulebook/mrx/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.
1. Purpose
MRX proposes to amend its Pricing
Schedule at Options 7, section 6, Ports
and Other Services, to assess port fees,
which were not assessed until this year.
Prior to this year, MRX did not assess
its Members any port fees. MRX
launched its options market in 2016 3
And Members did not pay any port fees
until 2022.
The proposed changes are designed to
update fees for MRX’s services to reflect
their current value—rather than their
value when it was established six years
ago—based on MRX’s ability to deliver
3 The Exchange initially filed the proposed
pricing changes on May 2, 2022 (SR–MRX–2022–
04) instituting fees for membership, ports and
market data. On June 29, 2022, the Exchange
withdrew that filing, and submitted separate filings
for membership, ports and market data. SR–MRX–
2022–06 replaced the port fees set forth in SR–
MRX–2022–04. SR–MRX–2022–06 was withdrawn
on July 1, 2022 and replaced with SR–MRX–2022–
09. On August 25, 2022. SR–MRX–2022–09 which
was withdrawn and replaced with SR–MRX–2022–
12. The instant filing replaces SR–MRX–2022–12
which was withdrawn on October 11, 2022.
E:\FR\FM\18OCN1.SGM
18OCN1
63120
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 18, 2022 / Notices
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
value to its customers through
technology, liquidity and functionality.
Newly-opened exchanges often charge
no fees for certain services, such as
ports, in order to attract order flow to an
exchange, and later amend their fees to
reflect the true value of those services.4
Allowing newly-opened exchanges time
to build and sustain market share before
charging non-transactional fees
encourages market entry and promotes
competition. The proposed port fees
within Options 7, section 6, Ports and
Other Services, are described below.
This proposal reflects MRX’s
assessment that it has gained sufficient
market share to compete effectively
against the other 15 options exchanges
without waiving fees for ports. These
types of fees are assessed by options
exchanges that compete with MRX in
the sale of exchange services—indeed,
as of the date of the initial filing of these
port fees, MRX was the only options
exchange (out of the 16 current options
exchanges) not assessing port fees. New
exchanges commonly waive
connectivity fees to attract market
participants, facilitating their entry into
the market and, once there is sufficient
depth and breadth of liquidity,
‘‘graduate’’ to compete against
established exchanges and charge fees
that reflect the value of their services.5
If MRX is incorrect in this assessment,
that error will be reflected in MRX’s
ability to compete with other options
exchanges.6
The Exchange proposes to amend fees
for the following ports within Options 7,
4 See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release No
90076 (October 2, 2020), 85 FR 63620 (October 8,
2020) (Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness
of a Proposed Rule Change To Adopt the Initial Fee
Schedule and Other Fees for MEMX LLC).
5 For example, MIAX Emerald commenced
operations as a national securities exchange
registered on March 1, 2019. See Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 84891 (December 20,
2018), 83 FR 67421 (December 28, 2018) (File No.
10–233) (order approving application of MIAX
Emerald, LLC for registration as a national
securities exchange). MIAX Emerald filed to adopt
its transaction fees and certain of its nontransaction fees in its filing SR–EMERALD–2019–
15. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 85393
(March 21, 2019), 84 FR 11599 (March 27, 2019)
(SR–EMERALD–2019–15) (Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change
To Establish the MIAX Emerald Fee Schedule).
MIAX Emerald waived its one-time application fee
and monthly Trading Permit Fees assessable to
EEMs and Market Makers among other fees within
SR–EMERALD–2019–15.
6 Nasdaq announced that, beginning in 2022, it
plans to migrate its North American markets to
Amazon Web Services in a phased approach,
starting with MRX. The MRX migration will take
place in November 2022. The proposed fee changes
are entirely unrelated to this effort.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:52 Oct 17, 2022
Jkt 259001
section 6: (1) FIX,7 (2) SQF; 8 (3) SQF
Purge; 9 (4) OTTO; 10 (5) CTI; 11 (6) FIX
DROP; 12 and Disaster Recovery Ports.13
Currently, no fees are being assessed for
these ports.
The Exchange proposes to assess no
fee for the first FIX Port obtained by an
7 ‘‘Financial Information eXchange’’ or ‘‘FIX’’ is
an interface that allows Members and their
Sponsored Customers to connect, send, and receive
messages related to orders and auction orders to the
Exchange. Features include the following: (1)
execution messages; (2) order messages; (3) risk
protection triggers and cancel notifications; and (4)
post trade allocation messages. See Supplementary
Material .03(a) to Options 3, section 7.
8 ‘‘Specialized Quote Feed’’ or ‘‘SQF’’ is an
interface that allows Market Makers to connect,
send, and receive messages related to quotes,
Immediate-or-Cancel Orders, and auction responses
to the Exchange. Features include the following: (1)
options symbol directory messages (e.g., underlying
and complex instruments); (2) system event
messages (e.g., start of trading hours messages and
start of opening); (3) trading action messages (e.g.,
halts and resumes); (4) execution messages; (5)
quote messages; (6) Immediate-or-Cancel Order
messages; (7) risk protection triggers and purge
notifications; (8) opening imbalance messages; (9)
auction notifications; and (10) auction responses.
The SQF Purge Interface only receives and notifies
of purge requests from the Market Maker. Market
Makers may only enter interest into SQF in their
assigned options series. See Supplementary
Material .03(c) to Options 3, section 7.
9 SQF Purge is a specific port for the SQF
interface that only receives and notifies of purge
requests from the Market Maker. Dedicated SQF
Purge Ports enable Market Makers to seamlessly
manage their ability to remove their quotes in a
swift manner.
10 ‘‘Ouch to Trade Options’’ or ‘‘OTTO’’ is an
interface that allows Members and their Sponsored
Customers to connect, send, and receive messages
related to orders, auction orders, and auction
responses to the Exchange. Features include the
following: (1) options symbol directory messages
(e.g., underlying and complex instruments); (2)
system event messages (e.g., start of trading hours
messages and start of opening); (3) trading action
messages (e.g., halts and resumes); (4) execution
messages; (5) order messages; (6) risk protection
triggers and cancel notifications; (7) auction
notifications; (8) auction responses; and (9) post
trade allocation messages. See Supplementary
Material .03(b) to Options 3, section 7.
11 Clearing Trade Interface (‘‘CTI’’) is a real-time
cleared trade update message that is sent to a
Member after an execution has occurred and
contains trade details specific to that Member. The
information includes, among other things, the
following: (i) The Clearing Member Trade
Agreement (‘‘CMTA’’) or The Options Clearing
Corporation (‘‘OCC’’) number; (ii) badge or
mnemonic; (iii) account number; (iv) information
which identifies the transaction type (e.g., auction
type) for billing purposes; and (v) market
participant capacity. See Options 3, section
23(b)(1).
12 FIX DROP is a real-time order and execution
update message that is sent to a Member after an
order been received/modified or an execution has
occurred and contains trade details specific to that
Member. The information includes, among other
things, the following: (i) executions; (ii)
cancellations; (iii) modifications to an existing
order; and (iv) busts or post-trade corrections. See
Options 3, section 23(b)(3).
13 Disaster Recovery ports provide connectivity to
the Exchange’s disaster recovery data center, to be
utilized in the event the Exchange should failover
during a trading day.
PO 00000
Frm 00098
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Electronic Access Member 14 or the first
SQF Port obtained by a Market Maker.15
The Exchange proposes to assess a FIX
Port Fee of $650 per port, per month,
per account number 16 for each
subsequent port beyond the first port.
The Exchange proposes to assess an
SQF Port Fee of $1,250 per port, per
month for each subsequent port beyond
the first port.17 The Exchange proposes
to assess an SQF Purge Port Fee of
$1,250 per port, per month. The
Exchange proposes to assess an OTTO
Port Fee of $650 per port, per month,
per account number. The Exchange
proposes to assess a CTI Port Fee and a
FIX Drop Port Fee of $650 per port, per
month.
The Exchange proposes to assess no
fee for the first FIX Disaster Recovery
Port obtained by an Electronic Access
Member 18 or the first SQF Disaster
14 The first FIX Port would be provided to each
Electronic Access Member. The term ‘‘Electronic
Access Member’’ or ‘‘EAM’’ means a Member that
is approved to exercise trading privileges associated
with EAM Rights. See General 1, section 1(a)(6).
Also, the first SQF Port would be provided to each
Market Maker. The term ‘‘Market Makers’’ refers to
‘‘Competitive Market Makers’’ and ‘‘Primary Market
Makers’’ collectively. See Options 1, section
1(a)(21). The term ‘‘Competitive Market Maker’’
means a Member that is approved to exercise
trading privileges associated with CMM Rights. See
Options 1, section 1(a)(12). The term ‘‘Primary
Market Maker’’ means a Member that is approved
to exercise trading privileges associated with PMM
Rights. See Options 1, section 1(a)(35).
15 The first SQF Port would be provided to each
Market Maker. The term ‘‘Market Makers’’ refers to
‘‘Competitive Market Makers’’ and ‘‘Primary Market
Makers’’ collectively. See Options 1, section
1(a)(21). The term ‘‘Competitive Market Maker’’
means a Member that is approved to exercise
trading privileges associated with CMM Rights. See
Options 1, section 1(a)(12). The term ‘‘Primary
Market Maker’’ means a Member that is approved
to exercise trading privileges associated with PMM
Rights. See Options 1, section 1(a)(35).
16 An ‘‘account number’’ shall mean a number
assigned to a Member. Members may have more
than one account number. See Options 1, section
1(a)(1). Account numbers are free on MRX.
17 SQF’s Port Fees are assessed a higher dollar fee
as compared to FIX and OTTO ports ($1,250 vs.
$650) because the Exchange has to maintain options
assignments within SQF and manage quoting
traffic. Market Makers may utilize SQF Ports in
their assigned options series. Market Maker badges
are assigned to specific SQF ports to manage the
option series in which a Market Maker may quote.
Additionally, because of quoting obligations
provided for within Options 2, section 5, Market
Makers are required to provide liquidity in their
assigned options series which generates quote
traffic. The Exchange notes because of the higher
fee, SQF ports are billed per port, per month while
FIX and OTTO ports are billed per port, per month,
per account number. Members may have more than
one account number.
18 The first FIX Port would be provided to each
Electronic Access Member. The term ‘‘Electronic
Access Member’’ or ‘‘EAM’’ means a Member that
is approved to exercise trading privileges associated
with EAM Rights. See General 1, section 1(a)(6).
Also, the first SQF Port would be provided to each
Market Maker. The term ‘‘Market Makers’’ refers to
‘‘Competitive Market Makers’’ and ‘‘Primary Market
E:\FR\FM\18OCN1.SGM
18OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 18, 2022 / Notices
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Recovery Port obtained by a Market
Maker.19 The Exchange proposes to
assess each additional FIX Disaster
Recovery Port and each additional SQF
Disaster Recovery Port a fee of $50 per
port, per month, per account number.
Additionally, the Exchange proposes to
assess a Disaster Recovery Fee for SQF
Purge and OTTO Ports of $50 per port,
per month, per account number. Finally,
the Exchange proposes to assess a
Disaster Recovery Fee for CTI Ports and
FIX DROP Ports of $50 per port, per
month.
The OTTO Port, CTI Port, FIX Port,
FIX Drop Port and all Disaster Recovery
Ports 20 are available to all Electronic
Access Members, and will be subject to
a monthly cap of $7,500.
The SQF Port and the SQF Purge Port
are available to all Market Makers, and
will be subject to a monthly cap of
$17,500.21
The Exchange is not amending the
TradeInfo MRX Interface 22 or the
Nasdaq MRX Depth of Market, Nasdaq
MRX Order Feed, Nasdaq MRX Top
Quote Feed, Nasdaq MRX Trades Feed,
or Nasdaq MRX Spread Feed Ports; all
of these aforementioned ports will
continue to be assessed no fees.
Additionally, as is the case today, the
Disaster Recovery Ports for TradeInfo
and the Nasdaq MRX Depth of Market,
Nasdaq MRX Order Feed, Nasdaq MRX
Top Quote Feed, Nasdaq MRX Trades
Feed and Nasdaq MRX Spread Feed
Ports will not be assessed a fee.
Makers’’ collectively. See Options 1, section
1(a)(21). The term ‘‘Competitive Market Maker’’
means a Member that is approved to exercise
trading privileges associated with CMM Rights. See
Options 1, section 1(a)(12). The term ‘‘Primary
Market Maker’’ means a Member that is approved
to exercise trading privileges associated with PMM
Rights. See Options 1, section 1(a)(35).
19 The first SQF Port would be provided to each
Market Maker. The term ‘‘Market Makers’’ refers to
‘‘Competitive Market Makers’’ and ‘‘Primary Market
Makers’’ collectively. See Options 1, section
1(a)(21). The term ‘‘Competitive Market Maker’’
means a Member that is approved to exercise
trading privileges associated with CMM Rights. See
Options 1, section 1(a)(12). The term ‘‘Primary
Market Maker’’ means a Member that is approved
to exercise trading privileges associated with PMM
Rights. See Options 1, section 1(a)(35).
20 This includes FIX, SQF, SQF Purge, OTTO, CTI
and FIX Drop Disaster Recovery Ports.
21 Only Market Makers may quote on MRX. The
Exchange is proposing non-substantive technical
amendments to add commas within the
‘‘Production’’ column of the proposed rule text to
separate terms.
22 TradeInfo is a user interface that permits a
Member to: (i) search all orders submitted in a
particular security or all orders of a particular type,
regardless of their status (open, canceled, executed,
etc.); (ii) view orders and executions; and (iii)
download orders and executions for recordkeeping
purposes. TradeInfo users may also cancel open
orders at the order, port or firm mnemonic level
through TradeInfo. See Options 3, section 23(b)(2).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:52 Oct 17, 2022
Jkt 259001
Order and Quote Entry Protocols
Only one order protocol is required
for an MRX Member to submit orders
into MRX. The Exchange will provide
each Electronic Access Member the first
FIX Port at no cost to submit orders into
MRX. Only one account number is
necessary to transact an options
business on MRX and account numbers
are available to Members at no cost.
Only one quote protocol is required for
an MRX Market Maker to submit quotes
into MRX. The Exchange will provide
each Market Maker the first SQF Port at
no cost to submit quotes into MRX. A
quoting protocol, such as SQF, is only
required to the extent an MRX Member
has been appointed as a Market Maker
in an options series pursuant to Options
2, section 1.
Only MRX Members may utilize ports
on MRX. Any market participant that
sends orders to a Member would not
need to utilize a port. The Member can
send all orders, proprietary and agency,
through one port to MRX. Members may
elect to obtain multiple account
numbers to organize their business,
however only one account number and
one port for orders and one port for
quotes is necessary for a Member to
trade on MRX.
MRX also offers an OTTO protocol.
Unlike FIX, which offers routing
capability, OTTO does not permit
routing. Depending on a Member’s
business model, Members may elect to
purchase an OTTO Port in addition to
the first FIX Port offered at no cost.
Members may prefer one protocol as
compared to another protocol, for
example, the ability to route may cause
a Member to utilize FIX and a Member
that desires to execute an order locally
may utilize OTTO. Also, the OTTO Port
offers lower latency as compared to the
FIX Port, which may be attractive to
Members depending on their trading
behavior. MRX Members utilizing the
first FIX Port offered at no cost do not
need to purchase an OTTO Port.
However, Members may elect to utilize
both order entry protocols, depending
on how they organize their business.
Because the Exchange is providing the
first FIX Port at no cost, the use of an
OTTO Port is optional. OTTO provides
MRX Members with an additional
choice as to the type of protocol that
they may use to submit orders to the
Exchange. Today, Nasdaq Phlx LLC
(‘‘Phlx’’) and Nasdaq BX, Inc. (‘‘BX’’)
offer only a FIX Port to submit orders on
those options markets.23
Further, while only one protocol is
necessary to submit orders into MRX,
23 See Phlx and BX Options 3, section 7 for a list
of protocols.
PO 00000
Frm 00099
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
63121
Members may choose to purchase a
greater number of order entry ports,
depending on that Member’s business
model.24 To the extent that Electronic
Access Members chose to utilize more
than one FIX Port, the Electronic Access
Member would be assessed $650 per
port, per month, per account number for
each subsequent optional port beyond
the first port. To the extent that Market
Makers chose to utilize more than one
SQF Port, the Market Maker would be
assessed $1,250 per port, per month for
each subsequent optional port beyond
the first port. Additionally, to the extent
a Member expended more than $7,500
for FIX Ports or more than $17,500 for
SQF Ports, the Exchange would not
charge an MRX Member for additional
FIX or SQF Ports, respectively, beyond
the cap.
Other Protocols
The Exchange’s proposal to offer an
SQF Purge Port for $1,250 per port, per
month is optional. The SQF Purge Port
is designed to assist Market Makers in
the management of, and risk control
over, their quotes. Market Makers may
utilize a purge port to reduce
uncertainty and to manage risk by
purging all quotes in their assigned
options series. Of note, Market Makers
may only enter interest into SQF in their
assigned options series. Additionally,
the SQF Purge Port may be utilized by
a Market Maker in the event that the
Member has a system issue and
determines to purge its quotes from the
order book. The SQF Purge Port is
optional as Market Makers have various
ways of purging their quotes from the
order book. First of all, a Market Maker
may cancel quotes through SQF in their
assigned option series.25 Second, a
Member may cancel any bids or offers
in any series of options by requesting
MRX Market Operations staff to effect
such cancellation as per the instructions
of the Member.26 Third, in the event of
a loss of communication with the
Exchange, MRX offers the ability to
cancel all of a Member’s open quotes via
a cancel-on-disconnect control.27
Fourth, MRX offers Market Makers the
ability, with respect to quotes, to
establish pre-determined levels of risk
exposure which would be utilized to
automatically remove quotes in all
24 For example, a Member may desire to utilize
multiple FIX or OTTO Ports for accounting
purposes, to measure performance, for regulatory
reasons or other determinations that are specific to
that Member.
25 SQF Purge Ports, similar to SQF Ports, allow
Market Makers to mass cancel quotes.
26 See Options 3, section 19, Mass Cancellation of
Trading Interest.
27 See MRX Options 3, section 18, Detection of
Loss. This risk protection is free.
E:\FR\FM\18OCN1.SGM
18OCN1
63122
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 18, 2022 / Notices
series of an options class.28
Accordingly, the Exchange believes that
the SQF Purge Port provides an efficient
option to other available services which
allow a Market Maker to cancel quotes.
CTI Ports and FIX DROP Ports are
optional as Members have multiple
ways of receiving information
concerning open orders and executed
transactions. First, FIX and OTTO
protocols provide Members with realtime order execution messages similar
to the Clearing Trade Interface and FIX
DROP. Second, TradeInfo provides
Members with the ability to query open
orders and order executions real-time, at
no cost, similar to the Clearing Trade
Interface and FIX DROP. Third,
Members receive free daily reports
listing open orders and trade executions
from the Exchange. While not real-time,
the Open Orders Report and Trade
Detail Report provide Members with
information similar to the Clearing
Trade Interface and FIX DROP.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Disaster Recovery
With respect to Disaster Recovery
Ports, the Exchange proposes to assess
no fee for the first FIX Disaster Recovery
Port obtained by an Electronic Access
Member or the first SQF Disaster
Recovery Port obtained by a Market
Maker. The Exchange proposes to assess
no fees for these ports to provide
Members with continuous access to
MRX in the event of a failover at no
cost. Electronic Access Members only
require one FIX Disaster Recovery Port
to submit orders in the event of a
failover. Market Makers only require
one SQF Disaster Recovery Port to
submit quotes in the event of a failover.
Electronic Access Members may elect to
purchase additional optional FIX
Disaster Recovery Ports for $50 per port,
per month, per account number. Market
Makers may elect to purchase additional
optional SQF Disaster Recovery Ports
for $50 per port, per month, per account
number. The additional FIX and SQF
Disaster Recovery Ports are not
necessary to connect to the Exchange in
the event of a failover because the
Exchange has provided Members with a
FIX Disaster Recovery Port and an SQF
Disaster Recovery Port at no cost.
Further, the Exchange’s proposal to
offer Disaster Recovery Ports for SQF
Purge Ports and OTTO Ports for $50 per
port, per month, per account number
and Disaster Recovery Ports for CTI
Ports and FIX DROP Ports for $50 per
port, per month is optional. As noted
28 See MRX Options 3, section 15(a)(3)(B).
Thresholds may be set by Members based on
percentage, volume, delta or vega. This risk
protection is free.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:52 Oct 17, 2022
Jkt 259001
herein, today, there are other
alternatives for these ports. The
purchase of an SQF Purge Port, OTTO
Port, CTI Port, and FIX DROP Port in
production are optional and, therefore,
so is the purchase of Disaster Recovery
Ports for these ports. The proposed
Disaster Recovery Port fees are intended
to encourage Members to be efficient
when purchasing Disaster Recovery
Ports. Similar to all other ports, Disaster
Recovery Ports need to be maintained
by the Exchange.29
Finally, in the event that an MRX
Member elects to subscribe to multiple
ports, the Exchange offers a monthly cap
beyond which a Member would be
assessed no additional port fees in a
given month. As noted above, the SQF
Port and the SQF Purge Port are subject
to a monthly cap of $17,500 and the
OTTO Port, CTI Port, FIX Port, FIX Drop
Port and all Disaster Recovery Ports are
subject to a monthly cap of $7,500.
As noted herein, these different
protocols are not all necessary to
conduct business on MRX; a Member
may choose among protocols based on
their business workflow. The proposed
port fees are similar to fees assessed
today by GEMX.30 The Exchange’s
proposal to offer the first FIX and SQF
Port at no cost as well as the first FIX
and SQF Disaster Recovery Ports at no
cost would allow MRX Members to
submit orders and quotes into MRX at
no cost.
2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes that its
proposal is consistent with section 6(b)
of the Act,31 in general, and furthers the
objectives of sections 6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5)
of the Act,32 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 proposed changes to the Pricing
Schedule are reasonable in several
respects. As a threshold matter, the
Exchange is subject to significant
competitive forces in the market for
order flow, which constrains its pricing
determinations. The fact that the market
for order flow is competitive has long
29 The Exchange maintains ports in a number of
ways to ensure that ports are properly connected to
the Exchange at all times. This includes offering
testing, ensuring all ports are up-to-date with the
latest code releases, as well as ensuring that all
ports meet the Exchange’s information security
specifications.
30 See GEMX Options 7, section 6.C. (Ports and
Other Services).
31 See 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
32 See 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
PO 00000
Frm 00100
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
been recognized by the courts. In
NetCoalition v. Securities and Exchange
Commission, the D.C. Circuit stated,
‘‘[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’
. . . .’’ 33
The Commission and the courts have
repeatedly expressed their preference
for competition over regulatory
intervention to determine 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
broader forms that are most important to
investors and listed companies.’’ 34
Congress directed the Commission to
‘‘rely on ‘competition, whenever
possible, in meeting its regulatory
responsibilities for overseeing the SROs
and the national market system.’ ’’ 35 As
a result, the Commission has
historically relied on competitive forces
to determine whether a fee proposal is
equitable, fair, reasonable, and not
unreasonably or unfairly discriminatory.
‘‘If competitive forces are operative, the
self-interest of the exchanges themselves
will work powerfully to constrain
unreasonable or unfair behavior.’’ 36
Accordingly, ‘‘the existence of
significant competition provides a
substantial basis for finding that the
terms of an exchange’s fee proposal are
equitable, fair, reasonable, and not
unreasonably or unfairly
discriminatory.’’ 37 In its 2019 guidance
33 See NetCoalition, 615 F.3d at 539 (D.C. Cir.
2010) (quoting Securities Exchange Act Release No.
59039 (December 2, 2008), 73 FR 74770, 74782–83
(December 9, 2008) (SR–NYSEArca–2006–21)).
34 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808
(June 9, 2005), 70 FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005)
(‘‘Regulation NMS Adopting Release’’).
35 See NetCoalition, 615 F.3d at 534–35; see also
H.R. Rep. No. 94–229 at 92 (1975) (‘‘[I]t is the intent
of the conferees that the national market system
evolve through the interplay of competitive forces
as unnecessary regulatory restrictions are
removed.’’).
36 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59039
(December 2, 2008), 73 FR 74,770 (December 9,
2008) (SR–NYSEArca–2006–21).
37 Id.
E:\FR\FM\18OCN1.SGM
18OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 18, 2022 / Notices
on fee proposals, Commission staff
indicated that they would look at factors
beyond the competitive environment,
such as cost, only if a ‘‘proposal lacks
persuasive evidence that the proposed
fee is constrained by significant
competitive forces.’’ 38
History of MRX Operations
Over the years, MRX has amended its
transactional pricing to remain
competitive and attract order flow to the
Exchange.39
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
38 See U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission,
‘‘Staff Guidance on SRO Rule filings Relating to
Fees’’ (May 21, 2019), available at https://
www.sec.gov/tm/staff-guidance-sro-rule-filings-fees.
39 See e.g. Securities Exchange Act Release Nos.
77292 (March 4, 2016), 81 FR 12770 (March 10,
2016) (SR–ISEMercury–2016–02) (Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule
Change To Establish the Schedule of Fees); 77409
(March 21, 2016), 81 FR 16240 (March 25, 2016)
(SR–ISEMercury–2016–05) (Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change
To Amend the Schedule of Fees); 81 FR 16238
(March 21, 2016), 81 FR 16238 (March 25, 2016)
(SR–ISEMercury-2016–06) (Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change
To Amend the Schedule of Fees); 77841 (May 16,
2016), 81 FR 31986 (SR–ISEMercury–2016–11)
(Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of
Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Schedule of
Fees); 82537 (January 19, 2018), 83 FR 3784
(January 26, 2018) (SR–MRX–2018–01) (Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed
Rule Change To Amend the Schedule of Fees To
Introduce a New Pricing Model); 82990 (April 4,
2018), 83 FR 15434 (April 10, 2018) (SR–MRX–
2018–10) (Notice of Filing and Immediate
Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend
Chapter IV of the Exchange’s Schedule of Fees);
28677 (June 14, 2018), 83 FR 28677 (June 20, 2018)
(SR–MRX–2018–19) (Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change
To Increase Certain Route-Out Fees Set Forth in
section II.A of the Schedule of Fees); 84113
(September 13, 2018), 83 FR 47386 (September 19,
2018) (SR–MRX–2018–27) (Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change
To Relocate the Exchange’s Schedule of Fees);
85143 (February 14, 2019), 84 FR 5508 (February
21, 2019) (SR–MRX–2019–02) (Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change
To Amend the Pricing Schedule at Options 7,
section 3); 85313 (March 14, 2019), 84 FR 10357
(March 20, 2019) (SR–MRX–2019–05) (Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed
Rule Change Relating to PIM Fees and Rebates);
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:52 Oct 17, 2022
Jkt 259001
In June 2019, MRX commenced
offering complex orders.40 With the
addition of complex order functionality,
MRX offered Members certain order
types, an opening process, auction
capabilities and other trading
functionality that was nearly identical
to functionality available on ISE.41 By
86326 (July 8, 2019), 84 FR 33300 (July 12, 2019)
(SR–MRX–2019–14) (Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change
To Adopt Complex Order Pricing); 88022 (January
23, 2020), 85 FR 5263 (January 29, 2020) (SR–MRX–
2020–02) (Notice of Filing and Immediate
Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend
MRX Pricing Schedule); 89046 (June 11, 2020), 85
FR 36633 (June 17, 2020) (SR–MRX–2020–11)
(Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of
Proposed Rule Change To Amend Its Pricing
Schedule at Options 7); 89320 (July 15, 2020), 85
FR 44135 (July 21, 2020) (SR–MRX–2020–14)
(Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of
Proposed Rule Change To Amend Its Pricing
Schedule at Options 7, section 5, Other Options
Fees and Rebates, in Connection With the Pricing
for Orders Entered Into the Exchanges Price
Improvement Mechanism); 90503 (November 24,
2020), 85 FR 77317 (December 1, 2020) (SR–MRX–
2020–18) (Notice of Filing and Immediate
Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend
Its Pricing Schedule at Options 7 for Orders Entered
Into the Exchange’s Price Improvement
Mechanism); 90434 (November 16, 2020), 85 FR
74473 (November 20, 2020) (SR–MRX–2020–19)
(Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of
Proposed Rule Change To the Exchange’s Pricing
Schedule at Options 7 To Amend Taker Fees for
Regular Orders); 90455 (November 18, 2020), 85 FR
75064 (November 24, 2020) (SR–MRX–2020–21)
(Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of
Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Pricing
Schedule); and 91687 (April 27, 2021), 86 FR 23478
(May 3, 2021) (SR–MRX–2021–04) (Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule
Change To Amend the Exchange’s Pricing Schedule
at Options 7). Note that ISE Mercury is an earlier
name for MRX.
40 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 86326
(July 8, 2019), 84 FR 33300 (July 12, 2019) (SR–
MRX–2019–14) (Notice of Filing and Immediate
Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change to Adopt
Complex Order Pricing).
41 One distinction is that ISE offered its Members
access to Nasdaq Precise in 2019 and since that
time. MRX has never offered Precise. ‘‘Nasdaq
Precise’’ or ‘‘Precise’’ is a front-end interface that
allows EAMs and their Sponsored Customers to
send orders to the Exchange and perform other
related functions. Features include the following:
(1) order and execution management: enter, modify,
PO 00000
Frm 00101
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
63123
way of comparison, ISE assessed fees for
ports 42 in 2019 while offering the same
suite of functionality as MRX, with a
limited exception.43
Ports Are Subject to Significant
Substitution-Based Competitive Forces
An exchange can show that a product
is ‘‘subject to significant substitutionbased competitive forces’’ by
introducing evidence that customers can
substitute the product for products
offered by other exchanges.
Chart 1 below shows the January 2022
market share for multiply-listed options
by exchange. Of the 16 operating
options exchanges, none currently has
more than a 13.1% market share, and
MRX has the smallest market share at
1.8%. Customers widely distribute their
transactions across exchanges according
to their business needs and the ability
of each exchange to meet those needs
through technology, liquidity and
functionality. Average market share for
the 16 options exchanges is 6.26
percent, with the median at 5.8, and a
range between 1.8 and 13.1 percent.
and cancel orders on the Exchange, and manage
executions (e.g., parent/child orders, inactive
orders, and post-trade allocations); (2) market data:
access to real-time market data (e.g., NBBO and
Exchange BBO); (3) risk management: set
customizable risk parameters (e.g., kill switch); and
(4) book keeping and reporting: comprehensive
audit trail of orders and trades (e.g., order history
and done away trade reports). See ISE
Supplementary Material .03(d) of Options 3, section
7. Precise is also available on GEMX.
42 Since 2019, ISE has assessed the following port
fees: a FIX Port Fee of $300 per port, per month,
per mnemonic, an SQF Port Fee and SQF Purge Port
Fee of $1,100 per port, per month, an OTTO Port
Fee of $400 per port, per month, per mnemonic
with a monthly cap of $4,000, a CTI Port Fee and
FIX DROP Port Fee of $500 per port, per month, per
mnemonic. See Securities Exchange Act Release
No. 82568 (January 23, 2018), 83 FR 4086 (January
29, 2018) (SR–ISE–2018–07) (Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change
To Assess Fees for OTTO Port, CTI Port, FIX Port,
FIX Drop Port and Disaster Recovery Port
Connectivity). Of note, ISE assessed port fees prior
to 2019 as well.
43 See note 41, supra.
E:\FR\FM\18OCN1.SGM
18OCN1
63124
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 18, 2022 / Notices
Chart 1: Market Share by Exchange for January 2022
Marbt Share - Exchange
ARCA
PHU<
CIJOit
10.19'
NDM
AME>(
&2%
MIA>(
Option Exchanges - Parent Company
IEDGX
lioxj
MPRl
a
iiiMLD
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:52 Oct 17, 2022
Jkt 259001
SQF Port which are proposed to be
offered at no cost, depending on that
Member’s particular business model.44
However, Members do not need more
than one order entry port (and account
number) and one quote port to submit
interest to MRX.
The experience of MRX’s affiliates
shows that the number of ports that
members choose to purchase varies
widely. For example, a review of the
Phlx exchange in April 2022 shows that,
44 For example, a Member may desire to utilize
multiple FIX ports for accounting purposes, to
measure performance, for regulatory reasons or
other determinations that are specific to that
Member.
PO 00000
Frm 00102
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
among its member organizations that
purchase ports, approximately 26
percent purchased 1 SQF or FIX port,
another 26 percent purchased between 2
and 5 ports, 21 percent purchased
between 6 and 10 ports, and 28 percent
purchased more than 11 ports. This
means that any MRX Member may enter
all of their interest (orders or quotes)
with only one order and one quote port
and remain competitive.45
By way of comparison, the number of
ports that MRX Members purchased in
April 2022 also varied widely.
45 As noted above, one port would be required to
submit orders and one port would be required to
submit quotes.
E:\FR\FM\18OCN1.SGM
18OCN1
EN18OC22.021</GPH>
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Market share is the percentage of
volume on a particular exchange
relative to the total volume across all
exchanges, and indicates the amount of
order flow directed to that exchange.
High levels of market share enhance the
value of trading and ports.
As described in detail below, only one
order protocol is required to submit
orders to MRX. Quoting protocols are
only required to the extent an MRX
Member has been appointed as a Market
Maker in an options series pursuant to
Options 2, section 1, and only one
quoting protocol is necessary to quote
on MRX. Members may choose a greater
number of order or quote entry ports,
beyond the first FIX Port and the first
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 18, 2022 / Notices
63125
Chart 2: Number of SQF and FIX Ports Subscribed to by MRX Members in April 2022
MRX count of SQF and FIX ports per firm - April 2022
8
7
6
,,, s
E
"-
u: 4
0
,It
3
2
1
0
Chart 2 indicates the number of FIX
and SQF Ports, respectively, that MRX
Members were subscribed to in April
2022. Chart 2 shows that 1 MRX
Member only subscribed to 1 SQF Port
and 3 MRX Members subscribed to 1
FIX Port.
Further, approximately 23 percent of
MRX Members purchased 1 SQF, FIX or
OTTO Port,46 another 43 percent
purchased between 2 and 5 ports, 13
percent purchased between 6 and 10
ports, and 20 percent purchased more
than 11 ports. MRX Members, similar to
Phlx member organizations, have the
option of reducing their port purchases
without purchasing a substitute
product.
All of these statistics must be viewed
in the context of a field with relatively
low barriers to entry. MRX, like many
new entrants to the field, offered ports
for free to establish itself and gain
market share. As new entrants enter the
field, MRX can also expect competition
from these new entrants. Those new
entrants, like MRX, are likely to set port,
or other fees to zero, increasing
marketplace competition.
The Exchange notes that one MRX
Member cancelled 1 SQF Port and 1
OTTO Port to avoid being assessed an
SQF Port fee as of May 2, 2022.47 As of
July 1, 2022, the Exchange did not
assess MRX Members for their first SQF
46 Phlx only offers FIX and SQF ports while MRX
offers FIX, OTTO and SQF ports for order and quote
entry.
47 MRX originally filed to assess a fee for all FIX
Ports.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:52 Oct 17, 2022
Jkt 259001
3
2
4
s
Port. MRX port fees are subject to
significant substitution-based
competitive forces due to its
consistently low percentage of market
share, the relatively small number of
purchasers for each product, and the
purchasers that either cancelled or are
reviewing their subscriptions.
Implementation of the proposed fees is
therefore consistent with the Act.
Fees for Ports
The proposed port fees described
below are in line with those of other
markets. Setting a fee above competitors
is likely to drive away customers, so the
most efficient price-setting strategy is to
set prices at the same level as other
firms.
As noted above, market participants
may choose to become a member of one
or more options exchanges based on the
market participant’s business model.
The Exchange believes that there are
many factors that may cause a market
participant to decide to become a
member of a particular exchange
dependent upon their business model.
A very small number of market
participants choose to become a member
of all sixteen options exchanges. It is not
a requirement for market participants to
become members of all options
exchanges, in fact, certain market
participants conduct an options
business as a member of only one
options market.48 Most firms that
48 BOX Exchange LLC (‘‘BOX’’) amended its fees
on January 3, 2022 to adopt an electronic market
maker trading permit fee. See Securities and
PO 00000
Frm 00103
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
10+
8
6
actively trade on options markets are
not currently Members of MRX and do
not purchase port services at MRX. Ports
are only available to MRX Members or
service bureaus, and only an MRX
Member may utilize a port.49
Using options markets that Nasdaq
operates as points of comparison, less
Exchange Release No. 94894 (May 11, 2022), 87 FR
29987 (May 17, 2022) (SR–BOX–2022–17) (Notice
of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed
Rule Change To Amend the Fee Schedule on the
BOX Options Market LLC Facility To Adopt
Electronic Market Maker Trading Permit Fees). In
the BOX–2022–17 rule change, BOX stated that,
‘‘. . . it is not aware of any reason why Market
Makers could not simply drop their access to an
exchange (or not initially access an exchange) if an
exchange were to establish prices for its nontransaction fees that, in the determination of such
Market Maker, did not make business or economic
sense for such Market Maker to access such
exchange. The Exchange again notes that no market
makers are required by rule, regulation, or
competitive forces to be a Market Maker on the
Exchange.’’ Further, in 2022, MEMX LLC
(‘‘MEMX’’) established a monthly membership fee.
See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 93927
(January 7, 2022), 87 FR 2191 (January 13, 2022)
(SR–MEMX–2021–19). The Monthly Membership
Fee is assessed to each active Member at the close
of business on the first day of each month. MEMX
reasoned in MEMX–2022–19 that that there is value
in becoming a member of the exchange. MEMX
stated that it believed that its proposed membership
fee ‘‘is not unfairly discriminatory because no
broker-dealer is required to become a member of the
Exchange.’’ Moreover, ‘‘neither the trade-through
requirements under Regulation NMS nor brokerdealers’ best execution obligations require a brokerdealer to become a member of every exchange.’’ The
Exchange notes that neither BOX–2022–17 or
MEMX–2022–19 were suspended.
49 Service bureaus may obtain ports on behalf of
Members. The Exchange would only assign a badge
and/or mnemonic to a Member to be utilized to
submit quotes and/or orders to the Exchange.
E:\FR\FM\18OCN1.SGM
18OCN1
EN18OC22.022</GPH>
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
1
63126
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 18, 2022 / Notices
than a third of the firms that are
members of at least one of the options
markets that Nasdaq operates are also
Members of MRX (approximately 29%).
MRX, like other options markets, has a
mix of market participants as Members.
Chart 3 below displays the percentage of
Electronic Access Members, Market
Makers and Clearing Firms on MRX.50
Chart 3: Composition ofMRX Membership as of August 2022
MRX member type distribution. - August 2022
ii MM
ilr MM and EAM
iii Clearing and EAM
ii Clearing
The percentages in Chart 3 represent
percentages of the total number of MRX
Members. Some Members have dual
representations (e.g., a Market Maker
and Electronic Access Member) as
reflected in Chart 2.
The Exchange notes that no firm is a
Member of MRX only. Few, if any, firms
have purchased port services at MRX,
notwithstanding the fact that ports are
currently free, because MRX currently
has less liquidity than other options
markets. As explained above, MRX has
the smallest market share of the 16
options exchanges, representing only
approximately 1.8% of the market, and,
for certain market participants, the
current levels of liquidity may be
insufficient to justify the costs
associated with becoming a Member and
connecting to the Exchange,
notwithstanding the fact that ports are
currently free.
The decision to become a member of
an exchange, particularly for registered
market makers, is complex, and not
solely based on the non-transactional
costs assessed by an exchange. As noted
herein, specific factors include, but are
not limited to: (i) an exchange’s
available liquidity in options series; (ii)
trading functionality offered on a
particular market; (iii) product offerings;
(iv) customer service on an exchange;
and (v) transactional pricing. Becoming
a member of the exchange does not
‘‘lock’’ a potential member into a market
or diminish the overall competition for
exchange services. The decision to
become a member of an exchange is
made at the beginning of the
relationship, and is no less subject to
competition than trading fees or ports.
In lieu of becoming a member at each
options exchange, a market participant
may join one exchange and elect to have
their orders routed in the event that a
better price is available on an away
market. Nothing in the Order Protection
Rule requires a firm to become a
Member at MRX.51 If MRX is not at the
NBBO, MRX will route an order to any
away market that is at the NBBO to
prevent a trade-through and also ensure
that the order was executed at a superior
price.52
With respect to the submission of
orders, Members may also choose not to
purchase any port at all from the
Exchange, and instead rely on the port
of a third party to submit an order.53 For
example, a third-party broker-dealer
Member of MRX may be utilized by a
retail investor to submit orders into an
Exchange. An institutional investor may
utilize a broker-dealer, a service
bureau,54 or request sponsored access 55
through a member of an exchange in
order to submit a trade directly to an
options exchange.56 A market
participant may either pay the costs
associated with becoming a member of
an exchange or, in the alternative, a
market participant may elect to pay
commissions to a broker-dealer, pay fees
50 Of note, Nasdaq Execution Services, LLC
(‘‘NES’’), a Nasdaq affiliate, is a Member of MRX.
NES is a broker-dealer and the Routing Facility of
the Exchange. NES routes orders in options listed
and open for trading on the System to away markets
either directly or through one or more third-party
unaffiliated routing broker-dealers pursuant to
Exchange Rules on behalf of the Exchange. NES is
subject to regulation as a facility of the Exchange,
including the requirement to file proposed rule
changes under section 19 of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, as amended
51 See Options Order Protection and Locked/
Crossed Market Plan (August 14, 2009), available at
https://www.theocc.com/getmedia/7fc629d9-4e544b99-9f11-c0e4db1a2266/options_order_protection_
plan.pdf.
52 MRX Members may elect to not route their
orders by marking an order as ‘‘do-not-route.’’ In
this case, the order would not be routed. See
Options 3, section 7(m).
53 Market Makers on MRX are required to obtain
one SQF port to submit quotes into MRX.
54 Service bureaus provide access to market
participants to submit and execute orders on an
exchange. On MRX, a Service Bureau may be a
Member. Some MRX Members utilize a Service
Bureau for connectivity and that Service Bureau
may not be a Member. Some market participants
utilize a Service Bureau who is a Member to submit
orders. As noted herein only MRX Members may
submit orders or quotes through ports.
55 Sponsored Access is an arrangement whereby
a member permits its customers to enter orders into
an exchange’s system that bypass the member’s
trading system and are routed directly to the
Exchange, including routing through a service
bureau or other third-party technology provider.
56 This may include utilizing a Floor Broker and
submitting the trade to one of the five options
trading floors.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:52 Oct 17, 2022
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00104
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\18OCN1.SGM
18OCN1
EN18OC22.023</GPH>
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Iii EAM
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 18, 2022 / Notices
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
to a service bureau to submit trades, or
pay a member to sponsor the market
participant in order to submit trades
directly to an exchange. Market
participants may elect any of the above
models and weigh the varying costs
when determining how to submit trades
to an exchange. Depending on the
number of orders to be submitted,
technology, ability to control
submission of orders, and projected
revenues, a market participant may
determine one model is more cost
efficient as compared to the alternatives.
Only if a market participant elects to
become a Member of MRX will the
market participant need to utilize a port
to submit orders and/or quotes into
MRX. Once an applicant is approved for
membership on MRX and becomes a
Member, the Exchange assigns the
Member a badge 57 and/or mnemonic 58
to submit quotes and/or orders to the
Exchange through the applicable port.
An MRX Member may have one or more
accounts numbers and may assign
badges or mnemonics to those account
numbers.59 Membership approval grants
a Member a right to exercise trading
privileges on MRX, which includes the
submission of orders and/or quotes into
the Exchange through a secure port by
utilizing the badge and/or mnemonic
assigned to a specific Member by the
Exchange. The Exchange utilizes ports
as a secure method for Members to
submit orders and/or quotes into the
Exchange’s match engine and for the
Exchange to send messages related to
those orders and/or quotes to its
Members.
MRX is obligated to regulate its
Members and secure access to its
environment. In order to properly
regulate its Members and secure the
trading environment, MRX takes
measures to ensure access is monitored
and maintained with various controls.
Ports are a method utilized by the
Exchange to grant Members secure
access to communicate with the
Exchange and exercise trading rights.
When a market participant elects to be
a Member of MRX, and is approved for
membership by MRX, the Member is
granted trading rights to enter orders
and/or quotes into MRX through secure
ports.
57 A ‘‘badge’’ shall mean an account number,
which may contain letters and/or numbers,
assigned to Market Makers. A Market Maker
account may be associated with multiple badges.
See MRX Options 1, section 1(a)(5).
58 A ‘‘mnemonic’’ shall mean an acronym
comprised of letters and/or numbers assigned to
Electronic Access Members. An Electronic Access
Member account may be associated with multiple
mnemonics. See MRX Options 1, section 1(a)(23).
59 The Exchange provides account numbers,
badges and mnemonics at no cost.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:52 Oct 17, 2022
Jkt 259001
As noted herein, there is no legal or
regulatory requirement that a market
participant become a Member of MRX,
or, if it is a Member, to purchase port
services beyond the one quoting
protocol or one order entry protocol
necessary to quote or submit orders on
MRX. The Exchange proposes to offer
the first FIX and SQF Port at no cost in
addition to the first FIX Disaster
Recovery Port and the first SQF Disaster
Recovery Port at no cost.60 As noted
above, Members may freely choose to
rely on one or many ports, depending
on their business model.
The Exchange’s proposal to amend
port fees is reasonable, equitable and
not unfairly discriminatory as MRX is
providing MRX Electronic Access
Members the first FIX Port to submit
orders and MRX Market Makers the first
SQF Port to submit quotes to MRX, at
no cost, in addition to providing the
first FIX Disaster Recovery Port and the
first SQF Disaster Recovery Port at no
cost; all other ports offered by MRX are
optional and not necessary to trade
options on the Exchange.
The proposed fees reflect the ongoing
services provided to maintain and
support the ports. In order to submit
orders into MRX, only one order
protocol is required, and MRX is
providing Electronic Access Members
the first FIX Port at no cost. Quoting
protocols are only required to the extent
an MRX Member has been appointed as
a Market Maker in an options series
pursuant to Options 2, section 1.
Similarly, only one quoting protocol is
necessary to quote on MRX and MRX is
providing Market Makers the first SQF
Port at no cost. As noted above, only
Members may utilize ports. A Member
can send all orders, proprietary and
agency, through one port to MRX and all
quotes through one port. Therefore, for
the foregoing reasons, it is reasonable to
assess no fee for the first FIX Port
obtained by an Electronic Access
Member or the first SQF Port obtained
by a Market Maker. Further it is
equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory to assess no fee for the
first FIX Port to Electronic Access
Members as all Electronic Access
Members would be entitled to the first
FIX Port at no cost. Also, it is equitable
and not unfairly discriminatory to
assess no fee for the first SQF Port to
Market Makers as all Market Makers
would be entitled to the first SQF Port
at no cost. With this proposal, MRX
Members may organize their business in
60 Only Members and service bureaus may request
ports on MRX, and only Members may utilize ports
on MRX through their assigned badge or mnemonic.
See Options 1, section 1(a)(5) and (23).
PO 00000
Frm 00105
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
63127
such a way as to submit orders and/or
quotes continuously to MRX at no cost.
The Exchange’s proposal to assess
Members $650 per port, per month, per
account number for FIX Ports beyond
the first port and $1,250 per port, per
month for SQF Ports beyond the first
port is reasonable because these ports
are optional and Members only require
one FIX Port to submit orders to MRX
and one SQF Port to submit quotes to
MRX. Members electing to subscribe to
more than one FIX or SQF Port are
choosing the additional ports to
accommodate their business model.
Additionally, to the extent a Member
expended more than $7,500 for FIX
Ports or more than $17,500 for SQF
Ports, the Exchange would not charge an
MRX Member for additional FIX or SQF
Ports beyond the cap. The fees for the
proposed additional FIX and SQF Ports
are equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because any Member
may elect to subscribe to additional
ports. Electronic Access Members
would be subject to the same fees for
FIX Ports and Market Makers would be
subject to the same fees for SQF Ports.
Unlike other market participants,
Market Makers are required to provide
continuous two-sided quotes on a daily
basis,61 and are subject to various
obligations associated with providing
liquidity.62 Also, as noted herein,
account numbers are available on MRX
at no cost.
The Exchange’s proposal to assess
$650 per port, per month, per account
number for an OTTO Port is reasonable
because OTTO is optional. The
Exchange is offering the first FIX Port at
no cost to submit orders to MRX. In
addition to the FIX Port, all Members
may elect to purchase OTTO to submit
orders to MRX. Unlike FIX, which offers
routing capability, OTTO does not
permit routing. Depending on a
Member’s business model, Members
may elect to purchase an OTTO Port in
addition to the FIX Port, which is being
provided at no cost. Members may
prefer one protocol as compared to
another protocol. For example, the
ability to route may cause a Member to
utilize FIX and a Member that desires to
execute an order locally may utilize
OTTO. Also, the OTTO Port offers lower
latency as compared to the FIX Port,
which may be attractive to Members
depending on their trading behavior.
MRX Members utilizing the FIX Port,
which is offered at no cost, do not need
to utilize OTTO. Members may elect to
utilize both order entry protocols,
depending on how they organize their
61 See
62 See
E:\FR\FM\18OCN1.SGM
MRX Options 2, section 5.
MRX Options 2, section 4.
18OCN1
63128
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 18, 2022 / Notices
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
business. OTTO provides MRX
Members with an additional choice as to
the type of protocol that they may use
to submit orders to the Exchange.
Today, Phlx and BX offer only a FIX
Port to submit orders on those options
markets.63 The proposed OTTO fee is
equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because any Member
may elect to purchase an optional OTTO
Port and would be subject to the same
fee.
The Exchange’s proposal to offer an
SQF Purge Port for $1,250 per port, per
month is reasonable because this port is
optional. The SQF Purge Port is
designed to assist Market Makers in the
management of, and risk control over,
their quotes. Market Makers may utilize
a purge port to reduce uncertainty and
to manage risk by purging all quotes in
their assigned options series. Of note,
Market Makers may only enter interest
into SQF in their assigned options
series. Additionally, the SQF Purge Port
may be utilized by a Market Maker in
the event that the Member has a system
issue and determines to purge from the
order book. The SQF Purge Port is
optional as Market Makers have various
ways of purging their quotes from the
order book. First of all, a Market Maker
may cancel quotes through SQF in their
assigned options series in the same
manner as they may cancel quotes with
an SQF Purge Port.64 Second, a Member
may cancel any bids or offers in any
series of options by requesting MRX
Market Operations staff to effect such
cancellation as per the instructions of
the Member.65 Third, in the event of a
loss of communication with the
Exchange, MRX offers the ability to
cancel all of a Member’s open quotes via
a cancel-on-disconnect control.66
Fourth, MRX offers Market Makers the
ability, with respect to simple orders, to
establish pre-determined levels of risk
exposure which would be utilized to
automatically remove quotes in all
series of an options class.67
Accordingly, the Exchange believes that
the SQF Purge Port provides an efficient
alternative to other available services
which allow a Market Maker to cancel
quotes. The proposed SQF Purge Port is
equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because any Member
63 See Phlx and BX Options 3, section 7 for a list
of protocols.
64 SQF Purge Ports, similar to SQF Ports, allow
Market Makers to mass cancel quotes.
65 See Options 3, section 19, Mass Cancellation of
Trading Interest.
66 See MRX Options 3, section 18, Detection of
Loss. This risk protection is free.
67 See MRX Options 3, section 15(a)(3)(B).
Thresholds may be set by Members based on
percentage, volume, delta or vega. This risk
protection is free.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:52 Oct 17, 2022
Jkt 259001
may elect to purchase an optional SQF
Purge Port and would be subject to the
same fee.
The Exchange’s proposal to assess
$650 per port, per month for CTI Ports
and FIX DROP Ports is reasonable
because these ports are optional because
Members have various ways of receiving
information concerning open orders and
executed transactions. First, FIX and
OTTO provide Members with real-time
order executions similar to the Clearing
Trade Interface and FIX DROP. Second,
TradeInfo provides Members with the
ability to query open orders and order
executions real-time, at no cost, similar
to the Clearing Trade Interface and FIX
DROP. Third, Members receive free
daily reports listing open orders and
trade executions from the Exchange.
While not real-time, the Open Orders
Report and Trade Detail Report provide
Members with information similar to
the Clearing Trade Interface and FIX
DROP. The proposed CTI and FIX DROP
Ports are equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because any Member
may elect to purchase an optional CTI
Port or FIX DROP Port and would be
subject to the same fee.
The Exchange’s proposal to assess no
fee for the first FIX Disaster Recovery
Port or the first SQF Disaster Recovery
Port is reasonable because it will
provide Members with continuous
access to MRX in the event of a failover,
at no cost. Further it is equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory to assess no fee
for the first FIX Disaster Recovery Port
to Electronic Access Members as all
Electronic Access Members would be
entitled to the first FIX Disaster
Recovery Port at no cost. Also, it is
equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory to assess no fee for the
first SQF Disaster Recovery Port to
Market Makers as all Market Makers
would be entitled to the first SQF
Disaster Recovery Port at no cost.
The Exchange’s proposal to assess
Members $50 per port, per month, per
account number for optional FIX
Disaster Recovery Ports beyond the first
port offered at no cost and $50 per port,
per month, per account number for
optional SQF Disaster Recovery Ports
beyond the first port offered at no cost
is reasonable because these ports are
optional and Members only require one
FIX Disaster Recovery Port to submit
orders to MRX in the event of a failover
and one SQF Disaster Recovery Port to
submit quotes to MRX in the event of a
failover. Additionally, to the extent a
Member expended more than $7,500 for
Disaster Recovery Ports, the Exchange
would not charge an MRX Member for
additional Disaster Recovery Ports
beyond the cap. The fees for the
PO 00000
Frm 00106
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
proposed additional FIX and SQF
Disaster Recovery Ports are equitable
and not unfairly discriminatory because
any Member may elect additional ports
and would be subject to the same fees.
The Exchange’s proposal to offer
Disaster Recovery Ports for SQF Purge
Ports, and OTTO Ports at $50 per port,
per month, per account number and CTI
Ports, and FIX DROP Ports for $50 per
port, per month is reasonable because
these ports are optional. As noted
herein, there are other alternatives for
all of these ports today, the purchase of
an SQF Purge Port, OTTO Port, CTI
Port, and FIX DROP Port in production
is optional and, therefore, so is the
purchase of Disaster Recovery Ports for
these ports. The proposed Disaster
Recovery Port fees are intended to
encourage Members to be efficient when
purchasing Disaster Recovery Ports. The
proposed Disaster Recovery Ports are
equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because any Member
may elect to purchase an optional
Disaster Recovery Port and would be
subject to the same fee, depending on
the port.
Finally, in the event that an MRX
Member elects to subscribe to multiple
ports, the Exchange offers a monthly cap
beyond which a Member would be
assessed no additional fees for month.
As noted above, the SQF Port and the
SQF Purge Port are subject to a monthly
cap of $17,500 and the OTTO Port, CTI
Port, FIX Port, FIX Drop Port and all
Disaster Recovery Ports are subject to a
monthly cap of $7,500. These caps are
reasonable because they allow Members
to limit their fees beyond a certain level
if they elect to purchase multiple ports
in a given month. The caps are also
equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because any Member
will be subject to the cap, provided they
exceeded the appropriate dollar amount
in a given month.
The proposed port fees are similar to
the fees assessed by GEMX.68
After 6 years, MRX proposes to
commence assessing port fees, just as all
other options exchanges while offerings
its Members the ability to submit orders
and quotes to the Exchange at no cost.
The introduction of these fees will not
impede a Member’s access to MRX, but
rather will allow MRX to continue to
compete and grow its marketplace so
that it may continue to offer a robust
trading architecture, a quality opening
process, an array of simple and complex
order types and auctions, and
competitive transaction pricing. If MRX
is incorrect in its assessment of the
68 See GEMX Options 7, section 6.C. (Ports and
Other Services).
E:\FR\FM\18OCN1.SGM
18OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 18, 2022 / Notices
value of its services, that assessment
will be reflected in MRX’s ability to
compete with other options exchanges.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Burden on Competition
The Exchange does not believe that
the proposed rule change will impose
any intermarket burden on competition
not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
The Exchange believes its proposal to
offer the first FIX and SQF Ports for free,
as well as the first Disaster Recovery
version of these ports, positions MRX as
a competitive market among other
options exchanges, all of which assess
fees for the first order and/or quote
protocols. MRX’s offering would permit
Electronic Access Members and Market
Makers the ability to submit orders and
quote to MRX at no cost. The remainder
of the port offerings are optional. The
Exchange believes that the optional port
offerings permit MRX to remain
competitive with other options markets
in its offerings.
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. 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.
By way of example, today, with the
exception of Precise, ISE has identical
functionality to MRX. Market
participants may elect to become
members of ISE instead of MRX if those
market participants believe that the
order flow on ISE provides more value
than the order flow on MRX. ISE has
more market share (6.2%) as compared
to MRX (1.8%). A market participant
may evaluate the fees assessed by ISE,
its market share, and proprietary
products, among other things, and
determine to become a member of ISE
instead of MRX if it determines the
proposed fees to be unreasonable.
Additionally, the proposed port fees are
similar to port fees assessed by GEMX 69
for similar connectivity.
69 See GEMX Options 7, section 6.C. (Ports and
Other Services).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:52 Oct 17, 2022
Jkt 259001
Further, in connection with a
technology migration, Cboe Exchange,
Inc. (‘‘Cboe’’) amended access and
connectivity fees, including port fees.70
Specifically, Cboe adopted certain
logical ports to allow for the delivery
and/or receipt of trading messages—i.e.,
orders, accepts, cancels, transactions,
etc. Cboe established tiered pricing for
BOE and FIX logical ports, tiered
pricing for BOE Bulk ports, and flat
prices for DROP, Purge Ports, GRP Ports
and Multicast PITCH/Top Spin Server
Ports. Cboe argued in its fee proposal
that the proposed pricing more closely
aligned its access fees to those of its
affiliated exchanges, and reasonably so,
as the affiliated exchanges offer
substantially similar connectivity and
functionality and are on the same
platform that Cboe migrated to.71 Cboe
also justified its proposal by stating that,
‘‘ . . . the Exchange believes
substitutable products and services are
in fact available to market participants,
including, among other things, other
options exchanges a market participant
may connect to in lieu of the Exchange,
indirect connectivity to the Exchange
via a third-party reseller of connectivity
and/or trading of any options product,
including proprietary products, in the
Over-the-Counter (OTC) markets.’’ 72
Cboe stated in its proposal that,
The rule structure for options exchanges are
also fundamentally different from those of
equities exchanges. In particular, options
market participants are not forced to connect
to (and purchase market data from) all
options exchanges. For example, there are
many order types that are available in the
equities markets that are not utilized in the
options markets, which relate to mid-point
pricing and pegged pricing which require
connection to the SIPs and each of the
equities exchanges in order to properly
execute those orders in compliance with best
execution obligations. Additionally, in the
options markets, the linkage routing and
trade through protection are handled by the
exchanges, not by the individual members.
Thus not connecting to an options exchange
or disconnecting from an options exchange
does not potentially subject a broker-dealer to
violate order protection requirements. Gone
are the days when the retail brokerage firms
(such as Fidelity, Schwab, and eTrade) were
members of the options exchanges—they are
not members of the Exchange or its affiliates,
they do not purchase connectivity to the
Exchange, and they do not purchase market
70 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 90333
(November 4, 2020), 85 FR 71666 (November 10,
2020) (SR–CBOE–2020–105).
71 Id. at 71676.
72 Id. at 71676.
PO 00000
Frm 00107
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
63129
data from the Exchange. Accordingly, not
only is there not an actual regulatory
requirement to connect to every options
exchange, the Exchange believes there is also
no ‘‘de facto’’ or practical requirement as
well, as further evidenced by the recent
significant reduction in the number of
broker-dealers that are members of all
options exchanges.73
The proposal also referenced the
National Market System Plan Governing
the Consolidated Audit Trail (‘‘CAT
NMS Plan’’),74 wherein the Commission
discussed the existence of competition
in the marketplace generally, and
particularly for exchanges with unique
business models. The Commission
acknowledged that, even if an exchange
were to exit the marketplace due to its
proposed fee-related change, it would
not significantly impact competition in
the market for exchange trading services
because these markets are served by
multiple competitors.75 Further, the
Commission explicitly stated that
‘‘[c]onsequently, demand for these
services in the event of the exit of a
competitor is likely to be swiftly met by
existing competitors.’’ 76 Finally, the
Commission recognized that while some
exchanges may have a unique business
model that is not currently offered by
competitors, a competitor could create
similar business models if demand were
adequate, and if a competitor did not do
so, the Commission believes it would be
likely that new entrants would do so if
the exchange with that unique business
model was otherwise profitable.77
Cboe concluded that the Exchange is
subject to significant substitution-based
competitive forces in pricing its
connectivity and access fees.78 Cboe
stressed that the proof of competitive
constraints does not depend on showing
that members walked away, or
threatened to walk away, from a product
due to a pricing change. Rather, the very
absence of such negative feedback (in
and of itself, and particularly when
coupled with positive feedback) is
indicative that the proposed fees are, in
fact, reasonable and consistent with the
Exchange being subject to competitive
forces in setting fees.79
73 Id.
at 71677.
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 86901
(September 9, 2019), 84 FR 48458 (September 13,
2019) (File No. S7–13–19).
75 Id.
76 Id.
77 Id.
78 Id. at 71679.
79 Id. at 71680.
74 See
E:\FR\FM\18OCN1.SGM
18OCN1
63130
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 18, 2022 / Notices
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Cboe also filed to establish a monthly
fee for Certification Logical Ports of
$250 per Certification Logical Port.80
Cboe reasoned that purchasing
additional Certification Logical Ports,
beyond the one Certification Logical
Port per logical port type offered in the
production environment free of charge,
is voluntary and not required in order
to participate in the production
environment, including live production
trading on the Exchange.81
In its statutory basis, Cboe justified
the new port fee by stating that it
believed the Certification Logical Port
fee were reasonable because while such
ports were no longer completely free,
TPHs and non-TPHs would continue to
be entitled to receive free of charge one
Certification Logical Port for each type
of logical port that is currently offered
in the production environment.82 Cboe
noted that other exchanges assess
similar fees and cited to Nasdaq Stock
Market LLC and MIAX Options
Exchange.83 Cboe also noted that the
decision to purchase additional ports is
optional and no market participant is
required or under any regulatory
obligation to purchase excess
Certification Logical Ports in order to
access the Exchange’s certification
environment.84 Finally, similar
proposals to adopt a Certification
Logical Port monthly fee were filed by
Cboe BYX Exchange, Inc.,85 Cboe BZX
Exchange, Inc.,86 and Cboe EDGA
Exchange, Inc.87
The Cboe fee proposals described
herein were filed subsequent to the D.C.
Circuit decision in Susquehanna Int’l
Grp., LLC v. SEC, 866 F.3d 442 (D.C.
Cir. 2017), meaning that such fee filings
were subject to the same (and current)
80 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 94512
(March 24, 2002), 87 FR 18425 (March 30, 2022)
(SR–Cboe–2022–011). Cboe offers BOE and FIX
Logical Ports, BOE Bulk Logical Ports, Drop Logical
Ports, Purge Ports, GRP Ports and Multicast PITCH/
Top Spin Server Ports. For each type of the
aforementioned logical ports that are used in the
production environment, the Exchange also offers
corresponding ports which provide Trading Permit
Holders and non-TPHs access to the Exchange’s
certification environment to test proprietary
systems and applications (i.e., ‘‘Certification Logical
Ports’’).
81 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 94512
(March 24, 2002), 87 FR 18425 (March 30, 2022)
(SR–Cboe–2022–011).
82 Id. at 18426.
83 Id. at 18426.
84 Id. at 18426.
85 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 94507
(March 24, 2002), 87 FR 18439 (March 30, 2022)
(SR–CboeBYX–2022–004).
86 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 94511
(March 24, 2002), 87 FR 18411 (March 30, 2022)
(SR–CboeBZX–2022–021).
87 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 94517
(March 25, 2002), 87 FR 18848 (March 31, 2022)
(SR–CboeBZX–2022–021).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:52 Oct 17, 2022
Jkt 259001
standard for SEC review and approval as
SR–MRX–2022–12[sic]. In summary,
MRX requests the Commission apply
the same standard of review to SR–
MRX–2022–12[sic] which was applied
to the various Cboe and Cboe affiliated
markets’ filings with respect to port fees.
If the Commission were to apply a
different standard of review to MRX–
2022–12[sic] than it applied to other
exchange fee filings it would create a
burden on competition such that it
would impair MRX’s ability to compete
among other options markets.
The Exchange does not believe that
the proposed rule change will impose
any intramarket burden on competition
not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
Only one order protocol is required to
submit orders to MRX, and the
Exchange proposes to offer the first FIX
Port and the first FIX Disaster Recovery
Port to Electronic Access Members at no
cost. This would provide Members with
the ability to continuously submit
orders to MRX, even in the event of a
failover. Likewise, only one quoting
protocol is required to submit quotes to
MRX, and the Exchange proposes to
offer the first SQF Port and the first SQF
Disaster Recovery Port to Market Makers
at no cost. This would provide Market
Makers with the ability to continuously
submit quotes to MRX, even in the event
of a failover. Only one account number
is necessary per Member and account
numbers are free.
As noted above, the remainder of the
proposed port fees are for optional ports
(additional FIX and SQF Ports,
additional FIX and SQF Disaster
Recovery Ports, SQF Purge Port, OTTO
Port, CTI Port, FIX DROP Port and
Disaster Recovery Ports for SQF Purge
Ports, OTTO Ports, CTI Ports, and FIX
DROP Ports). These different protocols
are not all necessary to conduct
business on MRX. Members choose
among the protocols based on their
business workflow. The proposed fees
do not impose an undue burden on
competition because the Exchange
would uniformly assess the port fees to
all Members and would uniformly apply
monthly caps. Market participants may
also connect to third parties instead of
directly to the Exchange.
With respect to the higher fees
assessed for SQF Ports and SQF Purge
Ports, the Exchange notes that only
Market Makers may utilize these ports.
Market Makers are required to provide
continuous two-sided quotes on a daily
basis,88 and are subject to various
obligations associated with providing
88 See
PO 00000
MRX Options 2, section 5.
Frm 00108
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
liquidity.89 As a result of these quoting
obligations, the SQF Port and SQF Purge
Port are designed to handle higher
throughput to permit Market Makers to
bundle orders to meet their obligations.
The technology to permit Market
Makers to submit a greater number of
quotes, in addition to the various risk
protections 90 afforded to these market
participants when quoting, accounts for
the higher SQF Port and SQF Purge Port
fees. Greater liquidity benefits all
market participants by providing more
trading opportunities and attracting
greater participation by Market Makers.
Also, an increase in the activity of
Market Makers in turn facilitates tighter
spreads.
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.91 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–
MRX–2022–20 on the subject line.
89 See
MRX Options 2, section 4.
MRX Options 3, section 15(a)(3). Market
Makers are offered risk protections to permit them
to manage their risk more effectively.
91 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
90 See
E:\FR\FM\18OCN1.SGM
18OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 18, 2022 / Notices
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–MRX–2022–20. 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–MRX–2022–20 and should
be submitted on or before November 8,
2022.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.92
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022–22557 Filed 10–17–22; 8:45 am]
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
92 17
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:52 Oct 17, 2022
Jkt 259001
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Investment Company Act Release No.
34727; File No. 812–15379]
63131
LLP US Bank Tower, 633 West 5th
Street, Suite 4900, Los Angeles, CA,
90071–2032.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Lincoln Variable Insurance Products
Trust and Lincoln Investment Advisors
Corporation
Deepak T. Pai, Senior Counsel, or Lisa
Reid Ragen, Branch Chief, at (202) 551–
6825 (Division of Investment
Management, Chief Counsel’s Office).
October 13, 2022.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Securities and Exchange
Commission (‘‘Commission’’ or ‘‘SEC’’).
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
Notice of an application under
Section 6(c) of the Investment Company
Act of 1940 (‘‘Act’’) for an exemption
from Section 15(c) of the Act.
Summary of Application: The
requested exemption would permit a
Trust’s board of trustees (the ‘‘Board’’)
to approve new sub-advisory
agreements and material amendments to
existing sub-advisory agreements
without complying with the in-person
meeting requirement of Section 15(c) of
the Act.
Applicants: Lincoln Variable
Insurance Products Trust (the ‘‘Trust’’),
and Lincoln Investment Advisors
Corporation (‘‘LIAC’’ or the ‘‘Adviser’’).
Filing Dates: The application was
filed on August 8, 2022, and amended
on September 30, 2022.
Hearing or Notification of Hearing: An
order granting the requested relief will
be issued unless the Commission orders
a hearing. Interested persons may
request a hearing on any application by
emailing the SEC’s Secretary at
Secretarys-Office@sec.gov and serving
the relevant applicant with a copy of the
request by email, if an email address is
listed for the relevant applicant below,
or personally or by mail, if a physical
address is listed for the relevant
applicant below.
Hearing requests should be received
by the Commission by 5:30 p.m. on
November 7, 2022, and should be
accompanied by proof of service on
applicants, in the form of an affidavit or,
for lawyers, a certificate of service.
Pursuant to rule 0–5 under the Act,
hearing requests should state the nature
of the writer’s interest, any facts bearing
upon the desirability of a hearing on the
matter, the reason for the request, and
the issues contested. Persons who wish
to be notified of a hearing may request
notification by emailing the
Commission’s Secretary.
ADDRESSES: The Commission:
Secretarys-Office@sec.gov. Applicants:
Ronald Holinsky, Esq., Lincoln
Investment Advisors Corporation, 150
N. Radnor-Chester Road, Radnor, PA
19087; Robert Robertson, Esq., Dechert
PO 00000
Frm 00109
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
For
Applicants’ representations, legal
analysis, and conditions, please refer to
Applicants’ first amended application,
dated September 30, 2022, which may
be obtained via the Commission’s
website by searching for the file number
at the top of this document, or for an
Applicant using the Company name
search field on the SEC’s EDGAR
system. The SEC’s EDGAR system may
be searched at https://www.sec.gov/
edgar/searchedgar/legacy/
companysearch.html. You may also call
the SEC’s Public Reference Room at
(202) 551–8090.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Investment Management, under delegated
authority.
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022–22629 Filed 10–17–22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–96047; File No. SR–MRX–
2022–19)
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq
MRX, LLC; Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed
Rule Change To Amend MRX’s Pricing
Schedule at Options 7, Section 5
Related to Membership Fees
October 12, 2022.
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 October
5, 2022, Nasdaq MRX, LLC (‘‘MRX’’ 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
2 17
E:\FR\FM\18OCN1.SGM
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
CFR 240.19b–4.
18OCN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 200 (Tuesday, October 18, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63119-63131]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-22557]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-96046; File No. SR-MRX-2022-20]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq MRX, LLC; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend MRX's
Pricing Schedule at Options 7, Section 6
October 12, 2022.
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 October 11, 2022, Nasdaq MRX, LLC (``MRX'' 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 MRX's Pricing Schedule at Options 7,
section 6.
The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at https://listingcenter.nasdaq.com/rulebook/mrx/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
MRX proposes to amend its Pricing Schedule at Options 7, section 6,
Ports and Other Services, to assess port fees, which were not assessed
until this year. Prior to this year, MRX did not assess its Members any
port fees. MRX launched its options market in 2016 \3\ And Members did
not pay any port fees until 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The Exchange initially filed the proposed pricing changes on
May 2, 2022 (SR-MRX-2022-04) instituting fees for membership, ports
and market data. On June 29, 2022, the Exchange withdrew that
filing, and submitted separate filings for membership, ports and
market data. SR-MRX-2022-06 replaced the port fees set forth in SR-
MRX-2022-04. SR-MRX-2022-06 was withdrawn on July 1, 2022 and
replaced with SR-MRX-2022-09. On August 25, 2022. SR-MRX-2022-09
which was withdrawn and replaced with SR-MRX-2022-12. The instant
filing replaces SR-MRX-2022-12 which was withdrawn on October 11,
2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposed changes are designed to update fees for MRX's services
to reflect their current value--rather than their value when it was
established six years ago--based on MRX's ability to deliver
[[Page 63120]]
value to its customers through technology, liquidity and functionality.
Newly-opened exchanges often charge no fees for certain services, such
as ports, in order to attract order flow to an exchange, and later
amend their fees to reflect the true value of those services.\4\
Allowing newly-opened exchanges time to build and sustain market share
before charging non-transactional fees encourages market entry and
promotes competition. The proposed port fees within Options 7, section
6, Ports and Other Services, are described below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release No 90076 (October
2, 2020), 85 FR 63620 (October 8, 2020) (Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Adopt the
Initial Fee Schedule and Other Fees for MEMX LLC).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This proposal reflects MRX's assessment that it has gained
sufficient market share to compete effectively against the other 15
options exchanges without waiving fees for ports. These types of fees
are assessed by options exchanges that compete with MRX in the sale of
exchange services--indeed, as of the date of the initial filing of
these port fees, MRX was the only options exchange (out of the 16
current options exchanges) not assessing port fees. New exchanges
commonly waive connectivity fees to attract market participants,
facilitating their entry into the market and, once there is sufficient
depth and breadth of liquidity, ``graduate'' to compete against
established exchanges and charge fees that reflect the value of their
services.\5\ If MRX is incorrect in this assessment, that error will be
reflected in MRX's ability to compete with other options exchanges.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ For example, MIAX Emerald commenced operations as a national
securities exchange registered on March 1, 2019. See Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 84891 (December 20, 2018), 83 FR 67421
(December 28, 2018) (File No. 10-233) (order approving application
of MIAX Emerald, LLC for registration as a national securities
exchange). MIAX Emerald filed to adopt its transaction fees and
certain of its non-transaction fees in its filing SR-EMERALD-2019-
15. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 85393 (March 21, 2019),
84 FR 11599 (March 27, 2019) (SR-EMERALD-2019-15) (Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Establish
the MIAX Emerald Fee Schedule). MIAX Emerald waived its one-time
application fee and monthly Trading Permit Fees assessable to EEMs
and Market Makers among other fees within SR-EMERALD-2019-15.
\6\ Nasdaq announced that, beginning in 2022, it plans to
migrate its North American markets to Amazon Web Services in a
phased approach, starting with MRX. The MRX migration will take
place in November 2022. The proposed fee changes are entirely
unrelated to this effort.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange proposes to amend fees for the following ports within
Options 7, section 6: (1) FIX,\7\ (2) SQF; \8\ (3) SQF Purge; \9\ (4)
OTTO; \10\ (5) CTI; \11\ (6) FIX DROP; \12\ and Disaster Recovery
Ports.\13\ Currently, no fees are being assessed for these ports.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ ``Financial Information eXchange'' or ``FIX'' is an
interface that allows Members and their Sponsored Customers to
connect, send, and receive messages related to orders and auction
orders to the Exchange. Features include the following: (1)
execution messages; (2) order messages; (3) risk protection triggers
and cancel notifications; and (4) post trade allocation messages.
See Supplementary Material .03(a) to Options 3, section 7.
\8\ ``Specialized Quote Feed'' or ``SQF'' is an interface that
allows Market Makers to connect, send, and receive messages related
to quotes, Immediate-or-Cancel Orders, and auction responses to the
Exchange. Features include the following: (1) options symbol
directory messages (e.g., underlying and complex instruments); (2)
system event messages (e.g., start of trading hours messages and
start of opening); (3) trading action messages (e.g., halts and
resumes); (4) execution messages; (5) quote messages; (6) Immediate-
or-Cancel Order messages; (7) risk protection triggers and purge
notifications; (8) opening imbalance messages; (9) auction
notifications; and (10) auction responses. The SQF Purge Interface
only receives and notifies of purge requests from the Market Maker.
Market Makers may only enter interest into SQF in their assigned
options series. See Supplementary Material .03(c) to Options 3,
section 7.
\9\ SQF Purge is a specific port for the SQF interface that only
receives and notifies of purge requests from the Market Maker.
Dedicated SQF Purge Ports enable Market Makers to seamlessly manage
their ability to remove their quotes in a swift manner.
\10\ ``Ouch to Trade Options'' or ``OTTO'' is an interface that
allows Members and their Sponsored Customers to connect, send, and
receive messages related to orders, auction orders, and auction
responses to the Exchange. Features include the following: (1)
options symbol directory messages (e.g., underlying and complex
instruments); (2) system event messages (e.g., start of trading
hours messages and start of opening); (3) trading action messages
(e.g., halts and resumes); (4) execution messages; (5) order
messages; (6) risk protection triggers and cancel notifications; (7)
auction notifications; (8) auction responses; and (9) post trade
allocation messages. See Supplementary Material .03(b) to Options 3,
section 7.
\11\ Clearing Trade Interface (``CTI'') is a real-time cleared
trade update message that is sent to a Member after an execution has
occurred and contains trade details specific to that Member. The
information includes, among other things, the following: (i) The
Clearing Member Trade Agreement (``CMTA'') or The Options Clearing
Corporation (``OCC'') number; (ii) badge or mnemonic; (iii) account
number; (iv) information which identifies the transaction type
(e.g., auction type) for billing purposes; and (v) market
participant capacity. See Options 3, section 23(b)(1).
\12\ FIX DROP is a real-time order and execution update message
that is sent to a Member after an order been received/modified or an
execution has occurred and contains trade details specific to that
Member. The information includes, among other things, the following:
(i) executions; (ii) cancellations; (iii) modifications to an
existing order; and (iv) busts or post-trade corrections. See
Options 3, section 23(b)(3).
\13\ Disaster Recovery ports provide connectivity to the
Exchange's disaster recovery data center, to be utilized in the
event the Exchange should failover during a trading day.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange proposes to assess no fee for the first FIX Port
obtained by an Electronic Access Member \14\ or the first SQF Port
obtained by a Market Maker.\15\ The Exchange proposes to assess a FIX
Port Fee of $650 per port, per month, per account number \16\ for each
subsequent port beyond the first port. The Exchange proposes to assess
an SQF Port Fee of $1,250 per port, per month for each subsequent port
beyond the first port.\17\ The Exchange proposes to assess an SQF Purge
Port Fee of $1,250 per port, per month. The Exchange proposes to assess
an OTTO Port Fee of $650 per port, per month, per account number. The
Exchange proposes to assess a CTI Port Fee and a FIX Drop Port Fee of
$650 per port, per month.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ The first FIX Port would be provided to each Electronic
Access Member. The term ``Electronic Access Member'' or ``EAM''
means a Member that is approved to exercise trading privileges
associated with EAM Rights. See General 1, section 1(a)(6). Also,
the first SQF Port would be provided to each Market Maker. The term
``Market Makers'' refers to ``Competitive Market Makers'' and
``Primary Market Makers'' collectively. See Options 1, section
1(a)(21). The term ``Competitive Market Maker'' means a Member that
is approved to exercise trading privileges associated with CMM
Rights. See Options 1, section 1(a)(12). The term ``Primary Market
Maker'' means a Member that is approved to exercise trading
privileges associated with PMM Rights. See Options 1, section
1(a)(35).
\15\ The first SQF Port would be provided to each Market Maker.
The term ``Market Makers'' refers to ``Competitive Market Makers''
and ``Primary Market Makers'' collectively. See Options 1, section
1(a)(21). The term ``Competitive Market Maker'' means a Member that
is approved to exercise trading privileges associated with CMM
Rights. See Options 1, section 1(a)(12). The term ``Primary Market
Maker'' means a Member that is approved to exercise trading
privileges associated with PMM Rights. See Options 1, section
1(a)(35).
\16\ An ``account number'' shall mean a number assigned to a
Member. Members may have more than one account number. See Options
1, section 1(a)(1). Account numbers are free on MRX.
\17\ SQF's Port Fees are assessed a higher dollar fee as
compared to FIX and OTTO ports ($1,250 vs. $650) because the
Exchange has to maintain options assignments within SQF and manage
quoting traffic. Market Makers may utilize SQF Ports in their
assigned options series. Market Maker badges are assigned to
specific SQF ports to manage the option series in which a Market
Maker may quote. Additionally, because of quoting obligations
provided for within Options 2, section 5, Market Makers are required
to provide liquidity in their assigned options series which
generates quote traffic. The Exchange notes because of the higher
fee, SQF ports are billed per port, per month while FIX and OTTO
ports are billed per port, per month, per account number. Members
may have more than one account number.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange proposes to assess no fee for the first FIX Disaster
Recovery Port obtained by an Electronic Access Member \18\ or the first
SQF Disaster
[[Page 63121]]
Recovery Port obtained by a Market Maker.\19\ The Exchange proposes to
assess each additional FIX Disaster Recovery Port and each additional
SQF Disaster Recovery Port a fee of $50 per port, per month, per
account number. Additionally, the Exchange proposes to assess a
Disaster Recovery Fee for SQF Purge and OTTO Ports of $50 per port, per
month, per account number. Finally, the Exchange proposes to assess a
Disaster Recovery Fee for CTI Ports and FIX DROP Ports of $50 per port,
per month.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ The first FIX Port would be provided to each Electronic
Access Member. The term ``Electronic Access Member'' or ``EAM''
means a Member that is approved to exercise trading privileges
associated with EAM Rights. See General 1, section 1(a)(6). Also,
the first SQF Port would be provided to each Market Maker. The term
``Market Makers'' refers to ``Competitive Market Makers'' and
``Primary Market Makers'' collectively. See Options 1, section
1(a)(21). The term ``Competitive Market Maker'' means a Member that
is approved to exercise trading privileges associated with CMM
Rights. See Options 1, section 1(a)(12). The term ``Primary Market
Maker'' means a Member that is approved to exercise trading
privileges associated with PMM Rights. See Options 1, section
1(a)(35).
\19\ The first SQF Port would be provided to each Market Maker.
The term ``Market Makers'' refers to ``Competitive Market Makers''
and ``Primary Market Makers'' collectively. See Options 1, section
1(a)(21). The term ``Competitive Market Maker'' means a Member that
is approved to exercise trading privileges associated with CMM
Rights. See Options 1, section 1(a)(12). The term ``Primary Market
Maker'' means a Member that is approved to exercise trading
privileges associated with PMM Rights. See Options 1, section
1(a)(35).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The OTTO Port, CTI Port, FIX Port, FIX Drop Port and all Disaster
Recovery Ports \20\ are available to all Electronic Access Members, and
will be subject to a monthly cap of $7,500.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ This includes FIX, SQF, SQF Purge, OTTO, CTI and FIX Drop
Disaster Recovery Ports.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The SQF Port and the SQF Purge Port are available to all Market
Makers, and will be subject to a monthly cap of $17,500.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ Only Market Makers may quote on MRX. The Exchange is
proposing non-substantive technical amendments to add commas within
the ``Production'' column of the proposed rule text to separate
terms.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange is not amending the TradeInfo MRX Interface \22\ or
the Nasdaq MRX Depth of Market, Nasdaq MRX Order Feed, Nasdaq MRX Top
Quote Feed, Nasdaq MRX Trades Feed, or Nasdaq MRX Spread Feed Ports;
all of these aforementioned ports will continue to be assessed no fees.
Additionally, as is the case today, the Disaster Recovery Ports for
TradeInfo and the Nasdaq MRX Depth of Market, Nasdaq MRX Order Feed,
Nasdaq MRX Top Quote Feed, Nasdaq MRX Trades Feed and Nasdaq MRX Spread
Feed Ports will not be assessed a fee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ TradeInfo is a user interface that permits a Member to: (i)
search all orders submitted in a particular security or all orders
of a particular type, regardless of their status (open, canceled,
executed, etc.); (ii) view orders and executions; and (iii) download
orders and executions for recordkeeping purposes. TradeInfo users
may also cancel open orders at the order, port or firm mnemonic
level through TradeInfo. See Options 3, section 23(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order and Quote Entry Protocols
Only one order protocol is required for an MRX Member to submit
orders into MRX. The Exchange will provide each Electronic Access
Member the first FIX Port at no cost to submit orders into MRX. Only
one account number is necessary to transact an options business on MRX
and account numbers are available to Members at no cost. Only one quote
protocol is required for an MRX Market Maker to submit quotes into MRX.
The Exchange will provide each Market Maker the first SQF Port at no
cost to submit quotes into MRX. A quoting protocol, such as SQF, is
only required to the extent an MRX Member has been appointed as a
Market Maker in an options series pursuant to Options 2, section 1.
Only MRX Members may utilize ports on MRX. Any market participant
that sends orders to a Member would not need to utilize a port. The
Member can send all orders, proprietary and agency, through one port to
MRX. Members may elect to obtain multiple account numbers to organize
their business, however only one account number and one port for orders
and one port for quotes is necessary for a Member to trade on MRX.
MRX also offers an OTTO protocol. Unlike FIX, which offers routing
capability, OTTO does not permit routing. Depending on a Member's
business model, Members may elect to purchase an OTTO Port in addition
to the first FIX Port offered at no cost. Members may prefer one
protocol as compared to another protocol, for example, the ability to
route may cause a Member to utilize FIX and a Member that desires to
execute an order locally may utilize OTTO. Also, the OTTO Port offers
lower latency as compared to the FIX Port, which may be attractive to
Members depending on their trading behavior. MRX Members utilizing the
first FIX Port offered at no cost do not need to purchase an OTTO Port.
However, Members may elect to utilize both order entry protocols,
depending on how they organize their business. Because the Exchange is
providing the first FIX Port at no cost, the use of an OTTO Port is
optional. OTTO provides MRX Members with an additional choice as to the
type of protocol that they may use to submit orders to the Exchange.
Today, Nasdaq Phlx LLC (``Phlx'') and Nasdaq BX, Inc. (``BX'') offer
only a FIX Port to submit orders on those options markets.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ See Phlx and BX Options 3, section 7 for a list of
protocols.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Further, while only one protocol is necessary to submit orders into
MRX, Members may choose to purchase a greater number of order entry
ports, depending on that Member's business model.\24\ To the extent
that Electronic Access Members chose to utilize more than one FIX Port,
the Electronic Access Member would be assessed $650 per port, per
month, per account number for each subsequent optional port beyond the
first port. To the extent that Market Makers chose to utilize more than
one SQF Port, the Market Maker would be assessed $1,250 per port, per
month for each subsequent optional port beyond the first port.
Additionally, to the extent a Member expended more than $7,500 for FIX
Ports or more than $17,500 for SQF Ports, the Exchange would not charge
an MRX Member for additional FIX or SQF Ports, respectively, beyond the
cap.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ For example, a Member may desire to utilize multiple FIX or
OTTO Ports for accounting purposes, to measure performance, for
regulatory reasons or other determinations that are specific to that
Member.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other Protocols
The Exchange's proposal to offer an SQF Purge Port for $1,250 per
port, per month is optional. The SQF Purge Port is designed to assist
Market Makers in the management of, and risk control over, their
quotes. Market Makers may utilize a purge port to reduce uncertainty
and to manage risk by purging all quotes in their assigned options
series. Of note, Market Makers may only enter interest into SQF in
their assigned options series. Additionally, the SQF Purge Port may be
utilized by a Market Maker in the event that the Member has a system
issue and determines to purge its quotes from the order book. The SQF
Purge Port is optional as Market Makers have various ways of purging
their quotes from the order book. First of all, a Market Maker may
cancel quotes through SQF in their assigned option series.\25\ Second,
a Member may cancel any bids or offers in any series of options by
requesting MRX Market Operations staff to effect such cancellation as
per the instructions of the Member.\26\ Third, in the event of a loss
of communication with the Exchange, MRX offers the ability to cancel
all of a Member's open quotes via a cancel-on-disconnect control.\27\
Fourth, MRX offers Market Makers the ability, with respect to quotes,
to establish pre-determined levels of risk exposure which would be
utilized to automatically remove quotes in all
[[Page 63122]]
series of an options class.\28\ Accordingly, the Exchange believes that
the SQF Purge Port provides an efficient option to other available
services which allow a Market Maker to cancel quotes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ SQF Purge Ports, similar to SQF Ports, allow Market Makers
to mass cancel quotes.
\26\ See Options 3, section 19, Mass Cancellation of Trading
Interest.
\27\ See MRX Options 3, section 18, Detection of Loss. This risk
protection is free.
\28\ See MRX Options 3, section 15(a)(3)(B). Thresholds may be
set by Members based on percentage, volume, delta or vega. This risk
protection is free.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CTI Ports and FIX DROP Ports are optional as Members have multiple
ways of receiving information concerning open orders and executed
transactions. First, FIX and OTTO protocols provide Members with real-
time order execution messages similar to the Clearing Trade Interface
and FIX DROP. Second, TradeInfo provides Members with the ability to
query open orders and order executions real-time, at no cost, similar
to the Clearing Trade Interface and FIX DROP. Third, Members receive
free daily reports listing open orders and trade executions from the
Exchange. While not real-time, the Open Orders Report and Trade Detail
Report provide Members with information similar to the Clearing Trade
Interface and FIX DROP.
Disaster Recovery
With respect to Disaster Recovery Ports, the Exchange proposes to
assess no fee for the first FIX Disaster Recovery Port obtained by an
Electronic Access Member or the first SQF Disaster Recovery Port
obtained by a Market Maker. The Exchange proposes to assess no fees for
these ports to provide Members with continuous access to MRX in the
event of a failover at no cost. Electronic Access Members only require
one FIX Disaster Recovery Port to submit orders in the event of a
failover. Market Makers only require one SQF Disaster Recovery Port to
submit quotes in the event of a failover. Electronic Access Members may
elect to purchase additional optional FIX Disaster Recovery Ports for
$50 per port, per month, per account number. Market Makers may elect to
purchase additional optional SQF Disaster Recovery Ports for $50 per
port, per month, per account number. The additional FIX and SQF
Disaster Recovery Ports are not necessary to connect to the Exchange in
the event of a failover because the Exchange has provided Members with
a FIX Disaster Recovery Port and an SQF Disaster Recovery Port at no
cost.
Further, the Exchange's proposal to offer Disaster Recovery Ports
for SQF Purge Ports and OTTO Ports for $50 per port, per month, per
account number and Disaster Recovery Ports for CTI Ports and FIX DROP
Ports for $50 per port, per month is optional. As noted herein, today,
there are other alternatives for these ports. The purchase of an SQF
Purge Port, OTTO Port, CTI Port, and FIX DROP Port in production are
optional and, therefore, so is the purchase of Disaster Recovery Ports
for these ports. The proposed Disaster Recovery Port fees are intended
to encourage Members to be efficient when purchasing Disaster Recovery
Ports. Similar to all other ports, Disaster Recovery Ports need to be
maintained by the Exchange.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ The Exchange maintains ports in a number of ways to ensure
that ports are properly connected to the Exchange at all times. This
includes offering testing, ensuring all ports are up-to-date with
the latest code releases, as well as ensuring that all ports meet
the Exchange's information security specifications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, in the event that an MRX Member elects to subscribe to
multiple ports, the Exchange offers a monthly cap beyond which a Member
would be assessed no additional port fees in a given month. As noted
above, the SQF Port and the SQF Purge Port are subject to a monthly cap
of $17,500 and the OTTO Port, CTI Port, FIX Port, FIX Drop Port and all
Disaster Recovery Ports are subject to a monthly cap of $7,500.
As noted herein, these different protocols are not all necessary to
conduct business on MRX; a Member may choose among protocols based on
their business workflow. The proposed port fees are similar to fees
assessed today by GEMX.\30\ The Exchange's proposal to offer the first
FIX and SQF Port at no cost as well as the first FIX and SQF Disaster
Recovery Ports at no cost would allow MRX Members to submit orders and
quotes into MRX at no cost.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ See GEMX Options 7, section 6.C. (Ports and Other
Services).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with section
6(b) of the Act,\31\ in general, and furthers the objectives of
sections 6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the Act,\32\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ See 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
\32\ See 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposed changes to the Pricing Schedule are reasonable in
several respects. As a threshold matter, the Exchange is subject to
significant competitive forces in the market for order flow, which
constrains its pricing determinations. The fact that the market for
order flow is competitive has long been recognized by the courts. In
NetCoalition v. Securities and Exchange Commission, the D.C. Circuit
stated, ``[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' . . . .'' \33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ See NetCoalition, 615 F.3d at 539 (D.C. 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 to determine
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 broader forms that are most
important to investors and listed companies.'' \34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005) (``Regulation NMS Adopting
Release'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Congress directed the Commission to ``rely on `competition,
whenever possible, in meeting its regulatory responsibilities for
overseeing the SROs and the national market system.' '' \35\ As a
result, the Commission has historically relied on competitive forces to
determine whether a fee proposal is equitable, fair, reasonable, and
not unreasonably or unfairly discriminatory. ``If competitive forces
are operative, the self-interest of the exchanges themselves will work
powerfully to constrain unreasonable or unfair behavior.'' \36\
Accordingly, ``the existence of significant competition provides a
substantial basis for finding that the terms of an exchange's fee
proposal are equitable, fair, reasonable, and not unreasonably or
unfairly discriminatory.'' \37\ In its 2019 guidance
[[Page 63123]]
on fee proposals, Commission staff indicated that they would look at
factors beyond the competitive environment, such as cost, only if a
``proposal lacks persuasive evidence that the proposed fee is
constrained by significant competitive forces.'' \38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ See NetCoalition, 615 F.3d at 534-35; see also H.R. Rep.
No. 94-229 at 92 (1975) (``[I]t is the intent of the conferees that
the national market system evolve through the interplay of
competitive forces as unnecessary regulatory restrictions are
removed.'').
\36\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59039 (December 2,
2008), 73 FR 74,770 (December 9, 2008) (SR-NYSEArca-2006-21).
\37\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
History of MRX Operations
Over the years, MRX has amended its transactional pricing to remain
competitive and attract order flow to the Exchange.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ See U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, ``Staff
Guidance on SRO Rule filings Relating to Fees'' (May 21, 2019),
available at https://www.sec.gov/tm/staff-guidance-sro-rule-filings-fees.
\39\ See e.g. Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 77292 (March
4, 2016), 81 FR 12770 (March 10, 2016) (SR-ISEMercury-2016-02)
(Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule
Change To Establish the Schedule of Fees); 77409 (March 21, 2016),
81 FR 16240 (March 25, 2016) (SR-ISEMercury-2016-05) (Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend
the Schedule of Fees); 81 FR 16238 (March 21, 2016), 81 FR 16238
(March 25, 2016) (SR-ISEMercury-2016-06) (Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend the
Schedule of Fees); 77841 (May 16, 2016), 81 FR 31986 (SR-ISEMercury-
2016-11) (Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed
Rule Change To Amend the Schedule of Fees); 82537 (January 19,
2018), 83 FR 3784 (January 26, 2018) (SR-MRX-2018-01) (Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend
the Schedule of Fees To Introduce a New Pricing Model); 82990 (April
4, 2018), 83 FR 15434 (April 10, 2018) (SR-MRX-2018-10) (Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend
Chapter IV of the Exchange's Schedule of Fees); 28677 (June 14,
2018), 83 FR 28677 (June 20, 2018) (SR-MRX-2018-19) (Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Increase Certain Route-Out Fees Set Forth in section II.A of the
Schedule of Fees); 84113 (September 13, 2018), 83 FR 47386
(September 19, 2018) (SR-MRX-2018-27) (Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Relocate the
Exchange's Schedule of Fees); 85143 (February 14, 2019), 84 FR 5508
(February 21, 2019) (SR-MRX-2019-02) (Notice of Filing and Immediate
Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Pricing
Schedule at Options 7, section 3); 85313 (March 14, 2019), 84 FR
10357 (March 20, 2019) (SR-MRX-2019-05) (Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Relating to PIM
Fees and Rebates); 86326 (July 8, 2019), 84 FR 33300 (July 12, 2019)
(SR-MRX-2019-14) (Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a
Proposed Rule Change To Adopt Complex Order Pricing); 88022 (January
23, 2020), 85 FR 5263 (January 29, 2020) (SR-MRX-2020-02) (Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend
MRX Pricing Schedule); 89046 (June 11, 2020), 85 FR 36633 (June 17,
2020) (SR-MRX-2020-11) (Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness
of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Its Pricing Schedule at Options 7);
89320 (July 15, 2020), 85 FR 44135 (July 21, 2020) (SR-MRX-2020-14)
(Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule
Change To Amend Its Pricing Schedule at Options 7, section 5, Other
Options Fees and Rebates, in Connection With the Pricing for Orders
Entered Into the Exchanges Price Improvement Mechanism); 90503
(November 24, 2020), 85 FR 77317 (December 1, 2020) (SR-MRX-2020-18)
(Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule
Change To Amend Its Pricing Schedule at Options 7 for Orders Entered
Into the Exchange's Price Improvement Mechanism); 90434 (November
16, 2020), 85 FR 74473 (November 20, 2020) (SR-MRX-2020-19) (Notice
of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To the
Exchange's Pricing Schedule at Options 7 To Amend Taker Fees for
Regular Orders); 90455 (November 18, 2020), 85 FR 75064 (November
24, 2020) (SR-MRX-2020-21) (Notice of Filing and Immediate
Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Pricing
Schedule); and 91687 (April 27, 2021), 86 FR 23478 (May 3, 2021)
(SR-MRX-2021-04) (Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of
Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Exchange's Pricing Schedule at
Options 7). Note that ISE Mercury is an earlier name for MRX.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In June 2019, MRX commenced offering complex orders.\40\ With the
addition of complex order functionality, MRX offered Members certain
order types, an opening process, auction capabilities and other trading
functionality that was nearly identical to functionality available on
ISE.\41\ By way of comparison, ISE assessed fees for ports \42\ in 2019
while offering the same suite of functionality as MRX, with a limited
exception.\43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\40\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 86326 (July 8,
2019), 84 FR 33300 (July 12, 2019) (SR-MRX-2019-14) (Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change to
Adopt Complex Order Pricing).
\41\ One distinction is that ISE offered its Members access to
Nasdaq Precise in 2019 and since that time. MRX has never offered
Precise. ``Nasdaq Precise'' or ``Precise'' is a front-end interface
that allows EAMs and their Sponsored Customers to send orders to the
Exchange and perform other related functions. Features include the
following: (1) order and execution management: enter, modify, and
cancel orders on the Exchange, and manage executions (e.g., parent/
child orders, inactive orders, and post-trade allocations); (2)
market data: access to real-time market data (e.g., NBBO and
Exchange BBO); (3) risk management: set customizable risk parameters
(e.g., kill switch); and (4) book keeping and reporting:
comprehensive audit trail of orders and trades (e.g., order history
and done away trade reports). See ISE Supplementary Material .03(d)
of Options 3, section 7. Precise is also available on GEMX.
\42\ Since 2019, ISE has assessed the following port fees: a FIX
Port Fee of $300 per port, per month, per mnemonic, an SQF Port Fee
and SQF Purge Port Fee of $1,100 per port, per month, an OTTO Port
Fee of $400 per port, per month, per mnemonic with a monthly cap of
$4,000, a CTI Port Fee and FIX DROP Port Fee of $500 per port, per
month, per mnemonic. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 82568
(January 23, 2018), 83 FR 4086 (January 29, 2018) (SR-ISE-2018-07)
(Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule
Change To Assess Fees for OTTO Port, CTI Port, FIX Port, FIX Drop
Port and Disaster Recovery Port Connectivity). Of note, ISE assessed
port fees prior to 2019 as well.
\43\ See note 41, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ports Are Subject to Significant Substitution-Based Competitive Forces
An exchange can show that a product is ``subject to significant
substitution-based competitive forces'' by introducing evidence that
customers can substitute the product for products offered by other
exchanges.
Chart 1 below shows the January 2022 market share for multiply-
listed options by exchange. Of the 16 operating options exchanges, none
currently has more than a 13.1% market share, and MRX has the smallest
market share at 1.8%. Customers widely distribute their transactions
across exchanges according to their business needs and the ability of
each exchange to meet those needs through technology, liquidity and
functionality. Average market share for the 16 options exchanges is
6.26 percent, with the median at 5.8, and a range between 1.8 and 13.1
percent.
[[Page 63124]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN18OC22.021
Market share is the percentage of volume on a particular exchange
relative to the total volume across all exchanges, and indicates the
amount of order flow directed to that exchange. High levels of market
share enhance the value of trading and ports.
As described in detail below, only one order protocol is required
to submit orders to MRX. Quoting protocols are only required to the
extent an MRX Member has been appointed as a Market Maker in an options
series pursuant to Options 2, section 1, and only one quoting protocol
is necessary to quote on MRX. Members may choose a greater number of
order or quote entry ports, beyond the first FIX Port and the first SQF
Port which are proposed to be offered at no cost, depending on that
Member's particular business model.\44\ However, Members do not need
more than one order entry port (and account number) and one quote port
to submit interest to MRX.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\44\ For example, a Member may desire to utilize multiple FIX
ports for accounting purposes, to measure performance, for
regulatory reasons or other determinations that are specific to that
Member.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The experience of MRX's affiliates shows that the number of ports
that members choose to purchase varies widely. For example, a review of
the Phlx exchange in April 2022 shows that, among its member
organizations that purchase ports, approximately 26 percent purchased 1
SQF or FIX port, another 26 percent purchased between 2 and 5 ports, 21
percent purchased between 6 and 10 ports, and 28 percent purchased more
than 11 ports. This means that any MRX Member may enter all of their
interest (orders or quotes) with only one order and one quote port and
remain competitive.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\45\ As noted above, one port would be required to submit orders
and one port would be required to submit quotes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
By way of comparison, the number of ports that MRX Members
purchased in April 2022 also varied widely.
[[Page 63125]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN18OC22.022
Chart 2 indicates the number of FIX and SQF Ports, respectively,
that MRX Members were subscribed to in April 2022. Chart 2 shows that 1
MRX Member only subscribed to 1 SQF Port and 3 MRX Members subscribed
to 1 FIX Port.
Further, approximately 23 percent of MRX Members purchased 1 SQF,
FIX or OTTO Port,\46\ another 43 percent purchased between 2 and 5
ports, 13 percent purchased between 6 and 10 ports, and 20 percent
purchased more than 11 ports. MRX Members, similar to Phlx member
organizations, have the option of reducing their port purchases without
purchasing a substitute product.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\46\ Phlx only offers FIX and SQF ports while MRX offers FIX,
OTTO and SQF ports for order and quote entry.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
All of these statistics must be viewed in the context of a field
with relatively low barriers to entry. MRX, like many new entrants to
the field, offered ports for free to establish itself and gain market
share. As new entrants enter the field, MRX can also expect competition
from these new entrants. Those new entrants, like MRX, are likely to
set port, or other fees to zero, increasing marketplace competition.
The Exchange notes that one MRX Member cancelled 1 SQF Port and 1
OTTO Port to avoid being assessed an SQF Port fee as of May 2,
2022.\47\ As of July 1, 2022, the Exchange did not assess MRX Members
for their first SQF Port. MRX port fees are subject to significant
substitution-based competitive forces due to its consistently low
percentage of market share, the relatively small number of purchasers
for each product, and the purchasers that either cancelled or are
reviewing their subscriptions. Implementation of the proposed fees is
therefore consistent with the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\47\ MRX originally filed to assess a fee for all FIX Ports.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fees for Ports
The proposed port fees described below are in line with those of
other markets. Setting a fee above competitors is likely to drive away
customers, so the most efficient price-setting strategy is to set
prices at the same level as other firms.
As noted above, market participants may choose to become a member
of one or more options exchanges based on the market participant's
business model. The Exchange believes that there are many factors that
may cause a market participant to decide to become a member of a
particular exchange dependent upon their business model. A very small
number of market participants choose to become a member of all sixteen
options exchanges. It is not a requirement for market participants to
become members of all options exchanges, in fact, certain market
participants conduct an options business as a member of only one
options market.\48\ Most firms that actively trade on options markets
are not currently Members of MRX and do not purchase port services at
MRX. Ports are only available to MRX Members or service bureaus, and
only an MRX Member may utilize a port.\49\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\48\ BOX Exchange LLC (``BOX'') amended its fees on January 3,
2022 to adopt an electronic market maker trading permit fee. See
Securities and Exchange Release No. 94894 (May 11, 2022), 87 FR
29987 (May 17, 2022) (SR-BOX-2022-17) (Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Fee
Schedule on the BOX Options Market LLC Facility To Adopt Electronic
Market Maker Trading Permit Fees). In the BOX-2022-17 rule change,
BOX stated that, ``. . . it is not aware of any reason why Market
Makers could not simply drop their access to an exchange (or not
initially access an exchange) if an exchange were to establish
prices for its non-transaction fees that, in the determination of
such Market Maker, did not make business or economic sense for such
Market Maker to access such exchange. The Exchange again notes that
no market makers are required by rule, regulation, or competitive
forces to be a Market Maker on the Exchange.'' Further, in 2022,
MEMX LLC (``MEMX'') established a monthly membership fee. See
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 93927 (January 7, 2022), 87 FR
2191 (January 13, 2022) (SR-MEMX-2021-19). The Monthly Membership
Fee is assessed to each active Member at the close of business on
the first day of each month. MEMX reasoned in MEMX-2022-19 that that
there is value in becoming a member of the exchange. MEMX stated
that it believed that its proposed membership fee ``is not unfairly
discriminatory because no broker-dealer is required to become a
member of the Exchange.'' Moreover, ``neither the trade-through
requirements under Regulation NMS nor broker-dealers' best execution
obligations require a broker-dealer to become a member of every
exchange.'' The Exchange notes that neither BOX-2022-17 or MEMX-
2022-19 were suspended.
\49\ Service bureaus may obtain ports on behalf of Members. The
Exchange would only assign a badge and/or mnemonic to a Member to be
utilized to submit quotes and/or orders to the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Using options markets that Nasdaq operates as points of comparison,
less
[[Page 63126]]
than a third of the firms that are members of at least one of the
options markets that Nasdaq operates are also Members of MRX
(approximately 29%). MRX, like other options markets, has a mix of
market participants as Members. Chart 3 below displays the percentage
of Electronic Access Members, Market Makers and Clearing Firms on
MRX.\50\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\50\ Of note, Nasdaq Execution Services, LLC (``NES''), a Nasdaq
affiliate, is a Member of MRX. NES is a broker-dealer and the
Routing Facility of the Exchange. NES routes orders in options
listed and open for trading on the System to away markets either
directly or through one or more third-party unaffiliated routing
broker-dealers pursuant to Exchange Rules on behalf of the Exchange.
NES is subject to regulation as a facility of the Exchange,
including the requirement to file proposed rule changes under
section 19 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN18OC22.023
The percentages in Chart 3 represent percentages of the total
number of MRX Members. Some Members have dual representations (e.g., a
Market Maker and Electronic Access Member) as reflected in Chart 2.
The Exchange notes that no firm is a Member of MRX only. Few, if
any, firms have purchased port services at MRX, notwithstanding the
fact that ports are currently free, because MRX currently has less
liquidity than other options markets. As explained above, MRX has the
smallest market share of the 16 options exchanges, representing only
approximately 1.8% of the market, and, for certain market participants,
the current levels of liquidity may be insufficient to justify the
costs associated with becoming a Member and connecting to the Exchange,
notwithstanding the fact that ports are currently free.
The decision to become a member of an exchange, particularly for
registered market makers, is complex, and not solely based on the non-
transactional costs assessed by an exchange. As noted herein, specific
factors include, but are not limited to: (i) an exchange's available
liquidity in options series; (ii) trading functionality offered on a
particular market; (iii) product offerings; (iv) customer service on an
exchange; and (v) transactional pricing. Becoming a member of the
exchange does not ``lock'' a potential member into a market or diminish
the overall competition for exchange services. The decision to become a
member of an exchange is made at the beginning of the relationship, and
is no less subject to competition than trading fees or ports.
In lieu of becoming a member at each options exchange, a market
participant may join one exchange and elect to have their orders routed
in the event that a better price is available on an away market.
Nothing in the Order Protection Rule requires a firm to become a Member
at MRX.\51\ If MRX is not at the NBBO, MRX will route an order to any
away market that is at the NBBO to prevent a trade-through and also
ensure that the order was executed at a superior price.\52\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\51\ See Options Order Protection and Locked/Crossed Market Plan
(August 14, 2009), available at https://www.theocc.com/getmedia/7fc629d9-4e54-4b99-9f11-c0e4db1a2266/options_order_protection_plan.pdf.
\52\ MRX Members may elect to not route their orders by marking
an order as ``do-not-route.'' In this case, the order would not be
routed. See Options 3, section 7(m).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With respect to the submission of orders, Members may also choose
not to purchase any port at all from the Exchange, and instead rely on
the port of a third party to submit an order.\53\ For example, a third-
party broker-dealer Member of MRX may be utilized by a retail investor
to submit orders into an Exchange. An institutional investor may
utilize a broker-dealer, a service bureau,\54\ or request sponsored
access \55\ through a member of an exchange in order to submit a trade
directly to an options exchange.\56\ A market participant may either
pay the costs associated with becoming a member of an exchange or, in
the alternative, a market participant may elect to pay commissions to a
broker-dealer, pay fees
[[Page 63127]]
to a service bureau to submit trades, or pay a member to sponsor the
market participant in order to submit trades directly to an exchange.
Market participants may elect any of the above models and weigh the
varying costs when determining how to submit trades to an exchange.
Depending on the number of orders to be submitted, technology, ability
to control submission of orders, and projected revenues, a market
participant may determine one model is more cost efficient as compared
to the alternatives.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\53\ Market Makers on MRX are required to obtain one SQF port to
submit quotes into MRX.
\54\ Service bureaus provide access to market participants to
submit and execute orders on an exchange. On MRX, a Service Bureau
may be a Member. Some MRX Members utilize a Service Bureau for
connectivity and that Service Bureau may not be a Member. Some
market participants utilize a Service Bureau who is a Member to
submit orders. As noted herein only MRX Members may submit orders or
quotes through ports.
\55\ Sponsored Access is an arrangement whereby a member permits
its customers to enter orders into an exchange's system that bypass
the member's trading system and are routed directly to the Exchange,
including routing through a service bureau or other third-party
technology provider.
\56\ This may include utilizing a Floor Broker and submitting
the trade to one of the five options trading floors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Only if a market participant elects to become a Member of MRX will
the market participant need to utilize a port to submit orders and/or
quotes into MRX. Once an applicant is approved for membership on MRX
and becomes a Member, the Exchange assigns the Member a badge \57\ and/
or mnemonic \58\ to submit quotes and/or orders to the Exchange through
the applicable port. An MRX Member may have one or more accounts
numbers and may assign badges or mnemonics to those account
numbers.\59\ Membership approval grants a Member a right to exercise
trading privileges on MRX, which includes the submission of orders and/
or quotes into the Exchange through a secure port by utilizing the
badge and/or mnemonic assigned to a specific Member by the Exchange.
The Exchange utilizes ports as a secure method for Members to submit
orders and/or quotes into the Exchange's match engine and for the
Exchange to send messages related to those orders and/or quotes to its
Members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\57\ A ``badge'' shall mean an account number, which may contain
letters and/or numbers, assigned to Market Makers. A Market Maker
account may be associated with multiple badges. See MRX Options 1,
section 1(a)(5).
\58\ A ``mnemonic'' shall mean an acronym comprised of letters
and/or numbers assigned to Electronic Access Members. An Electronic
Access Member account may be associated with multiple mnemonics. See
MRX Options 1, section 1(a)(23).
\59\ The Exchange provides account numbers, badges and mnemonics
at no cost.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
MRX is obligated to regulate its Members and secure access to its
environment. In order to properly regulate its Members and secure the
trading environment, MRX takes measures to ensure access is monitored
and maintained with various controls. Ports are a method utilized by
the Exchange to grant Members secure access to communicate with the
Exchange and exercise trading rights. When a market participant elects
to be a Member of MRX, and is approved for membership by MRX, the
Member is granted trading rights to enter orders and/or quotes into MRX
through secure ports.
As noted herein, there is no legal or regulatory requirement that a
market participant become a Member of MRX, or, if it is a Member, to
purchase port services beyond the one quoting protocol or one order
entry protocol necessary to quote or submit orders on MRX. The Exchange
proposes to offer the first FIX and SQF Port at no cost in addition to
the first FIX Disaster Recovery Port and the first SQF Disaster
Recovery Port at no cost.\60\ As noted above, Members may freely choose
to rely on one or many ports, depending on their business model.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\60\ Only Members and service bureaus may request ports on MRX,
and only Members may utilize ports on MRX through their assigned
badge or mnemonic. See Options 1, section 1(a)(5) and (23).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange's proposal to amend port fees is reasonable, equitable
and not unfairly discriminatory as MRX is providing MRX Electronic
Access Members the first FIX Port to submit orders and MRX Market
Makers the first SQF Port to submit quotes to MRX, at no cost, in
addition to providing the first FIX Disaster Recovery Port and the
first SQF Disaster Recovery Port at no cost; all other ports offered by
MRX are optional and not necessary to trade options on the Exchange.
The proposed fees reflect the ongoing services provided to maintain
and support the ports. In order to submit orders into MRX, only one
order protocol is required, and MRX is providing Electronic Access
Members the first FIX Port at no cost. Quoting protocols are only
required to the extent an MRX Member has been appointed as a Market
Maker in an options series pursuant to Options 2, section 1. Similarly,
only one quoting protocol is necessary to quote on MRX and MRX is
providing Market Makers the first SQF Port at no cost. As noted above,
only Members may utilize ports. A Member can send all orders,
proprietary and agency, through one port to MRX and all quotes through
one port. Therefore, for the foregoing reasons, it is reasonable to
assess no fee for the first FIX Port obtained by an Electronic Access
Member or the first SQF Port obtained by a Market Maker. Further it is
equitable and not unfairly discriminatory to assess no fee for the
first FIX Port to Electronic Access Members as all Electronic Access
Members would be entitled to the first FIX Port at no cost. Also, it is
equitable and not unfairly discriminatory to assess no fee for the
first SQF Port to Market Makers as all Market Makers would be entitled
to the first SQF Port at no cost. With this proposal, MRX Members may
organize their business in such a way as to submit orders and/or quotes
continuously to MRX at no cost.
The Exchange's proposal to assess Members $650 per port, per month,
per account number for FIX Ports beyond the first port and $1,250 per
port, per month for SQF Ports beyond the first port is reasonable
because these ports are optional and Members only require one FIX Port
to submit orders to MRX and one SQF Port to submit quotes to MRX.
Members electing to subscribe to more than one FIX or SQF Port are
choosing the additional ports to accommodate their business model.
Additionally, to the extent a Member expended more than $7,500 for FIX
Ports or more than $17,500 for SQF Ports, the Exchange would not charge
an MRX Member for additional FIX or SQF Ports beyond the cap. The fees
for the proposed additional FIX and SQF Ports are equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory because any Member may elect to subscribe to
additional ports. Electronic Access Members would be subject to the
same fees for FIX Ports and Market Makers would be subject to the same
fees for SQF Ports. Unlike other market participants, Market Makers are
required to provide continuous two-sided quotes on a daily basis,\61\
and are subject to various obligations associated with providing
liquidity.\62\ Also, as noted herein, account numbers are available on
MRX at no cost.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\61\ See MRX Options 2, section 5.
\62\ See MRX Options 2, section 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange's proposal to assess $650 per port, per month, per
account number for an OTTO Port is reasonable because OTTO is optional.
The Exchange is offering the first FIX Port at no cost to submit orders
to MRX. In addition to the FIX Port, all Members may elect to purchase
OTTO to submit orders to MRX. Unlike FIX, which offers routing
capability, OTTO does not permit routing. Depending on a Member's
business model, Members may elect to purchase an OTTO Port in addition
to the FIX Port, which is being provided at no cost. Members may prefer
one protocol as compared to another protocol. For example, the ability
to route may cause a Member to utilize FIX and a Member that desires to
execute an order locally may utilize OTTO. Also, the OTTO Port offers
lower latency as compared to the FIX Port, which may be attractive to
Members depending on their trading behavior. MRX Members utilizing the
FIX Port, which is offered at no cost, do not need to utilize OTTO.
Members may elect to utilize both order entry protocols, depending on
how they organize their
[[Page 63128]]
business. OTTO provides MRX Members with an additional choice as to the
type of protocol that they may use to submit orders to the Exchange.
Today, Phlx and BX offer only a FIX Port to submit orders on those
options markets.\63\ The proposed OTTO fee is equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory because any Member may elect to purchase an
optional OTTO Port and would be subject to the same fee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\63\ See Phlx and BX Options 3, section 7 for a list of
protocols.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange's proposal to offer an SQF Purge Port for $1,250 per
port, per month is reasonable because this port is optional. The SQF
Purge Port is designed to assist Market Makers in the management of,
and risk control over, their quotes. Market Makers may utilize a purge
port to reduce uncertainty and to manage risk by purging all quotes in
their assigned options series. Of note, Market Makers may only enter
interest into SQF in their assigned options series. Additionally, the
SQF Purge Port may be utilized by a Market Maker in the event that the
Member has a system issue and determines to purge from the order book.
The SQF Purge Port is optional as Market Makers have various ways of
purging their quotes from the order book. First of all, a Market Maker
may cancel quotes through SQF in their assigned options series in the
same manner as they may cancel quotes with an SQF Purge Port.\64\
Second, a Member may cancel any bids or offers in any series of options
by requesting MRX Market Operations staff to effect such cancellation
as per the instructions of the Member.\65\ Third, in the event of a
loss of communication with the Exchange, MRX offers the ability to
cancel all of a Member's open quotes via a cancel-on-disconnect
control.\66\ Fourth, MRX offers Market Makers the ability, with respect
to simple orders, to establish pre-determined levels of risk exposure
which would be utilized to automatically remove quotes in all series of
an options class.\67\ Accordingly, the Exchange believes that the SQF
Purge Port provides an efficient alternative to other available
services which allow a Market Maker to cancel quotes. The proposed SQF
Purge Port is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because any
Member may elect to purchase an optional SQF Purge Port and would be
subject to the same fee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\64\ SQF Purge Ports, similar to SQF Ports, allow Market Makers
to mass cancel quotes.
\65\ See Options 3, section 19, Mass Cancellation of Trading
Interest.
\66\ See MRX Options 3, section 18, Detection of Loss. This risk
protection is free.
\67\ See MRX Options 3, section 15(a)(3)(B). Thresholds may be
set by Members based on percentage, volume, delta or vega. This risk
protection is free.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange's proposal to assess $650 per port, per month for CTI
Ports and FIX DROP Ports is reasonable because these ports are optional
because Members have various ways of receiving information concerning
open orders and executed transactions. First, FIX and OTTO provide
Members with real-time order executions similar to the Clearing Trade
Interface and FIX DROP. Second, TradeInfo provides Members with the
ability to query open orders and order executions real-time, at no
cost, similar to the Clearing Trade Interface and FIX DROP. Third,
Members receive free daily reports listing open orders and trade
executions from the Exchange. While not real-time, the Open Orders
Report and Trade Detail Report provide Members with information similar
to the Clearing Trade Interface and FIX DROP. The proposed CTI and FIX
DROP Ports are equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because any
Member may elect to purchase an optional CTI Port or FIX DROP Port and
would be subject to the same fee.
The Exchange's proposal to assess no fee for the first FIX Disaster
Recovery Port or the first SQF Disaster Recovery Port is reasonable
because it will provide Members with continuous access to MRX in the
event of a failover, at no cost. Further it is equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory to assess no fee for the first FIX Disaster
Recovery Port to Electronic Access Members as all Electronic Access
Members would be entitled to the first FIX Disaster Recovery Port at no
cost. Also, it is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory to assess
no fee for the first SQF Disaster Recovery Port to Market Makers as all
Market Makers would be entitled to the first SQF Disaster Recovery Port
at no cost.
The Exchange's proposal to assess Members $50 per port, per month,
per account number for optional FIX Disaster Recovery Ports beyond the
first port offered at no cost and $50 per port, per month, per account
number for optional SQF Disaster Recovery Ports beyond the first port
offered at no cost is reasonable because these ports are optional and
Members only require one FIX Disaster Recovery Port to submit orders to
MRX in the event of a failover and one SQF Disaster Recovery Port to
submit quotes to MRX in the event of a failover. Additionally, to the
extent a Member expended more than $7,500 for Disaster Recovery Ports,
the Exchange would not charge an MRX Member for additional Disaster
Recovery Ports beyond the cap. The fees for the proposed additional FIX
and SQF Disaster Recovery Ports are equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because any Member may elect additional ports and would
be subject to the same fees.
The Exchange's proposal to offer Disaster Recovery Ports for SQF
Purge Ports, and OTTO Ports at $50 per port, per month, per account
number and CTI Ports, and FIX DROP Ports for $50 per port, per month is
reasonable because these ports are optional. As noted herein, there are
other alternatives for all of these ports today, the purchase of an SQF
Purge Port, OTTO Port, CTI Port, and FIX DROP Port in production is
optional and, therefore, so is the purchase of Disaster Recovery Ports
for these ports. The proposed Disaster Recovery Port fees are intended
to encourage Members to be efficient when purchasing Disaster Recovery
Ports. The proposed Disaster Recovery Ports are equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory because any Member may elect to purchase an
optional Disaster Recovery Port and would be subject to the same fee,
depending on the port.
Finally, in the event that an MRX Member elects to subscribe to
multiple ports, the Exchange offers a monthly cap beyond which a Member
would be assessed no additional fees for month. As noted above, the SQF
Port and the SQF Purge Port are subject to a monthly cap of $17,500 and
the OTTO Port, CTI Port, FIX Port, FIX Drop Port and all Disaster
Recovery Ports are subject to a monthly cap of $7,500. These caps are
reasonable because they allow Members to limit their fees beyond a
certain level if they elect to purchase multiple ports in a given
month. The caps are also equitable and not unfairly discriminatory
because any Member will be subject to the cap, provided they exceeded
the appropriate dollar amount in a given month.
The proposed port fees are similar to the fees assessed by
GEMX.\68\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\68\ See GEMX Options 7, section 6.C. (Ports and Other
Services).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
After 6 years, MRX proposes to commence assessing port fees, just
as all other options exchanges while offerings its Members the ability
to submit orders and quotes to the Exchange at no cost. The
introduction of these fees will not impede a Member's access to MRX,
but rather will allow MRX to continue to compete and grow its
marketplace so that it may continue to offer a robust trading
architecture, a quality opening process, an array of simple and complex
order types and auctions, and competitive transaction pricing. If MRX
is incorrect in its assessment of the
[[Page 63129]]
value of its services, that assessment will be reflected in MRX's
ability to compete with other options exchanges.
B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any intermarket burden on competition not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
The Exchange believes its proposal to offer the first FIX and SQF
Ports for free, as well as the first Disaster Recovery version of these
ports, positions MRX as a competitive market among other options
exchanges, all of which assess fees for the first order and/or quote
protocols. MRX's offering would permit Electronic Access Members and
Market Makers the ability to submit orders and quote to MRX at no cost.
The remainder of the port offerings are optional. The Exchange believes
that the optional port offerings permit MRX to remain competitive with
other options markets in its offerings.
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. 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.
By way of example, today, with the exception of Precise, ISE has
identical functionality to MRX. Market participants may elect to become
members of ISE instead of MRX if those market participants believe that
the order flow on ISE provides more value than the order flow on MRX.
ISE has more market share (6.2%) as compared to MRX (1.8%). A market
participant may evaluate the fees assessed by ISE, its market share,
and proprietary products, among other things, and determine to become a
member of ISE instead of MRX if it determines the proposed fees to be
unreasonable. Additionally, the proposed port fees are similar to port
fees assessed by GEMX \69\ for similar connectivity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\69\ See GEMX Options 7, section 6.C. (Ports and Other
Services).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Further, in connection with a technology migration, Cboe Exchange,
Inc. (``Cboe'') amended access and connectivity fees, including port
fees.\70\ Specifically, Cboe adopted certain logical ports to allow for
the delivery and/or receipt of trading messages--i.e., orders, accepts,
cancels, transactions, etc. Cboe established tiered pricing for BOE and
FIX logical ports, tiered pricing for BOE Bulk ports, and flat prices
for DROP, Purge Ports, GRP Ports and Multicast PITCH/Top Spin Server
Ports. Cboe argued in its fee proposal that the proposed pricing more
closely aligned its access fees to those of its affiliated exchanges,
and reasonably so, as the affiliated exchanges offer substantially
similar connectivity and functionality and are on the same platform
that Cboe migrated to.\71\ Cboe also justified its proposal by stating
that, `` . . . the Exchange believes substitutable products and
services are in fact available to market participants, including, among
other things, other options exchanges a market participant may connect
to in lieu of the Exchange, indirect connectivity to the Exchange via a
third-party reseller of connectivity and/or trading of any options
product, including proprietary products, in the Over-the-Counter (OTC)
markets.'' \72\ Cboe stated in its proposal that,
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\70\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 90333 (November 4,
2020), 85 FR 71666 (November 10, 2020) (SR-CBOE-2020-105).
\71\ Id. at 71676.
\72\ Id. at 71676.
The rule structure for options exchanges are also fundamentally
different from those of equities exchanges. In particular, options
market participants are not forced to connect to (and purchase
market data from) all options exchanges. For example, there are many
order types that are available in the equities markets that are not
utilized in the options markets, which relate to mid-point pricing
and pegged pricing which require connection to the SIPs and each of
the equities exchanges in order to properly execute those orders in
compliance with best execution obligations. Additionally, in the
options markets, the linkage routing and trade through protection
are handled by the exchanges, not by the individual members. Thus
not connecting to an options exchange or disconnecting from an
options exchange does not potentially subject a broker-dealer to
violate order protection requirements. Gone are the days when the
retail brokerage firms (such as Fidelity, Schwab, and eTrade) were
members of the options exchanges--they are not members of the
Exchange or its affiliates, they do not purchase connectivity to the
Exchange, and they do not purchase market data from the Exchange.
Accordingly, not only is there not an actual regulatory requirement
to connect to every options exchange, the Exchange believes there is
also no ``de facto'' or practical requirement as well, as further
evidenced by the recent significant reduction in the number of
broker-dealers that are members of all options exchanges.\73\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\73\ Id. at 71677.
The proposal also referenced the National Market System Plan
Governing the Consolidated Audit Trail (``CAT NMS Plan''),\74\ wherein
the Commission discussed the existence of competition in the
marketplace generally, and particularly for exchanges with unique
business models. The Commission acknowledged that, even if an exchange
were to exit the marketplace due to its proposed fee-related change, it
would not significantly impact competition in the market for exchange
trading services because these markets are served by multiple
competitors.\75\ Further, the Commission explicitly stated that
``[c]onsequently, demand for these services in the event of the exit of
a competitor is likely to be swiftly met by existing competitors.''
\76\ Finally, the Commission recognized that while some exchanges may
have a unique business model that is not currently offered by
competitors, a competitor could create similar business models if
demand were adequate, and if a competitor did not do so, the Commission
believes it would be likely that new entrants would do so if the
exchange with that unique business model was otherwise profitable.\77\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\74\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 86901 (September 9,
2019), 84 FR 48458 (September 13, 2019) (File No. S7-13-19).
\75\ Id.
\76\ Id.
\77\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cboe concluded that the Exchange is subject to significant
substitution-based competitive forces in pricing its connectivity and
access fees.\78\ Cboe stressed that the proof of competitive
constraints does not depend on showing that members walked away, or
threatened to walk away, from a product due to a pricing change.
Rather, the very absence of such negative feedback (in and of itself,
and particularly when coupled with positive feedback) is indicative
that the proposed fees are, in fact, reasonable and consistent with the
Exchange being subject to competitive forces in setting fees.\79\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\78\ Id. at 71679.
\79\ Id. at 71680.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 63130]]
Cboe also filed to establish a monthly fee for Certification
Logical Ports of $250 per Certification Logical Port.\80\ Cboe reasoned
that purchasing additional Certification Logical Ports, beyond the one
Certification Logical Port per logical port type offered in the
production environment free of charge, is voluntary and not required in
order to participate in the production environment, including live
production trading on the Exchange.\81\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\80\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 94512 (March 24,
2002), 87 FR 18425 (March 30, 2022) (SR-Cboe-2022-011). Cboe offers
BOE and FIX Logical Ports, \BOE\ Bulk Logical Ports, \Drop\ Logical
Ports, Purge Ports, GRP Ports and Multicast PITCH/Top Spin Server
Ports. For each type of the aforementioned logical ports that are
used in the production environment, the Exchange also offers
corresponding ports which provide Trading Permit Holders and non-
TPHs access to the Exchange's certification environment to test
proprietary systems and applications (i.e., ``Certification Logical
Ports'').
\81\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 94512 (March 24,
2002), 87 FR 18425 (March 30, 2022) (SR-Cboe-2022-011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In its statutory basis, Cboe justified the new port fee by stating
that it believed the Certification Logical Port fee were reasonable
because while such ports were no longer completely free, TPHs and non-
TPHs would continue to be entitled to receive free of charge one
Certification Logical Port for each type of logical port that is
currently offered in the production environment.\82\ Cboe noted that
other exchanges assess similar fees and cited to Nasdaq Stock Market
LLC and MIAX Options Exchange.\83\ Cboe also noted that the decision to
purchase additional ports is optional and no market participant is
required or under any regulatory obligation to purchase excess
Certification Logical Ports in order to access the Exchange's
certification environment.\84\ Finally, similar proposals to adopt a
Certification Logical Port monthly fee were filed by Cboe BYX Exchange,
Inc.,\85\ Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc.,\86\ and Cboe EDGA Exchange, Inc.\87\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\82\ Id. at 18426.
\83\ Id. at 18426.
\84\ Id. at 18426.
\85\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 94507 (March 24,
2002), 87 FR 18439 (March 30, 2022) (SR-CboeBYX-2022-004).
\86\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 94511 (March 24,
2002), 87 FR 18411 (March 30, 2022) (SR-CboeBZX-2022-021).
\87\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 94517 (March 25,
2002), 87 FR 18848 (March 31, 2022) (SR-CboeBZX-2022-021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cboe fee proposals described herein were filed subsequent to
the D.C. Circuit decision in Susquehanna Int'l Grp., LLC v. SEC, 866
F.3d 442 (D.C. Cir. 2017), meaning that such fee filings were subject
to the same (and current) standard for SEC review and approval as SR-
MRX-2022-12[sic]. In summary, MRX requests the Commission apply the
same standard of review to SR-MRX-2022-12[sic] which was applied to the
various Cboe and Cboe affiliated markets' filings with respect to port
fees. If the Commission were to apply a different standard of review to
MRX-2022-12[sic] than it applied to other exchange fee filings it would
create a burden on competition such that it would impair MRX's ability
to compete among other options markets.
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any intramarket burden on competition not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. Only one order
protocol is required to submit orders to MRX, and the Exchange proposes
to offer the first FIX Port and the first FIX Disaster Recovery Port to
Electronic Access Members at no cost. This would provide Members with
the ability to continuously submit orders to MRX, even in the event of
a failover. Likewise, only one quoting protocol is required to submit
quotes to MRX, and the Exchange proposes to offer the first SQF Port
and the first SQF Disaster Recovery Port to Market Makers at no cost.
This would provide Market Makers with the ability to continuously
submit quotes to MRX, even in the event of a failover. Only one account
number is necessary per Member and account numbers are free.
As noted above, the remainder of the proposed port fees are for
optional ports (additional FIX and SQF Ports, additional FIX and SQF
Disaster Recovery Ports, SQF Purge Port, OTTO Port, CTI Port, FIX DROP
Port and Disaster Recovery Ports for SQF Purge Ports, OTTO Ports, CTI
Ports, and FIX DROP Ports). These different protocols are not all
necessary to conduct business on MRX. Members choose among the
protocols based on their business workflow. The proposed fees do not
impose an undue burden on competition because the Exchange would
uniformly assess the port fees to all Members and would uniformly apply
monthly caps. Market participants may also connect to third parties
instead of directly to the Exchange.
With respect to the higher fees assessed for SQF Ports and SQF
Purge Ports, the Exchange notes that only Market Makers may utilize
these ports. Market Makers are required to provide continuous two-sided
quotes on a daily basis,\88\ and are subject to various obligations
associated with providing liquidity.\89\ As a result of these quoting
obligations, the SQF Port and SQF Purge Port are designed to handle
higher throughput to permit Market Makers to bundle orders to meet
their obligations. The technology to permit Market Makers to submit a
greater number of quotes, in addition to the various risk protections
\90\ afforded to these market participants when quoting, accounts for
the higher SQF Port and SQF Purge Port fees. Greater liquidity benefits
all market participants by providing more trading opportunities and
attracting greater participation by Market Makers. Also, an increase in
the activity of Market Makers in turn facilitates tighter spreads.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\88\ See MRX Options 2, section 5.
\89\ See MRX Options 2, section 4.
\90\ See MRX Options 3, section 15(a)(3). Market Makers are
offered risk protections to permit them to manage their risk more
effectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.\91\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\91\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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-MRX-2022-20 on the subject line.
[[Page 63131]]
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-MRX-2022-20. 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-MRX-2022-20 and should be
submitted on or before November 8, 2022.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\92\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\92\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-22557 Filed 10-17-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
