Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq ISE, LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Legging Orders, 86162-86171 [2023-27163]
Download as PDF
86162
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 237 / Tuesday, December 12, 2023 / Notices
to Add Priority Mail & USPS Ground
Advantage Contract 131 to Competitive
Product List and Notice of Filing
Materials Under Seal; Filing Acceptance
Date: December 6, 2023; Filing
Authority: 39 U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR
3040.130 through 3040.135, and 39 CFR
3035.105; Public Representative:
Christopher C. Mohr; Comments Due:
December 14, 2023.
This Notice will be published in the
Federal Register.
Erica A. Barker,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023–27204 Filed 12–11–23; 8:45 am]
A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–99092; File No. SR–ISE–
2023–31]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq
ISE, LLC; Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed
Rule Change To Amend Legging
Orders
December 6, 2023.
Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2
notice is hereby given that on November
29, 2023, Nasdaq ISE, LLC (‘‘ISE’’ or
‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission (‘‘SEC’’ or
‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule
change as described in Items I and II
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.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Terms of Substance of
the Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange proposes to amend
Options 3, Section 7, Types of Orders
and Order and Quote Protocols, and
Options 3, Section 16, Complex Order
Risk Protection.
The text of the proposed rule change
is available on the Exchange’s website at
https://listingcenter.nasdaq.com/
rulebook/ise/rules, at the principal
office of the Exchange, and at the
Commission’s Public Reference Room.
1 15
2 17
18:03 Dec 11, 2023
1. Purpose
The Exchange proposes to amend
Options 3, Section 7, Types of Orders
and Order and Quote Protocols, and
Section 16, Complex Order Risk
Protections. Each change is described
below.
Options 3, Section 7
The Exchange proposes to expand the
description of Legging Orders to add
detail to describe the current System 3
functionality. The proposed
amendments reflect the way the System
handles Legging Orders today. The
Exchange is not amending its current
System functionality with respect to
Legging Orders, rather, the proposed
rule text is intended to add more detail
to ISE Options 3, Section 7(k) to
conform the level of detail to Nasdaq
Phlx LLC (‘‘Phlx’’) Options 3, Sections
7(b)(10) and 14(f)(iii)(C), which
describes Phlx’s legging orders, as well
as The Miami International Securities
Exchange, LLC (‘‘MIAX’’) Rule
518(a)(10), which describes derived
orders.
Generally, the Exchange proposes to
amend the phrase ‘‘regular limit order
book’’ in ISE Options 3, Section 7(k) to
‘‘single-leg limit order book’’ to conform
the rule text to the manner in which that
order book is described in ISE Options
3, Section 14, Complex Orders.
Currently, ISE Options 3, Section 7(k)
provides,
Legging Orders. A legging order is a limit
order on the regular limit order book that
represents one side of a Complex Options
Order that is to buy or sell an equal quantity
of two options series resting on the
Exchange’s Complex Order Book. Legging
3 The term ‘‘System’’ means the electronic system
operated by the Exchange that receives and
disseminates quotes, executes orders and reports
transactions. See Options 1, Section 1(a)(49).
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
CFR 240.19b–4.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
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.
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
orders are firm orders that are included in the
Exchange’s displayed best bid or offer.
(1) A legging order may be automatically
generated for one leg of a Complex Options
Order at a price: (i) that matches or improves
upon the best displayed bid or offer on the
regular limit order book; and (ii) at which the
net price can be achieved when the other leg
is executed against the best displayed bid or
offer on the regular limit order book. A
legging order will not be created at a price
that locks or crosses the best bid or offer of
another exchange or during a Posting Period
in progress on the same side in the series,
pursuant to Options 3, Section 15 regarding
Acceptable Trade Range.
(2) A legging order is executed only after
all other executable orders (including any
non-displayed size) and quotes at the same
price are executed in full. When a legging
order is executed, the other portion of the
Complex Options Order will be automatically
executed against the displayed best bid or
offer on the Exchange.
(3) A legging order is automatically
removed from the regular limit order book if:
(i) the price of the legging order is no longer
at the displayed best bid or offer on the
regular limit order book, (ii) execution of the
legging order would no longer achieve the
net price of the Complex Options Order
when the other leg is executed against the
best displayed bid or offer on the regular
limit order book, (iii) the Complex Options
Order is executed in full or in part on the
Complex Order Book, or (iv) the Complex
Options Order is cancelled or modified.
The Exchange proposes to amend the
first paragraph of ISE Options 3, Section
7(k) to instead provide,
A Legging Order is a Limit Order on the
single-leg limit order book in an individual
series that represents one leg of a two-legged
Complex Options Order that is to buy or sell
an equal quantity of two options series
resting on the Exchange’s Complex Order
Book. Legging Orders are firm orders that are
included in the Exchange’s displayed best
bid or offer. Legging Orders are not routable
and have a TIF of Day.
Generally, the Exchange proposes to
capitalize the terms ‘‘Legging Order’’
and ‘‘Limit Order’’ throughout ISE
Options 3, Section 7(k). The Exchange
also proposes to amend the term ‘‘one
side of a Complex Options Order’’ to
more specifically state, ‘‘one leg of a
two-legged Complex Options Order.’’
The Exchange also proposes to add a
new sentence to the end of the
paragraph which provides, ‘‘Legging
Orders are not routable and have a TIF
of Day.’’ Specifying that Legging Orders,
which are an individual component of
a Complex Options Order,4 are also not
4 The terms ‘‘Complex Options Order,’’ ‘‘StockOption Order,’’ and ‘‘Stock-Complex Order’’ refer to
orders for a Complex Options Strategy, StockOption Strategy, and Stock-Complex Strategy,
respectively. The term ‘‘Complex Order’’ includes
Complex Options Orders, Stock-Option Orders, and
Stock-Complex Orders. See ISE Options 3, Section
E:\FR\FM\12DEN1.SGM
12DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 237 / Tuesday, December 12, 2023 / Notices
routable will add detail to the
description of the order type and make
clear the current System handling.
Similarly, specifying that Legging
Orders will be Limit Orders 5 with a TIF
of Day makes clear the way these orders
are currently handled by the System.
Legging Orders are not based on
Member instruction and are intended to
facilitate more interaction between the
single-leg order book and the Complex
Order Book, resulting in increased
execution opportunities and better
execution prices for Complex Orders
and for orders resting on the single-leg
order book. For this reason, Legging
Orders do not route and have a TIF of
Day to permit Members to interact with
this order type. The Exchange believes
the amended rule text proposed in the
first paragraph of ISE Options 3, Section
7(k) more accurately describes a Legging
Order and provides Members with
greater information regarding this order
type. Phlx’s rules at Options 3, Section
7(b)(10) similarly describes a Legging
Order as ‘‘one leg of a two-legged
Complex Options Order’’ and specifies
that Phlx’s Legging Orders are not
routable and have a time-in-force of
Day.
The Exchange proposes to add a new
second paragraph to ISE Options 3,
Section 7(k) to specifically explain the
way the System will generate a Legging
Order. The Exchange proposes to state,
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
The System will evaluate whether Legging
Orders may be generated (1) when a Complex
Options Order enters the Complex Order
Book, and (2) after a time interval (to be
determined by the Exchange, not to exceed
1 second) when the NBBO or Exchange best
bid or offer in any component of a Complex
Options Order changes. The Exchange may
determine to limit the number of Legging
Orders generated on an objective basis and
may determine to remove existing Legging
Orders in order to maintain a fair and orderly
market in times of extreme volatility or
uncertainty. Legging Orders are treated as
having no Priority Customer capacity on the
single-leg order book, regardless of being
generated from Priority Customer Complex
Options Orders.
The Exchange proposes to make clear
that the System will evaluate whether
Legging Orders may be generated, which
occurs at the time a Complex Options
Order enters the Complex Order Book or
after a time interval (to be determined
by the Exchange, not to exceed one
second) 6 when the NBBO or Exchange
best bid or offer in any component of a
14(a)(5). See also ISE Options 3, Section 14(a)(1)–
(3).
5 A Limit Order is an order to buy or sell a stated
number of options contracts at a specified price or
better. See ISE Options 3, Section 7(b).
6 Today, the time interval is set to one hundred
milliseconds.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:03 Dec 11, 2023
Jkt 262001
Complex Options Order changes. The
Exchange proposes to state that it may
determine to limit the number of
Legging Orders generated on an
objective basis and may determine to
remove existing Legging Orders, and
cease the creation of additional Legging
Orders, to maintain a fair and orderly
market in times of extreme volatility or
uncertainty. Phlx has similar rule text in
Phlx Options 3, Section 14(f)(iii)(C).7
This limitation assists the Exchange in
managing the number of Legging Orders
generated to ensure that Legging Orders
do not negatively impact the Exchange’s
System capacity and performance so
that ISE may maintain a fair and orderly
market in times of extreme volatility or
uncertainty. Of note, the Exchange does
not limit the generation of Legging
Orders on the basis of the entering
Member or the Member category of the
order (i.e., Professional or Priority
Customer). Phlx similarly made this
representation when it proposed to
adopt rules related to the generation and
execution of ‘‘legging orders.’’ 8
Finally, the Exchange proposes to
provide that Legging Orders are treated
as having no Priority Customer capacity
on the single leg order book, regardless
of being generated from Priority
Customer Complex Options Orders. A
Legging Order is handled in the same
manner as other orders on the single-leg
order book except as otherwise provided
in ISE Options 3, Section 7(k), and is
executed only after all other executable
orders and quotes at the same price are
executed in full. When a Legging Order
is executed, the other component of the
Complex Order on the Complex Order
Book will be automatically executed
against the best bid or offer on the
Exchange. The Exchange believes that a
Legging Order, created for the execution
of a Complex Order, should not be
afforded priority over resting orders and
quotes on the single-leg order book, and
therefore has determined to protect the
7 Phlx’s rule states, in part, in Options 3, Section
14(f)(iii)(C) that, ‘‘. . . The System will evaluate the
CBOOK when a Complex Order enters the CBOOK
and at a regular time interval, to be determined by
the Exchange (which interval shall not exceed 1
second), following a change in the national best bid
and/or offer (‘NBBO’) or Phlx best bid and/or offer
(‘PBBO’) in any component of a Complex Order
eligible to generate Legging Orders, to determine
whether Legging Orders may be generated. The
Exchange may determine to limit the number of
Legging Orders generated on an objective basis and
may determine to remove existing Legging Orders
in order to maintain a fair and orderly market in
times of extreme volatility or uncertainty.’’
8 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 73545
(November 6, 2014), 79 FR 67498 (November 13,
2014) (SR–Phlx–2014–54) (Notice of Filing of
Amendment No. 1 and Order Granting Accelerated
Approval of a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified
by Amendment No. 1, To Add a New Complex
Order Process Called Legging Orders).
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
86163
priority on the single-leg order book of
such resting orders and quotes. MIAX
similarly executes a derived order only
after all other executable orders and
quotes at the same price are executed in
full.9
The Exchange proposes to amend ISE
Options 3, Section 7(k)(1) and add the
title ‘‘Generation of Legging Orders’’ to
describe the contents of the paragraph.
The Exchange proposes to amend the
first sentence which currently states,
A legging order may be automatically
generated for one leg of a Complex Options
Order at a price: (i) that matches or improves
upon the best displayed bid or offer on the
regular limit order book; and (ii) at which the
net price can be achieved when the other leg
is executed against the best displayed bid or
offer on the regular limit order book. A
legging order will not be created at a price
that locks or crosses the best bid or offer of
another exchange or during a Posting Period
in progress on the same side in the series,
pursuant to Options 3, Section 15 regarding
Acceptable Trade Range.
The Exchange proposes to instead
provide in Options 3, Section 7(k)(1),
A Legging Order may be automatically
generated for one or both leg(s) of a Complex
Options Order resting on top of the Complex
Order Book at a price: (i) that matches or
improves upon the best displayed bid or offer
on the single-leg limit order book; and (ii) at
which the net price can be achieved when
the other leg is executed against the best
displayed bid or offer on the single-leg limit
order book, excluding other Legging Orders.
Legging Orders will be generated and
executed in the minimum increment for that
options series.
The Exchange is proposing to add ‘‘or
both leg(s)’’ to the first sentence of ISE
Options 3, Section 7(k)(1) to make clear
a Legging Order may be generated for
each leg of a two-legged Complex Order.
The Exchange notes that Legging Orders
may be generated for each leg of a twolegged options orders with the same
quantity on both legs. Automatically
generating Legging Orders, which will
only be executed after all other
executable interest at the same price
(including non-displayed interest) is
executed in full, will provide additional
execution opportunities for Complex
Orders, without negatively impacting
any investors in the single-leg market. In
fact, the generation of Legging Orders
may enhance execution quality for
investors in the single-leg market by
improving the price and/or size of the
ISE BBO and by providing additional
execution opportunity for resting orders
9 See MIAX Rule 518(a)(10)(iv). See also
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 79072 (October
7, 2016), 81 FR 71131 (October 14, 2016) (SR–
MIAX–2016–26) (Order Approving a Proposed Rule
Change to Adopt New Rules to Govern the Trading
of Complex Orders).
E:\FR\FM\12DEN1.SGM
12DEN1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
86164
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 237 / Tuesday, December 12, 2023 / Notices
on the single-leg order book. The
generation of Legging Orders is fully
compliant with all regulatory
requirements. In particular, Legging
Orders are firm orders that will be
displayed at the ISE BBO. Also, a
Legging Order will be automatically
removed if it is no longer displayable at
the ISE BBO or if the net price of the
Complex Order can no longer be
achieved. Finally, the generation of
Legging Orders is limited in scope, as
they may be generated only for Complex
Options Orders with two legs.
Additionally, as noted herein, the
Exchange will closely manage and
curtail the generation of Legging Orders
to assure that they do not negatively
impact system capacity and
performance. Phlx’s Legging Orders
differ from ISE’s Legging Orders in that,
on Phlx, where two legging orders may
be generated, only one of those can
execute as part of the execution of a
particular complex order.
The addition of ‘‘resting on the top of
the Complex Order Book’’ in the first
sentence of ISE Options 3, Section
7(k)(1) will make clear that the priority
of orders in the Complex Order Book
controls with respect to the generation
of Legging Orders. The addition of this
language is intended to provide greater
detail with respect to the generation of
Legging Order.
The Exchange proposes to amend the
second sentence of ISE Options 3,
Section 7(k)(1) to add ‘‘excluding other
Legging Orders’’ to the end of the
sentence to make clear that the price of
a Legging Order is not considered in the
BBO for purposes of determining
whether the net price of a Complex
Order could be achieved were it to
generate a Legging Order. Below is an
example of the manner in which the
System calculates the net price and
excludes a Legging Order.
Complex Order is entered to Buy B–C 10
@ 0.20
System generates Legging Order on leg
B’s bid @ 4.00
System generates Legging Order on Leg
C’s offer @ 3.90
Executions:
If Complex Order B–C sold leg C @
3.90, it would have to buy leg B for 4.10
or less to satisfy its net price of 0.20.
Given that a Legging Order is available
on Leg B’s offer at 4.05, this Legging
Order on leg C would have been able to
generate at 3.85 instead of 3.90 if the
Legging Order at 4.05 was included in
the calculation of possible net execution
price, but since it is not, the Legging
Order is generated at 3.90 on Leg C’s
offer instead of 3.85.11
The Exchange is removing the last
sentence of ISE Options 3, Section
7(k)(1) 12 because that concept is being
relocated to proposed new paragraph
Options 3, Section 7(k)(2) as described
below.
Finally, the Exchange proposes to add
a sentence to ISE Options 3, Section
7(k)(1) which states, ‘‘Legging Orders
will be generated and executed in the
minimum increment for that options
series.’’ Options 3, Section 3 describes
the minimum increments for options
traded on ISE. This rule makes clear that
the minimum increment rule in ISE
Options 3, Section 3 is applicable to
Legging Orders. MIAX Rule
518(a)(10)(iii) similarly provides that
ISE’s derived orders will not be created
at a price increment less than the
minimum established by Rule 510.13
The Exchange proposes to add
proposed new paragraph ISE Options 3,
Section 7(k)(2) with the title ‘‘When
Legging Orders Will Not Be Generated’’
to describe the contents of the
paragraph. The Exchange proposes to
state in proposed ISE Options 3, Section
7(k)(2),
Example #1
Assume
Leg A is quoted 4.20 (100) × 4.25 (100)
Leg B is quoted 4.00 (100) × 4.10 (100)
Leg C is quoted 3.80 (100) × 3.90 (100)
Create A–B strategy, ratio of 1. cBBO 10
for A–B is 0.10 × 0.25
Create B–C strategy, ratio of 1. cBBO for
B–C is 0.10 × 0.30
Generation of Legging Orders:
Complex Order is entered to Buy A–B
10 @ 0.20
System generates Legging Order on leg
A’s bid @ 4.20
System generates Legging Order on Leg
B’s offer @ 4.05
When Legging Orders Will Not Be
Generated. A Legging Order will not be
generated: (i) at a price that locks or crosses
the best bid or offer of another exchange, (ii)
if there is a complex auction on either side
in the Complex Options Strategy, or a singleleg auction on either side in any component
of the Complex Options Strategy, or a Posting
Period in progress on the same side in the
10 The cBBO is the net best bid or offer comprised
of the best bids and offers of the individual legs of
the complex strategy.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:03 Dec 11, 2023
Jkt 262001
11 Furthermore, if a single-leg order arrives to buy
for 3.90 on Leg C, the B–C strategy trades with the
4.10 offer of Leg B and the 4.05 Legging Order is
removed.
12 The last sentence of ISE Options 3, Section
7(k)(1) states, ‘‘A legging order will not be created
at a price that locks or crosses the best bid or offer
of another exchange or during a Posting Period in
progress on the same side in the series, pursuant to
Options 3, Section 15 regarding Acceptable Trade
Range.’’
13 MIAX Rule 510 specifies the minimum
increments for options traded on MIAX.
PO 00000
Frm 00061
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
series, pursuant to Options 3, Section 15
regarding Acceptable Trade Range; (iii) if the
price of the leg(s) of a Complex Options
Order is outside of the price limits described
in Options 3, Section 16(a); (iv) if there is
already a Legging Order in that options series
on the same side of the market at the same
price; or (v) for Complex Orders with 2
option legs, where both legs are buying or
both legs are selling and both legs are calls
or both legs are puts, as described in Options
3, Section 14(d)(3)(A); or (vi) if the Exchange
has not opened; or a particular option series
has not opened or such options series is
halted.
This paragraph will describe when
Legging Orders will not be generated.
First, a Legging Order will not be
generated at a price that locks or crosses
the best bid or offer of another exchange
as stated in the last sentence of ISE
Options 3, Section 7(k)(1). This concept
is consistent with ISE Options 5,
Sections 2 and 3 which describe order
protection and locked and crossed
markets.14
Second, the Exchange proposes to add
a provision which states that a Legging
Order will not be generated if there is
a complex auction on either side in the
Complex Options Strategy,15 or a singleleg auction on either side in any
component of the Complex Options
Strategy, or a Posting Period in progress
on the same side in the series, pursuant
to ISE Options 3, Section 15 regarding
Acceptable Trade Range (‘‘ATR’’).16 The
last part of this proposed sentence
concerning ATR was relocated from the
last sentence of ISE Options 3, Section
7(k)(1).
Third, the Exchange proposes to add
a provision which states that a Legging
Order will not be generated if the price
of the leg(s) of a Complex Options Order
is outside of the price limits described
in ISE Options 3, Section 16(a). In the
instance where a Legging Order
generated is currently outside the price
parameter (because the ABBO has
moved), the System will remove the
Legging Order that was outside the price
14 ISE Options 5 is incorporated by reference to
ISE Options 5. Specifically, ISE Options 5, Section
2 and 3 apply to ISE.
15 A Complex Options Strategy is the
simultaneous purchase and/or sale of two or more
different options series in the same underlying
security, for the same account, in a ratio that is
equal to or greater than one-to-three (.333) and less
than or equal to three-to-one (3.00) and for the
purpose of executing a particular investment
strategy. Only those Complex Options Strategies
with no more than the applicable number of legs,
as determined by the Exchange on a class-by-class
basis, are eligible for processing. See ISE Options
3, Section 14(a)(1).
16 ATR is a risk protection which sets dynamic
boundaries within which quotes and orders may
trade. ATR is designed to guard the System from
experiencing dramatic price swings by preventing
the immediate execution of quotes and orders
beyond the thresholds set by this risk protection.
E:\FR\FM\12DEN1.SGM
12DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 237 / Tuesday, December 12, 2023 / Notices
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
limits pursuant to proposed ISE Options
3, Section 7(k)(2)(iii) and will attempt to
re-generate a new Legging Order that is
in the price limits described in ISE
Options 3, Section 16(a) as proposed in
ISE Options 3, Section 7(k)(4)(v). Today,
ISE Options 3, Section 16(a) would
restrict the execution of a Legging Order
through price limits for Complex
Orders. By adding the aforementioned
rule text in proposed new paragraph
Options 3, Section 7(k)(2), all
limitations related to the generation of
Legging Orders will be memorialized in
Options 3, Section 7(k).17
Fourth, the Exchange proposes to add
a provision which states that a Legging
Order will not be generated if there is
already a Legging Order in that options
series on the same side of the market at
the same price. This provision addresses
a situation of overlapping Legging
Orders. Phlx has a similar sentence in
Phlx Options 3, Section 7(b)(10)(2).18
The addition of this rule text will make
clear an existing limitation to the
generation of orders in ISE Options 3,
Section 7(k).
Fifth, the Exchange proposes to add a
provision which states that a Legging
Order will not be generated for Complex
Orders with two option legs, where both
legs are buying or both legs are selling
and both legs are calls or both legs are
puts, as described in ISE Options 3,
17 Phlx’s rule similarly indicates that a Legging
Order is subject to certain price parameters by
stating that a Legging Order will not be generated
if the price of the Complex Order is outside of the
relevant ACE Parameter. See Phlx Options 3,
Section 7(b)(10)(2). The ACE Parameter differs from
the price limits described in ISE Options 3, Section
16(a). Phlx’s ACE Parameter defines a price range
outside of which a Complex Order will not be
executed. The ACE Parameter is either a percentage
or number as defined by Phlx and may be set at a
different percentage or number for Complex Orders
where one of the components is the underlying
security. The ACE Parameter price range is based
on the cNBBO at the time an order would be
executed. A Complex Order to sell will not be
executed at a price that is lower than the cNBBO
bid by more than the ACE Parameter. A Complex
Order to buy will not be executed at a price that
is higher than the cNBBO offer by more than the
ACE Parameter. A Complex Order or a portion of
a Complex Order that cannot be executed within
the ACE Parameter pursuant to this rule will be
placed on the CBOOK. See Phlx Options 3, Section
16(b)(i).
18 Phlx Options 3, Section 7(b)(10)(2)) states, in
part, that Legging Order will not be generated if
there is already a Legging Order in that series on
the same side of the market at the same price
(unless it has priority based on the participant type,
under existing Exchange rules). The phrase ‘‘unless
it has priority based on the participant type, under
existing Exchange rules’’ is not being added to ISE’s
Rule as Options 3, Section 10 which describes
allocation on the single-leg order book, because as
stated in proposed ISE Options 3, Section 7(k),
‘‘Legging Orders are treated as having no Priority
Customer capacity on the single-leg order book,
regardless of being generated from Priority
Customer Complex Options Orders.’’
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:03 Dec 11, 2023
Jkt 262001
Section 14(d)(3)(A). This limitation is
currently provided for in ISE Options 3,
Section 14(d)(3)(A) and is being added
to proposed new paragraph ISE Options
3, Section 7(k)(2) to provide Members
with a complete list of when Legging
Orders will not be generated in Options
3, Section 7(k).
Sixth, the Exchange proposes to add
a provision which states that a Legging
Order will not be generated if the
Exchange has not opened; or a
particular option series has not opened
or such options series is halted. Since a
complex strategy must be available for
trading to generate a Legging Order, the
failure of an options series that is a
component of the complex strategy to
open or a subsequent halt would cause
Legging Orders not to generate. Phlx has
a similar rule in Phlx Options 3, Section
7(b)(10)(1).19
The Exchange proposes to renumber
current ISE Options 3, Section 7(k)(2) as
(k)(3) and add the title ‘‘Execution of
Legging Orders’’ to describe the contents
of the paragraph. The Exchange
proposes to state in proposed ISE
Options 3, Section 7(k)(3) that,
A Legging Order is executed only after all
other executable orders (including any nondisplayed size) and quotes at the same price
are executed in full. When a Legging Order
is executed, the other leg of the Complex
Options Order will be automatically executed
against the displayed best bid or offer on the
Exchange and any other Legging Order not
executed as part of the Complex Options
Order will be removed. Two Legging Orders
related to the same Complex Options Order
can be generated, and both can execute as
part of the execution of a particular Complex
Options Order.
The Exchange’s proposal, similar to
Phlx Options 3, Section
7(b)(10)(3)describes current System
handling when a Legging Order is
executed and subsequently the other leg
of the Complex Order will be
automatically executed against the
displayed best bid or offer on the
Exchange, and any other Legging Order
based on that Complex Order will be
removed. The Exchange proposes to
replace the word ‘‘portion’’ with ‘‘leg’’
to make the rule text more explicit. The
Exchange proposes to add the phrase
‘‘and any other Legging order not
executed as part of the Complex Options
Order will be removed’’ to the end of
the second sentence in proposed ISE
Options 3, Section 7(k)(3). Phlx has a
substantively similar sentence in
19 Phlx Options 3, Section 7(b)(10)(1) states, in
part, that Legging Orders will not be generated if the
Exchange or a particular option has not opened, is
halted or is otherwise not available for trading. ISE
believes that not opening and a halt are the two
possible scenarios and therefore Phlx’s rule and
ISE’s rule are substantively the same in this regard.
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
86165
Options 3, Section 7(b)(10)(3).20 The
addition of this phrase is intended to
provide additional information
regarding the treatment of unexecuted
Legging Orders in ISE Options 3,
Section 7(k). By way of example,
Example #2
Assume:
Complex A–B (ratio 1:1) strategy, ratio
of 1 is created
MM Quote for leg A 4.20 (100) × 4.50
(100)
MM Quote for leg B 4.00 (100) × 4.10
(100)
A–B Derived BBO: 0.10 × 0.50
Complex Order to Buy A–B 10 @n net
price of 0.45
System generates a Legging Order on leg
A’s bid for quantity of 10 @4 4.45
System generates a Legging Order leg
B’s offer for quantity of 10 @4 4.05
Single-leg order to sell 10 @4 4.45 on Leg
A arrives
Execution:
Complex Order A–B Legging Order
trades 10 with Single leg order on Leg
A @4 4.45
Complex Order A–B other leg trades 10
with MM Quote on Leg B @4 4.00
Removal of Legging Order:
Legging Order that was generated for
quantity of 10 on Leg B @4 4.05 is
removed from the order book.
Next, the Exchange proposes to add a
new sentence to ISE Options 3, Section
7(k)(3) which states, ‘‘Two Legging
Orders related to the same Complex
Options Order can be generated, and
both can execute as part of the
execution of a particular Complex
Options Order.’’ As noted above, two
Legging Orders related to the same
Complex Options Order can be
generated, and both can execute as part
of the execution of a particular Complex
Options Order. This behavior differs
from Phlx where two legging orders may
be generated, but only one of those can
execute as part of the execution of a
particular complex order. The Exchange
believes that permitting both Legging
Orders to execute as part of the
execution of a particular Complex
Options Order will allow more Complex
Orders to execute while the price of the
leg(s) will continue to be bounded by
20 Phlx Options 3, Section 7(b)(10)(3) states, ‘‘A
Legging Order is executed only after all other
executable orders (including any non-displayed
size) and quotes at the same price are executed in
full. When a Legging Order is executed, the other
leg of the Complex Order will be automatically
executed against the displayed best bid or offer on
the Exchange and any other Legging Order based on
that Complex Order will be removed.’’ ISE
explicitly states ‘‘not executed as part of the
Complex Options Order’’ where Phlx says ‘‘based
on that Complex Order.’’
E:\FR\FM\12DEN1.SGM
12DEN1
86166
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 237 / Tuesday, December 12, 2023 / Notices
the price limits described in ISE
Options 3, Section 16(a). By way of
example,
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Example #3
Assume:
Complex A–B strategy, ratio of 1 is
created
Complex 2A–B strategy, ratio of 2:1 is
created
MM Quote for leg A 4.20 (100) × 4.50
(100)
MM Quote for leg B 4.00 (100) × 4.10
(100)
Complex BBO for A–B is 0.10 × 0.50
Complex BBO for 2A–B is 4.30 × 5.00
Leg Generation:
Complex Order to Buy A–B 10 @0 0.45
System generates a Legging Order on leg
A’s bid @4 4.45
System generates a Legging Order on leg
B’s offer @4 4.05
Execution:
Complex Order to Sell 2A–B 5 @4 4.85
2A–B Order trades with Legging Order
on leg A 10 @4 4.45
2A–B Order trades with the Legging
Order on leg B 5 @4 4.05
A–B trades with MM Quote on leg B 5
@4 4.00
The Exchange proposes to renumber
ISE Options 3, Section 7(k)(3) as (k)(4)
and title the paragraph, ‘‘Removal of
Generated Legging Orders’’ to describe
the contents of the paragraph. This
paragraph describes when a Legging
Order is automatically removed from
the single-leg limit order book. The
Exchange proposes to add a clause to
the end of proposed ISE Options 3,
Section 7(k)(4)(i) so that the sentence
would state, ‘‘A Legging Order is
automatically removed from the singleleg limit order book if: (i) the price of
the Legging Order is no longer at the
displayed best bid or offer on the singleleg limit order book or is at a price that
locks or crosses the best bid or offer of
another exchange . . .’’(emphasis
added). Current ISE Options 3, Section
7(k)(1) already notes that a Legging
Order will not be created at a price that
locks or crosses the best bid or offer of
another exchange. Adding the same rule
text to proposed ISE Options 3, Section
7(k)(4) will make clear that a Legging
Order that locks or crosses an away
market would be removed from the limit
order book.
The Exchange proposes to add a
clause to proposed ISE Options 3,
Section 7(k)(4)(ii) to provide that ‘‘A
Legging Order is automatically removed
from the single-leg limit order book
if. . . (ii) execution of the Legging Order
would no longer achieve that net price
of the Complex Options Order when the
other leg is executed against the best
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:03 Dec 11, 2023
Jkt 262001
Legging Order to achieve the net price
of the Complex Order if it trades along
with the quote on Leg B.
The Exchange proposes to add a new
section ‘‘(v)’’ to proposed ISE Options 3,
Section 7(k)(4) which states, ‘‘A Legging
Order is automatically removed from
the single-leg limit order book if. . . (v)
the price of the leg(s) of a Complex
Options Order is outside of the price
limits described in current ISE Options
3, Section 16(a).’’ This limitation is
currently described in ISE Options 3,
Section 16(a) and is being added to this
order type to complete the list of cases
where a Legging Order would be
removed from the order book in Options
3, Section 7(k). Phlx has similar rule
text in Options 3, Section 7(b)(10)(4).22
The Exchange proposes to add new
section ‘‘(vi)’’ to proposed ISE Options
3, Section 7(k)(4) which states, ‘‘A
Legging Order is automatically removed
from the single-leg limit order book if
Example #4
. . .(vi) the System receives a complex
Assume:
auction on either side in the Complex
Options Strategy, or the System receives
Leg A is quoted 4.20 (100) × 4.25 (100)
a single-leg auction on either side in any
Leg B is quoted 4.00 (100) × 4.05 (100)
component of the Complex Options
Leg C is quoted 3.80 (100) × 3.90 (100)
Create A–B strategy, ratio of 1 with a
Strategy.’’ Phlx has similar language in
cBBO for A–B is 0.15 × 0.25
Options 3, Section 7(b)(10)(4).23 As
Create B–C strategy, ratio of 1 with a
noted above, the Exchange believes from
cBBO for B–C is 0.10 × 0.30
a System processing and user
acceptance standpoint, the best practice
Generation of Legging Orders:
is to remove the System-generated
Complex Order is entered to Buy B–C
Legging Order from the order book
(Buy B, Sell C) 10 @0 0.20
System generates Legging Orders on Leg during the course of the auction, as that
time is minimal, then the System can
B’s bid @4.00 & Leg C’s offer @3 3.85.
attempt to re-generate a Legging Order
Complex Order is entered to Buy A–B
once the auction has concluded.
(Buy A, Sell B) 10 @0 0.20
Finally, the Exchange proposes to add
System generates Legging Orders on Leg
A’s bid @4 4.20 & Leg B’s offer @4 4.05 new section ‘‘(vii)’’ to proposed ISE
Options 3, Section 7(k)(4) which states,
Removal of Legging Order:
‘‘A Legging Order is automatically
Market Maker updates their quote for
removed from the single-leg limit order
Leg B with a worsened offer: 4.00
book if . . . (vii) a Legging Order is
(100) × 4.10 (100)
generated by a different Complex
Even though the displayed best offer
Options Order in the same leg at a better
for Leg B did not change in price, it is
price or the same price for a participant
derived from a Legging Order which is
with a higher price priority.’’ As noted
excluded from the System’s calculations in ISE Options 3, Section 7(k)(1), a
in determining whether the net price of
Legging Order may be automatically
this Complex Order can be achieved if
generated at a price that matches or
its Legging Order trades. The Legging
improves upon the best displayed bid or
Order at 3.85 on Leg C can no longer
offer on the single-leg limit order book.
achieve the Complex Order’s net price
The System removes the Legging Order
were it to execute in addition to the
because it would have been at an
quote for Leg B. The System will remove inferior price. Phlx Options 3, Section
the Legging Order at 3.85 on Leg C and
7(b)(10)(4)has similar language.24
will regenerate a new Legging Order on
22 Phlx Options 3, Section 7(b)(10)(4)states that
Leg C at 3.90 and this would allow the
displayed bid or offer on the single-leg
limit order book, excluding other
Legging Orders’’ (emphasis added). Phlx
has a similar sentence in Options 3,
Section 7(b)(10)(4).21 A Legging Order is
removed if the BBO on the other leg
worsens such that the Complex Order
limit price could no longer be achieved
by trading with the quote, even if it
could be achieved by trading with a
Legging Order generated by another
Complex Order. The Exchange would
not rely solely on the price of another
Legging Order when calculating the net
price of the Complex Options Order for
purposes of determining at which price
a Legging Order will execute. In the
below example this point is illustrated
in that the Legging Order could not rely
on the 4.05 offer on Leg B derived from
the other Legging Order, rather it must
rely on the 4.10 offer on Leg B derived
from the quote.
21 Phlx
Options 3, Section 7(b)(10)(4)provides, ‘‘if
execution of the Legging Order would no longer
achieve the net price of the Complex Order when
the other leg is executed against the Exchange’s best
displayed bid or offer on the regular Limit Order
book (other than another Legging Order).’’ This
language is substantively the same as ISE’s
proposed rule text.
PO 00000
Frm 00063
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
‘‘A Legging Order is automatically removed from
the regular order book: . . . (v) if the price of the
Complex Order is outside the ACE Parameter of
paragraph (i).’’ As noted above, Phlx and ISE have
different price parameters.
23 Id.
24 Phlx Options 3, Section 7(b)(10)(4) states that
‘‘A Legging Order is automatically removed from
the regular order book: . . . (vii) if a Legging Order
E:\FR\FM\12DEN1.SGM
12DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 237 / Tuesday, December 12, 2023 / Notices
As revised, the rule text proposed in
ISE Options 3, Section 7(k)(4) is
intended to cover all circumstances
where a Legging Order would be
automatically removed from the singleleg limit order.
Options 3, Section 16
The Exchange proposes to amend the
language in ISE Options 3, Section 16(a)
related to price limits for Complex
Orders. As provided in ISE Options 3,
Section 16(a)the legs of a complex
strategy may be executed at prices that
are inferior to the prices available on
other exchanges trading the same
options series. Notwithstanding the
foregoing, the System will not permit
any leg of a complex strategy to trade
through the NBBO for the series or any
stock component by a configurable
amount calculated as the lesser of (i) an
absolute amount not to exceed $0.10,
and (ii) a percentage of the NBBO not
to exceed 500%, as determined by the
Exchange on a class, series or
underlying basis. A Member can also
include an instruction on a Complex
Order that each leg of the Complex
Order is to be executed only at a price
that is equal to or better than the NBBO
on the opposite side for the options
series or any stock component, as
applicable (‘‘Do-Not-Trade-Through’’ or
‘‘DNTT’’). The addition of the words
‘‘on the opposite side’’ is intended to
make clear the manner in which the
System will handle a DNTT instruction.
That is, the System will check that the
price is equal to or better than the NBBO
on the opposite side of the options
series or any stock component.
2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes that its
proposal is consistent with section 6(b)
of the Act,25 in general, and furthers the
objectives of section 6(b)(5) of the Act,26
in particular, in that it is designed to
promote just and equitable principles of
trade and to protect investors and the
public interest.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Options 3, Section 7
The Exchange’s proposal to amend
ISE Options 3, Section 7(k), Legging
Orders, is consistent with the Act
because the proposal expands the
description of Legging Orders to
describe in more detail the current
is generated by a different Complex Order in the
same leg at a better price or the same price for a
participant with a higher price priority. . .’’. While
Phlx’s Options 3, Section 14 has priority overlays
for different market participants within its
allocation model, whereas ISE does not have similar
priority overlays and the remainder of the language
is not necessary.
25 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
26 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:03 Dec 11, 2023
Jkt 262001
legging functionality, thereby increasing
transparency with respect to this order
type. The proposed amendments reflect
the way Legging Orders work today. The
Exchange is not amending its System
functionality with respect to Legging
Orders, rather, the proposed rule text is
intended to be more descriptive and
conform the level of detail in the order
type to Phlx Options 3, Section
7(b)(10)which describes details of Phlx’s
legging orders and MIAX Rule
518(a)(10), which describes derived
orders.
Specifying that Legging Orders, which
are an individual component of a
Complex Options Order, are ‘‘one leg of
a two-legged Complex Options Order’’
and are not routable in the first
paragraph of ISE Options 3, Section 7(k)
is consistent with the Act because these
terms better describe a Legging Order.
Similarly, specifying that Legging
Orders will be Limit Orders with a TIF
of Day makes clear the way these orders
are handled by the System. Legging
Orders are not based on Member
instruction and are intended to facilitate
more interaction between the single-leg
order book and the Complex Order
Book, resulting in increased execution
opportunities and better execution
prices for Complex Orders and for
orders resting on the single-leg order
book. For this reason, Legging Orders do
not route and have a TIF of Day to
permit Members to interact with this
order type. The Exchange believes the
amended rule text more accurately
describes a Legging Order and makes
clear to Members the behavior of
Legging Orders. Also, capitalizing the
terms ‘‘Legging Order’’ and ‘‘Limit
Order’’ and referring to a ‘‘single-leg’’
order book throughout ISE Options 3,
Section 7(k) conforms terms with those
of ISE Options 3, Section 14, Complex
Orders.
The proposed text in the new second
paragraph of ISE Options 3, Section 7(k)
makes clear the current System
processing for Legging Orders.
Specifically, the proposed rule text
makes clear that the System will
evaluate whether Legging Orders may be
generated, which occurs at the time a
Complex Options Order enters the
Complex Order Book or after a time
interval (to be determined by the
Exchange, not to exceed one second) 27
when the NBBO or Exchange best bid or
offer in any component of a Complex
Options Order changes. Further, the
Exchange proposes to state that it may
determine to limit the number of
Legging Orders generated on an
27 Today, the time interval is set to one hundred
milliseconds.
PO 00000
Frm 00064
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
86167
objective basis and may determine to
remove existing Legging Orders, and
cease the creation of additional Legging
Orders, to maintain a fair and orderly
market in times of extreme volatility or
uncertainty. Phlx has similar rule text in
Phlx Options 3, Section 14(f)(iii)(C).28
The proposed limitation is consistent
with the Act because it assists the
Exchange in managing the number of
Legging Orders generated to ensure that
Legging Orders do not negatively impact
the Exchange’s System capacity and
performance so that ISE may maintain a
fair and orderly market in times of
extreme volatility or uncertainty. Of
note, the Exchange does not limit the
generation of Legging Orders on the
basis of the entering Member or the
Member category of the order (i.e.,
Professional or Priority Customer). The
Exchange proposes to limit the number
of Legging Orders, remove existing
Legging Orders, and cease creation of
additional Legging Orders, in order to
permit the Exchange to maintain a fair
and orderly market in times of extreme
volatility or uncertainty. This discretion
is consistent with the Act because it
assists the Exchange in managing the
number of Legging Orders generated to
ensure that Legging Orders do not
negatively impact the Exchange’s
System capacity and performance.
The Exchange’s proposal to provide
that Legging Orders are treated as
having no Priority Customer capacity on
the single leg order book, regardless of
being generated from Priority Customer
Complex Options Orders is consistent
with the Act and the protection of
investor and the public interest. A
Legging Order is handled in the same
manner as other orders on the single-leg
order book except as otherwise provided
in ISE Options 3, Section 7(k), and is
executed only after all other executable
orders and quotes at the same price are
executed in full. When a Legging Order
is executed, the other component of the
Complex Order on the Complex Order
Book will be automatically executed
against the best bid or offer on the
Exchange. The Exchange believes that a
Legging Order, created for the execution
of a Complex Order, should not be
28 Phlx’s rule states, in part, in Options 3, Section
14(f)(iii)(C) that, ‘‘. . .The System will evaluate the
CBOOK when a Complex Order enters the CBOOK
and at a regular time interval, to be determined by
the Exchange (which interval shall not exceed 1
second), following a change in the national best bid
and/or offer (‘‘NBBO’’) or Phlx best bid and/or offer
(‘‘PBBO’’) in any component of a Complex Order
eligible to generate Legging Orders, to determine
whether Legging Orders may be generated. The
Exchange may determine to limit the number of
Legging Orders generated on an objective basis and
may determine to remove existing Legging Orders
in order to maintain a fair and orderly market in
times of extreme volatility or uncertainty.’’
E:\FR\FM\12DEN1.SGM
12DEN1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
86168
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 237 / Tuesday, December 12, 2023 / Notices
afforded priority over resting orders and
quotes on the single-leg order book, and
therefore has determined to protect the
priority on the single-leg order book of
such resting orders and quotes. MIAX
similarly executes a derived order only
after all other executable orders and
quotes at the same price are executed in
full.29
The Exchange’s proposal to amend
ISE Options 3, Section 7(k)(1) to make
clear a Legging Order may be generated
for each leg of a two-legged Complex
Order is consistent with the Act.
Legging Orders may be generated for
each leg of a two-legged options orders
with the same quantity on both legs.
Automatically generating Legging
Orders promotes just and equitable
principles of trade because these orders
will only be executed after all other
executable interest at the same price
(including non-displayed interest) is
executed in full. This behavior is
consistent with the Act because it will
provide additional execution
opportunities for Complex Orders,
without negatively impacting any
investors in the single-leg market. In
fact, the generation of Legging Orders
may enhance execution quality for
investors in the single-leg market by
improving the price and/or size of the
ISE BBO and by providing additional
execution opportunity for resting orders
on the single-leg order book. The
generation of Legging Orders is fully
compliant with all regulatory
requirements. In particular, Legging
Orders are firm orders that will be
displayed at the ISE BBO. Also, a
Legging Order will be automatically
removed if it is no longer displayable at
the ISE BBO or if the net price of the
Complex Order can no longer be
achieved. Finally, the generation of
Legging Orders is limited in scope, as
they may be generated only for Complex
Options Orders with two legs.
Additionally, as noted herein, the
Exchange will closely manage and
curtail the generation of Legging Orders
to assure that they do not negatively
impact system capacity and
performance. Phlx’s Legging Orders
differ from ISE’s Legging Orders in that,
on Phlx, two legging orders may be
generated, but only one of those can
execute as part of the execution of a
particular complex order.
The addition of ‘‘resting on the top of
the Complex Order Book’’ in the first
sentence of ISE Options 3, Section
29 See MIAX Rule 518(a)(10)(iv). See also
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 79072 (October
7, 2016), 81 FR 71131 (October 14, 2016) (SR–
MIAX–2016–26) (Order Approving a Proposed Rule
Change to Adopt New Rules to Govern the Trading
of Complex Orders).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:03 Dec 11, 2023
Jkt 262001
7(k)(1) is consistent with the Act
because it is consistent with existing
Legging Order functionality that
considers the best price on Phlx’s order
book. This addition will make clear that
the priority of orders in the Complex
Order Book controls with respect to the
generation of Legging Orders.
The Exchange’s proposal to amend
the second sentence of ISE Options 3,
Section 7(k)(1) to add ‘‘excluding other
Legging Orders’’ to the end of the
sentence is consistent with the Act
because it makes clear that the price of
a Legging Order is not considered in the
BBO for purposes of determining
whether the net price of a Complex
Order could be achieved were it to
generate a Legging Order.
Finally, the Exchange’s proposal to
add a sentence to ISE Options 3, Section
7(k)(1) which states, ‘‘Legging Orders
will be generated and executed in the
minimum increment for that options
series’’ is consistent with the Act
because ISE Options 3, Section 3
describes the minimum increments for
options traded on ISE. Adding this rule
text will make clear that the minimum
increment rule in Options 3, Section 3
is applicable to Legging Orders. MIAX
Rule 518(a)(10)(iii) similarly provides
that ISE’s derived orders will not be
created at a price increment less than
the minimum established by Rule 510.30
Amending proposed new paragraph
ISE Options 3, Section 7(k)(2) to note
that a Legging Order will not be
generated at a price that locks or crosses
the best bid or offer of another exchange
is already provided for in the last
sentence of current Options 3, Section
7(k)(1). This concept is consistent with
the Act in that the Exchange will not
trade through away markets as specified
in Options 5, Sections 2 and 3 which
describe order protection and locked
and crossed markets rules.
Adding a provision to proposed new
paragraph ISE Options 3, Section 7(k)(2)
which states that a Legging Order will
not be generated if there is a complex
auction on either side in the Complex
Options Strategy, or a single-leg auction
on either side in any component of the
Complex Options Strategy, or a Posting
Period in progress on the same side in
the series, pursuant to Options 3,
Section 15 regarding ATR is consistent
with the Act. The Exchange believes
from a System processing and user
acceptance standpoint, the best practice
is to wait for an auction in that options
series to be complete, or for the ATR
Posting Period to complete, as that time
is minimal. Phlx’s legging order rule in
30 MIAX Rule 510 specifies the minimum
increments for options traded on MIAX.
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Options 3, Section 7(b)(10)(2)has the
same restriction as proposed to be
added to ISE’s Legging Orders rule.31
Adding a provision to proposed new
paragraph ISE Options 3, Section 7(k)(2)
which states that a Legging Order will
not be generated if the price of the leg(s)
of a Complex Options Order is outside
of the price limits described in Options
3, Section 16(a) is consistent with the
Act. Today, ISE Options 3, Section 16(a)
would restrict the generation of a
Legging Order through price limits for
Complex Orders, by adding this rule
text in Options 3, Section 7(k)(2) all
limitations related to the generation of
Legging Orders will be memorialized in
Options 3, Section 7(k).32
Adding a provision to proposed new
paragraph ISE Options 3, Section 7(k)(2)
which states that a Legging Order will
not be generated if there is already a
Legging Order in that options series on
the same side of the market at the same
price is consistent with the Act. This
provision addresses a situation of
overlapping Legging Orders and Legging
Order dependencies in other
components. Phlx has a similar sentence
in Phlx Options 3, Section 7(b)(10)(2).
Of note, the phrase ‘‘unless it has
priority based on the participant type,
under existing Exchange rules’’ from
Phlx Options 3, Section 7(b)(10)(2) is
not being added to ISE’s Rule as Options
3, Section 10 which describes allocation
on the single-leg order book, because as
stated in proposed ISE Options 3,
Section 7(k), ‘‘Legging Orders are treated
as having no Priority Customer capacity
on the single-leg order book, regardless
of being generated from Priority
Customer Complex Options Orders.’’
The addition of this rule text will make
clear an existing limitation to the
generation of orders in Options 3,
Section 7(k).
Adding a provision to proposed new
paragraph ISE Options 3, Section 7(k)(2)
which states that a Legging Order will
31 Phlx Options 3, Section 7(b)(1)(2) provides that
‘‘A Legging Order will not be created . . .‘‘(ii) if
there is an auction on either side or a Posting Period
under Options 3, Section 15 regarding Acceptable
Trade Range on the same side in progress in the
series.’’ Phlx’s rules describe an auction on either
side of the Legging Order while ISE’s auction breaks
down the auction into either a complex auction or
single-leg auction. Of note, Phlx’s Acceptable Trade
Range rule has a Posting Period described in
Options 3, Section 15. ISE does have an Acceptable
Trade Range rule as well in Options 3, Section 15,
but that rule differs from Phlx as there is no Posting
Period.
32 Phlx’s rule similarly indicates that a Legging
Order is subject to certain price parameters by
stating that a Legging Order will not be generated
if the price of the Complex Order is outside of the
ACE Parameter of paragraph in subparagraph (i) of
Options 3, Section 14. The ACE Parameter differs
from the price limits described in ISE Options 3,
Section 16(a).
E:\FR\FM\12DEN1.SGM
12DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 237 / Tuesday, December 12, 2023 / Notices
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
not be generated for Complex Orders
with two option legs, where both legs
are buying or both legs are selling and
both legs are calls or both legs are puts,
as described in Options 3, Section
14(d)(3)(A) is consistent with the Act.
This limitation is already provided for
in current ISE Options 3, section
14(d)(3)(A) and is being added to
proposed new paragraph Options 3,
Section 7(k)(2) to provide Members with
a complete list of when Legging Orders
will not be generated in Options 3,
Section 7(k).
Adding a provision to proposed new
paragraph ISE Options 3, Section 7(k)(2)
which states that a Legging Order will
not be generated if the Exchange has not
opened; or a particular option series has
not opened or such options series is
halted is consistent with the Act. Since
a complex strategy must be available for
trading to generate a Legging Order, the
failure of an options series that is a
component of the complex strategy to
open or a subsequent halt would cause
Legging Orders not to generate. Phlx has
a similar rule in Phlx Options 3, Section
7(b)(10)(1).
Amending proposed ISE Options 3.
Section 7(k)(3), similar to Phlx Options
3, Section 7(b)(10)(3)to describe current
System handling when a Legging Order
is executed and subsequently the other
leg of the Complex Order is
automatically executed against the
displayed best bid or offer on the
Exchange, and, therefore, any other
Legging Order based on that Complex
Order is removed is consistent with the
Act. This example demonstrates that the
Exchange will execute against the best
bid or offer on the Exchange and will
remove Legging Orders. The proposal to
replace the word ‘‘portion’’ with ‘‘leg’’
will make the rule text more explicit.
Adding the phrase ‘‘and any other
Legging order not executed as part of the
Complex Options Order will be
removed’’ to the end of the second
sentence in proposed Options 3, Section
7(k)(3) is consistent with the Act
because the phrase will provide
additional information regarding the
treatment of unexecuted Legging Orders
in Options 3, Section 7(k). Phlx has a
substantively similar sentence in
Options 3, Section 7(b)(10)(3).33
33 Phlx Options 3, Section 7(b)(10)(3) states, ‘‘A
Legging Order is executed only after all other
executable orders (including any non-displayed
size) and quotes at the same price are executed in
full. When a Legging Order is executed, the other
leg of the Complex Order will be automatically
executed against the displayed best bid or offer on
the Exchange and any other Legging Order based on
that Complex Order will be removed.’’ ISE
explicitly states ‘‘not executed as part of the
Complex Options Order’’ where Phlx says ‘‘based
on that Complex Order.’’
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:03 Dec 11, 2023
Jkt 262001
Amending proposed ISE Options 3,
Section 7(k)(3) to add a new sentence to
Options 3, Section 7(k)(3) which states,
‘‘Two Legging Orders related to the
same Complex Options Order can be
generated, and both can execute as part
of the execution of a particular Complex
Options Order’’ is consistent with the
Act. As noted above, two Legging
Orders related to the same Complex
Options Order can be generated, and
both can execute as part of the
execution of a particular Complex
Options Order. This behavior differs
from Phlx where two legging orders may
be generated, but only one of those can
execute as part of the execution of a
particular complex order. The Exchange
believes that permitting both Legging
Orders to execute as part of the
execution of a particular Complex
Options Order will allow more Complex
Orders to execute while the price of the
leg(s) will continue to be bounded by
the price limits described in ISE
Options 3, Section 16(a).
Amending proposed ISE Options 3,
Section 7(k)(4)(i) to state, ‘‘A Legging
Order is automatically removed from
the single-leg limit order book if: (i) the
price of the Legging Order is no longer
at the displayed best bid or offer on the
single-leg limit order book or is at a
price that locks or crosses the best bid
or offer of another exchange . . .’’
(emphasis added) is consistent with the
Act. Current Options 3, Section 7(k)(2)
already notes that a Legging Order will
not be created at a price that locks or
crosses the best bid or offer of another
exchange. Adding the same rule text to
proposed Options 3, Section 7(k)(4) will
make clear that a Legging Order that
locks or crosses an away market would
be removed from the limit order book.
Amending proposed ISE Options 3,
Section 7(k)(4)(ii) to add a clause to
current Options 3, Section 7(k)(3) at (ii)
to provide that ‘‘A Legging Order is
automatically removed from the singleleg limit order book if . . . (ii) execution
of the Legging Order would no longer
achieve that net price of the Complex
Options Order when the other leg is
executed against the best displayed bid
or offer on the single-leg limit order
book, excluding other Legging Orders’’
(emphasis added) is consistent with the
Act. A Legging Order is removed if the
BBO on the other leg worsens such that
the Complex Order limit price could no
longer be achieved by trading with the
quote, even if it could be achieved by
trading with a Legging Order generated
by another Complex Order. Phlx has a
similar sentence in Options 3, Section
7(b)(10)(4).
Amending proposed ISE Options 3,
Section 7(k)(4) to add a new section
PO 00000
Frm 00066
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
86169
‘‘(v)’’ to this paragraph which states, ‘‘A
Legging Order is automatically removed
from the single-leg limit order book if
. . . (v) the price of the leg(s) of a
Complex Options Order is outside of the
price limits described in current
Options 3, Section 16(a)’’ is consistent
with the Act. This limitation is
currently described in ISE Options 3,
Section 16(a) and is being added to this
order type to complete the list of cases
where a Legging Order would be
removed from the order book in Options
3, Section 7(k). Phlx has similar rule
text in Options 3, Section 7(b)(10)(4).
Amending proposed ISE Options 3,
Section 7(k)(4) to add a new section
‘‘(vi)’’ to this paragraph which states, ‘‘A
Legging Order is automatically removed
from the single-leg limit order book if
. . . (vi) the System receives a complex
auction on either side in the Complex
Options Strategy, or the System receives
a single-leg auction on either side in any
component of the Complex Options
Strategy’’ is consistent with the Act. As
noted above, the Exchange believes from
a System processing and user
acceptance standpoint, the best practice
is to remove the System-generated
Legging Order from the order book
during the course of the auction, as that
time is minimal, then the System can
attempt to re-generate a Legging Order
once the auction has concluded. Phlx
has similar language in Options 3,
Section 7(b)(10)(4).
Amending proposed ISE Options 3,
Section 7(k)(4) to add a new section
‘‘(vii)’’ to this paragraph which states,
‘‘A Legging Order is automatically
removed from the single-leg limit order
book if . . . (vii) a Legging Order is
generated by a different Complex
Options Order in the same leg at a better
price or the same price for a participant
with a higher price priority.’’ As noted
in proposed Options 3, Section 7(k)(1),
a Legging Order may be automatically
generated at a price that matches or
improves upon the best displayed bid or
offer on the single-leg limit order book.
The System removes the Legging Order
because it would have been at an
inferior price. Phlx Options 3, Section
7(b)(10)(4) has similar language.
Options 3, Section 16
The Exchange’s proposal to amend
the language in ISE Options 3, Section
16(a) related to price limits for Complex
Orders is consistent with the Act and
protects investors and the general public
by ensuring that the DNTT instruction
causes a Complex Order is to be
executed only at a price that is equal to
or better than the NBBO on the opposite
side for the options series or any stock
component. The proposed rule text
E:\FR\FM\12DEN1.SGM
12DEN1
86170
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 237 / Tuesday, December 12, 2023 / Notices
makes transparent the manner in which
the System is currently handling the
DNTT instruction.
B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Burden on Competition
The Exchange does not believe that
the proposed rule change will impose
any burden on competition not
necessary or appropriate in furtherance
of the purposes of the Act.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Options 3, Section 7
The Exchange’s proposal to amend
ISE Options 3, Section 7(k), Legging
Orders, does not impose an intra-market
burden on competition because all
market participants may interact with
Legging Orders on the single-leg order
book. The Exchange’s proposal to
amend ISE Options 3, Section 7(k),
Legging Orders, does not impose an
inter-market burden on competition
because other options exchanges may
offer Legging Orders with similar
functionality. Enhancing the description
of the Legging Orders functionality will
allow ISE to compete effectively with
other options exchanges that offer
similar functionality.
The Exchange’s proposal to limit the
number of Legging Orders and the
ability to remove existing Legging
Orders does not impose an intra-market
burden on competition because the
functionality will permit the Exchange
to maintain a fair and orderly market in
times of extreme volatility or
uncertainty. Further, the Exchange does
not limit the generation of Legging
Orders on the basis of the entering
Member or the Member category of the
order (i.e., Professional or Priority
Customer). The Exchange’s proposal to
limit the number of Legging Orders and
the ability to remove existing Legging
Orders does not impose an inter-market
burden on competition because this
discretion is consistent with the
treatment of Legging Orders on other
options exchanges.34
Options 3, Section 16
The Exchange’s proposal to amend
the language in ISE Options 3, Section
16(a) related to price limits for Complex
Orders to specify that a Complex Order
must be executed at a price that is equal
to or better than the NBBO on the
opposite side for the options series or
any stock component does not impose
an intra-market burden on competition
because the System applies this price
check to all Members executing
Complex Orders in the same manner.
The Exchange’s proposal to amend the
language in ISE Options 3, Section 16(a)
34 See
Phlx Options 3, Section 14(f)(iii)(C).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:03 Dec 11, 2023
Jkt 262001
does not impose an inter-market burden
on competition because any options
exchange could offer similar
functionality.
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 Exchange has filed the proposed
rule change pursuant to section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act 35 and Rule
19b–4(f)(6) thereunder.36 Because the
foregoing proposed rule change does
not: (i) significantly affect the protection
of investors or the public interest; (ii)
impose any significant burden on
competition; and (iii) become operative
for 30 days from the date on which it
was filed, or such shorter time as the
Commission may designate, it has
become effective pursuant to section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act 37 and
subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b–4
thereunder.38
A proposed rule change filed
pursuant to Rule 19b–4(f)(6) under the
Act 39 normally does not become
operative for 30 days after the date of its
filing. However, Rule 19b–4(f)(6)(iii) 40
permits the Commission to designate a
shorter time if such action is consistent
with the protection of investors and the
public interest. The Exchange has
requested that the Commission waive
the 30-day operative delay so that the
Exchange may immediately update its
rules to provide greater detail with
respect to the generation, execution, and
removal of Legging Orders. The
Commission believes that the proposed
rule change presents no novel issues
and that waiver of the 30-day operative
delay is consistent with the protection
of investors and the public interest.
Accordingly, the Commission hereby
waives the operative delay and
designates the proposed rule change
operative upon filing.41
35 15
U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6).
37 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
38 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b–
4(f)(6)(iii) requires a self-regulatory organization to
give the Commission written notice of its intent to
file the proposed rule change, along with a brief
description and text of the proposed rule change,
at least five business days prior to the date of filing
of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time
as designated by the Commission. The Exchange
has satisfied this requirement.
39 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6).
40 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6)(iii).
41 For purposes only of waiving the 30-day
operative delay, the Commission has also
36 17
PO 00000
Frm 00067
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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:
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–
ISE–2023–31 on the subject line.
Paper Comments
• Send paper comments in triplicate
to Secretary, Securities and Exchange
Commission, 100 F Street NE,
Washington, DC 20549–1090.
All submissions should refer to file
number SR–ISE–2023–31. 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
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also
will be available for inspection and
copying at the principal office of the
considered the proposed rule’s impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See
15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
E:\FR\FM\12DEN1.SGM
12DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 237 / Tuesday, December 12, 2023 / Notices
Exchange. Do not include personal
identifiable information in submissions;
you should submit only information
that you wish to make available
publicly. We may redact in part or
withhold entirely from publication
submitted material that is obscene or
subject to copyright protection. All
submissions should refer to file number
SR–ISE–2023–31 and should be
submitted on or before January 2, 2024.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.42
Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023–27163 Filed 12–11–23; 8:45 am]
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
1. Purpose
[Release No. 34–99100; File No. SR–MEMX–
2023–32]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; MEMX
LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate
Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule
Change To Amend the Exchange’s Fee
Schedule
December 6, 2023.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2
notice is hereby given that, on
November 30, 2023, MEMX LLC
(‘‘MEMX’’ or the ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with
the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the ‘‘Commission’’) the
proposed rule change as described in
Items I, II and III below, which Items
have been prepared by the Exchange.
The Commission is publishing this
notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested
persons.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Terms of Substance of
the Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange is filing with the
Commission a proposed rule change to
amend the Exchange’s fee schedule
applicable to Members 3 (the ‘‘Fee
Schedule’’) pursuant to Exchange Rules
15.1(a) and (c). The Exchange proposes
to implement the changes to the Fee
Schedule pursuant to this proposal on
December 1, 2023. The text of the
proposed rule change is provided in
Exhibit 5.
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12), (59).
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.
3 See Exchange Rule 1.5(p).
1 15
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:03 Dec 11, 2023
Jkt 262001
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 the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
42 17
II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
The purpose of the proposed rule
change is to amend the Fee Schedule to
remove an expired criteria under
Liquidity Provision Tier 5.
The Exchange currently provides a
base rebate of $0.0015 per share for
executions of orders in securities priced
at or above $1.00 per share that add
displayed liquidity to the Exchange
(such orders, ‘‘Added Displayed
Volume’’).4 The Exchange also currently
offers Liquidity Provision Tiers 1–5
under which a Member may receive an
enhanced rebate for executions of
Added Displayed Volume by achieving
the corresponding required volume
criteria for each such tier. With respect
to Liquidity Provision Tier 5, the
Exchange currently provides an
enhanced rebate of $0.0025 per share for
executions of Added Displayed Volume
for Members that qualify for such tier by
achieving: (1) an ADAV 5 that is equal to
or greater than 0.06% of the TCV; 6 or
(2) a Displayed ADAV that is equal to
or greater than 0.007% of the TCV and
a Step-Up Displayed ADAV 7 from May
2023 that is equal to or greater than 50%
of the Member’s May 2023 Displayed
4 The base rebate for executions of Added
Displayed Volume is referred to by the Exchange on
the Fee Schedule under the existing description
‘‘Added displayed volume’’ with a Fee Code of ‘‘B’’,
‘‘D’’ or ‘‘J’’, as applicable, on execution reports.
5 As set forth on the Fee Schedule, ‘‘ADAV’’
means the average daily added volume calculated
as the number of shares added per day, which is
calculated on a monthly basis.
6 As set forth on the Fee Schedule, ‘‘TCV’’ means
total consolidated volume calculated as the volume
reported by all exchanges and trade reporting
facilities to a consolidated transaction reporting
plan for the month for which the fees apply.
7 As set forth on the Fee Schedule, ‘‘Step Up
Displayed ADAV’’ means Displayed ADAV in the
relevant baseline month subtracted from current
Displayed ADAV.
PO 00000
Frm 00068
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
86171
ADAV of the TCV.8 Additionally, the
Fee Schedule indicates that criteria (2)
of Liquidity Provision Tier 5 will expire
no later than November 30, 2023. Now,
given the expiration of criteria (2) of
Liquidity Provision Tier 5, it is
necessary to modify the Fee Schedule to
delete this criteria (2) as well as the note
under the Liquidity Provision Tiers
pricing table that indicates its
expiration, as both are no longer
applicable and otherwise obsolete. The
Exchange is not proposing to make any
changes to this or any other Liquidity
Provision Tier, and as such, Liquidity
Provision Tier 5 will now consist solely
of the previously existing criteria (1).
2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes that the
proposed rule change is consistent with
the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,9
in general, and with Sections 6(b)(4) and
6(b)(5) of the Act,10 in particular, in that
it provides for the equitable allocation
of reasonable dues, fees and other
charges among its Members and other
persons using its facilities and is not
designed to permit unfair
discrimination between customers,
issuers, brokers, or dealers.
The Exchange believes that the
proposed change to modify Liquidity
Provision Tier 5 to remove the expired
criteria (2) criteria [sic] is reasonable
because there was an expiration date
associated with this criteria that has
now passed. As such, this criteria is no
longer available under this tier, and
should not remain on the Fee Schedule.
The Exchange believes that the
enhanced rebate for executions of
Added Displayed Volume provided
under Liquidity Provision Tier 5, which
the Exchange is not proposing to change
with this proposal, remains
commensurate with the required criteria
under such tier, as modified, and is
reasonably related to the market quality
benefits that such tier is designed to
achieve. The Exchange also believes the
enhanced rebate for executions of
Added Displayed Volume provided
under Liquidity Provision Tier 5
remains equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory, as such enhanced rebate
will continue to apply equally to all
qualifying Members.
For the reasons discussed above, the
Exchange submits that the proposal
8 The proposed pricing for Liquidity Provision
Tier 5 is referred to by the Exchange on the Fee
Schedule under the existing description ‘‘Added
displayed volume, Liquidity Provision Tier 5’’ with
a Fee Code of ‘‘B5’’, ‘‘D5’’ or ‘‘J5’’, as applicable, to
be provided by the Exchange on the monthly
invoices provided to Members.
9 15 U.S.C. 78f.
10 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
E:\FR\FM\12DEN1.SGM
12DEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 237 (Tuesday, December 12, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 86162-86171]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-27163]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-99092; File No. SR-ISE-2023-31]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq ISE, LLC; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Legging
Orders
December 6, 2023.
Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on November 29, 2023, Nasdaq ISE, LLC (``ISE'' or ``Exchange'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC'' or ``Commission'')
the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II 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 Options 3, Section 7, Types of
Orders and Order and Quote Protocols, and Options 3, Section 16,
Complex Order Risk Protection.
The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at https://listingcenter.nasdaq.com/rulebook/ise/rules, at the
principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public
Reference Room.
II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.
A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
1. Purpose
The Exchange proposes to amend Options 3, Section 7, Types of
Orders and Order and Quote Protocols, and Section 16, Complex Order
Risk Protections. Each change is described below.
Options 3, Section 7
The Exchange proposes to expand the description of Legging Orders
to add detail to describe the current System \3\ functionality. The
proposed amendments reflect the way the System handles Legging Orders
today. The Exchange is not amending its current System functionality
with respect to Legging Orders, rather, the proposed rule text is
intended to add more detail to ISE Options 3, Section 7(k) to conform
the level of detail to Nasdaq Phlx LLC (``Phlx'') Options 3, Sections
7(b)(10) and 14(f)(iii)(C), which describes Phlx's legging orders, as
well as The Miami International Securities Exchange, LLC (``MIAX'')
Rule 518(a)(10), which describes derived orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The term ``System'' means the electronic system operated by
the Exchange that receives and disseminates quotes, executes orders
and reports transactions. See Options 1, Section 1(a)(49).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Generally, the Exchange proposes to amend the phrase ``regular
limit order book'' in ISE Options 3, Section 7(k) to ``single-leg limit
order book'' to conform the rule text to the manner in which that order
book is described in ISE Options 3, Section 14, Complex Orders.
Currently, ISE Options 3, Section 7(k) provides,
Legging Orders. A legging order is a limit order on the regular
limit order book that represents one side of a Complex Options Order
that is to buy or sell an equal quantity of two options series
resting on the Exchange's Complex Order Book. Legging orders are
firm orders that are included in the Exchange's displayed best bid
or offer.
(1) A legging order may be automatically generated for one leg
of a Complex Options Order at a price: (i) that matches or improves
upon the best displayed bid or offer on the regular limit order
book; and (ii) at which the net price can be achieved when the other
leg is executed against the best displayed bid or offer on the
regular limit order book. A legging order will not be created at a
price that locks or crosses the best bid or offer of another
exchange or during a Posting Period in progress on the same side in
the series, pursuant to Options 3, Section 15 regarding Acceptable
Trade Range.
(2) A legging order is executed only after all other executable
orders (including any non-displayed size) and quotes at the same
price are executed in full. When a legging order is executed, the
other portion of the Complex Options Order will be automatically
executed against the displayed best bid or offer on the Exchange.
(3) A legging order is automatically removed from the regular
limit order book if: (i) the price of the legging order is no longer
at the displayed best bid or offer on the regular limit order book,
(ii) execution of the legging order would no longer achieve the net
price of the Complex Options Order when the other leg is executed
against the best displayed bid or offer on the regular limit order
book, (iii) the Complex Options Order is executed in full or in part
on the Complex Order Book, or (iv) the Complex Options Order is
cancelled or modified.
The Exchange proposes to amend the first paragraph of ISE Options
3, Section 7(k) to instead provide,
A Legging Order is a Limit Order on the single-leg limit order
book in an individual series that represents one leg of a two-legged
Complex Options Order that is to buy or sell an equal quantity of
two options series resting on the Exchange's Complex Order Book.
Legging Orders are firm orders that are included in the Exchange's
displayed best bid or offer. Legging Orders are not routable and
have a TIF of Day.
Generally, the Exchange proposes to capitalize the terms ``Legging
Order'' and ``Limit Order'' throughout ISE Options 3, Section 7(k). The
Exchange also proposes to amend the term ``one side of a Complex
Options Order'' to more specifically state, ``one leg of a two-legged
Complex Options Order.'' The Exchange also proposes to add a new
sentence to the end of the paragraph which provides, ``Legging Orders
are not routable and have a TIF of Day.'' Specifying that Legging
Orders, which are an individual component of a Complex Options
Order,\4\ are also not
[[Page 86163]]
routable will add detail to the description of the order type and make
clear the current System handling. Similarly, specifying that Legging
Orders will be Limit Orders \5\ with a TIF of Day makes clear the way
these orders are currently handled by the System. Legging Orders are
not based on Member instruction and are intended to facilitate more
interaction between the single-leg order book and the Complex Order
Book, resulting in increased execution opportunities and better
execution prices for Complex Orders and for orders resting on the
single-leg order book. For this reason, Legging Orders do not route and
have a TIF of Day to permit Members to interact with this order type.
The Exchange believes the amended rule text proposed in the first
paragraph of ISE Options 3, Section 7(k) more accurately describes a
Legging Order and provides Members with greater information regarding
this order type. Phlx's rules at Options 3, Section 7(b)(10) similarly
describes a Legging Order as ``one leg of a two-legged Complex Options
Order'' and specifies that Phlx's Legging Orders are not routable and
have a time-in-force of Day.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The terms ``Complex Options Order,'' ``Stock-Option Order,''
and ``Stock-Complex Order'' refer to orders for a Complex Options
Strategy, Stock-Option Strategy, and Stock-Complex Strategy,
respectively. The term ``Complex Order'' includes Complex Options
Orders, Stock-Option Orders, and Stock-Complex Orders. See ISE
Options 3, Section 14(a)(5). See also ISE Options 3, Section
14(a)(1)-(3).
\5\ A Limit Order is an order to buy or sell a stated number of
options contracts at a specified price or better. See ISE Options 3,
Section 7(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange proposes to add a new second paragraph to ISE Options
3, Section 7(k) to specifically explain the way the System will
generate a Legging Order. The Exchange proposes to state,
The System will evaluate whether Legging Orders may be generated
(1) when a Complex Options Order enters the Complex Order Book, and
(2) after a time interval (to be determined by the Exchange, not to
exceed 1 second) when the NBBO or Exchange best bid or offer in any
component of a Complex Options Order changes. The Exchange may
determine to limit the number of Legging Orders generated on an
objective basis and may determine to remove existing Legging Orders
in order to maintain a fair and orderly market in times of extreme
volatility or uncertainty. Legging Orders are treated as having no
Priority Customer capacity on the single-leg order book, regardless
of being generated from Priority Customer Complex Options Orders.
The Exchange proposes to make clear that the System will evaluate
whether Legging Orders may be generated, which occurs at the time a
Complex Options Order enters the Complex Order Book or after a time
interval (to be determined by the Exchange, not to exceed one second)
\6\ when the NBBO or Exchange best bid or offer in any component of a
Complex Options Order changes. The Exchange proposes to state that it
may determine to limit the number of Legging Orders generated on an
objective basis and may determine to remove existing Legging Orders,
and cease the creation of additional Legging Orders, to maintain a fair
and orderly market in times of extreme volatility or uncertainty. Phlx
has similar rule text in Phlx Options 3, Section 14(f)(iii)(C).\7\ This
limitation assists the Exchange in managing the number of Legging
Orders generated to ensure that Legging Orders do not negatively impact
the Exchange's System capacity and performance so that ISE may maintain
a fair and orderly market in times of extreme volatility or
uncertainty. Of note, the Exchange does not limit the generation of
Legging Orders on the basis of the entering Member or the Member
category of the order (i.e., Professional or Priority Customer). Phlx
similarly made this representation when it proposed to adopt rules
related to the generation and execution of ``legging orders.'' \8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Today, the time interval is set to one hundred milliseconds.
\7\ Phlx's rule states, in part, in Options 3, Section
14(f)(iii)(C) that, ``. . . The System will evaluate the CBOOK when
a Complex Order enters the CBOOK and at a regular time interval, to
be determined by the Exchange (which interval shall not exceed 1
second), following a change in the national best bid and/or offer
(`NBBO') or Phlx best bid and/or offer (`PBBO') in any component of
a Complex Order eligible to generate Legging Orders, to determine
whether Legging Orders may be generated. The Exchange may determine
to limit the number of Legging Orders generated on an objective
basis and may determine to remove existing Legging Orders in order
to maintain a fair and orderly market in times of extreme volatility
or uncertainty.''
\8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 73545 (November 6,
2014), 79 FR 67498 (November 13, 2014) (SR-Phlx-2014-54) (Notice of
Filing of Amendment No. 1 and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of
a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 1, To Add a New
Complex Order Process Called Legging Orders).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, the Exchange proposes to provide that Legging Orders are
treated as having no Priority Customer capacity on the single leg order
book, regardless of being generated from Priority Customer Complex
Options Orders. A Legging Order is handled in the same manner as other
orders on the single-leg order book except as otherwise provided in ISE
Options 3, Section 7(k), and is executed only after all other
executable orders and quotes at the same price are executed in full.
When a Legging Order is executed, the other component of the Complex
Order on the Complex Order Book will be automatically executed against
the best bid or offer on the Exchange. The Exchange believes that a
Legging Order, created for the execution of a Complex Order, should not
be afforded priority over resting orders and quotes on the single-leg
order book, and therefore has determined to protect the priority on the
single-leg order book of such resting orders and quotes. MIAX similarly
executes a derived order only after all other executable orders and
quotes at the same price are executed in full.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See MIAX Rule 518(a)(10)(iv). See also Securities Exchange
Act Release No. 79072 (October 7, 2016), 81 FR 71131 (October 14,
2016) (SR-MIAX-2016-26) (Order Approving a Proposed Rule Change to
Adopt New Rules to Govern the Trading of Complex Orders).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange proposes to amend ISE Options 3, Section 7(k)(1) and
add the title ``Generation of Legging Orders'' to describe the contents
of the paragraph. The Exchange proposes to amend the first sentence
which currently states,
A legging order may be automatically generated for one leg of a
Complex Options Order at a price: (i) that matches or improves upon
the best displayed bid or offer on the regular limit order book; and
(ii) at which the net price can be achieved when the other leg is
executed against the best displayed bid or offer on the regular
limit order book. A legging order will not be created at a price
that locks or crosses the best bid or offer of another exchange or
during a Posting Period in progress on the same side in the series,
pursuant to Options 3, Section 15 regarding Acceptable Trade Range.
The Exchange proposes to instead provide in Options 3, Section
7(k)(1),
A Legging Order may be automatically generated for one or both
leg(s) of a Complex Options Order resting on top of the Complex
Order Book at a price: (i) that matches or improves upon the best
displayed bid or offer on the single-leg limit order book; and (ii)
at which the net price can be achieved when the other leg is
executed against the best displayed bid or offer on the single-leg
limit order book, excluding other Legging Orders. Legging Orders
will be generated and executed in the minimum increment for that
options series.
The Exchange is proposing to add ``or both leg(s)'' to the first
sentence of ISE Options 3, Section 7(k)(1) to make clear a Legging
Order may be generated for each leg of a two-legged Complex Order. The
Exchange notes that Legging Orders may be generated for each leg of a
two-legged options orders with the same quantity on both legs.
Automatically generating Legging Orders, which will only be executed
after all other executable interest at the same price (including non-
displayed interest) is executed in full, will provide additional
execution opportunities for Complex Orders, without negatively
impacting any investors in the single-leg market. In fact, the
generation of Legging Orders may enhance execution quality for
investors in the single-leg market by improving the price and/or size
of the ISE BBO and by providing additional execution opportunity for
resting orders
[[Page 86164]]
on the single-leg order book. The generation of Legging Orders is fully
compliant with all regulatory requirements. In particular, Legging
Orders are firm orders that will be displayed at the ISE BBO. Also, a
Legging Order will be automatically removed if it is no longer
displayable at the ISE BBO or if the net price of the Complex Order can
no longer be achieved. Finally, the generation of Legging Orders is
limited in scope, as they may be generated only for Complex Options
Orders with two legs. Additionally, as noted herein, the Exchange will
closely manage and curtail the generation of Legging Orders to assure
that they do not negatively impact system capacity and performance.
Phlx's Legging Orders differ from ISE's Legging Orders in that, on
Phlx, where two legging orders may be generated, only one of those can
execute as part of the execution of a particular complex order.
The addition of ``resting on the top of the Complex Order Book'' in
the first sentence of ISE Options 3, Section 7(k)(1) will make clear
that the priority of orders in the Complex Order Book controls with
respect to the generation of Legging Orders. The addition of this
language is intended to provide greater detail with respect to the
generation of Legging Order.
The Exchange proposes to amend the second sentence of ISE Options
3, Section 7(k)(1) to add ``excluding other Legging Orders'' to the end
of the sentence to make clear that the price of a Legging Order is not
considered in the BBO for purposes of determining whether the net price
of a Complex Order could be achieved were it to generate a Legging
Order. Below is an example of the manner in which the System calculates
the net price and excludes a Legging Order.
Example #1
Assume
Leg A is quoted 4.20 (100) x 4.25 (100)
Leg B is quoted 4.00 (100) x 4.10 (100)
Leg C is quoted 3.80 (100) x 3.90 (100)
Create A-B strategy, ratio of 1. cBBO \10\ for A-B is 0.10 x 0.25
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ The cBBO is the net best bid or offer comprised of the best
bids and offers of the individual legs of the complex strategy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Create B-C strategy, ratio of 1. cBBO for B-C is 0.10 x 0.30
Generation of Legging Orders:
Complex Order is entered to Buy A-B 10 @ 0.20
System generates Legging Order on leg A's bid @ 4.20
System generates Legging Order on Leg B's offer @ 4.05
Complex Order is entered to Buy B-C 10 @ 0.20
System generates Legging Order on leg B's bid @ 4.00
System generates Legging Order on Leg C's offer @ 3.90
Executions:
If Complex Order B-C sold leg C @3.90, it would have to buy leg B
for 4.10 or less to satisfy its net price of 0.20. Given that a Legging
Order is available on Leg B's offer at 4.05, this Legging Order on leg
C would have been able to generate at 3.85 instead of 3.90 if the
Legging Order at 4.05 was included in the calculation of possible net
execution price, but since it is not, the Legging Order is generated at
3.90 on Leg C's offer instead of 3.85.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Furthermore, if a single-leg order arrives to buy for 3.90
on Leg C, the B-C strategy trades with the 4.10 offer of Leg B and
the 4.05 Legging Order is removed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange is removing the last sentence of ISE Options 3,
Section 7(k)(1) \12\ because that concept is being relocated to
proposed new paragraph Options 3, Section 7(k)(2) as described below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ The last sentence of ISE Options 3, Section 7(k)(1) states,
``A legging order will not be created at a price that locks or
crosses the best bid or offer of another exchange or during a
Posting Period in progress on the same side in the series, pursuant
to Options 3, Section 15 regarding Acceptable Trade Range.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, the Exchange proposes to add a sentence to ISE Options 3,
Section 7(k)(1) which states, ``Legging Orders will be generated and
executed in the minimum increment for that options series.'' Options 3,
Section 3 describes the minimum increments for options traded on ISE.
This rule makes clear that the minimum increment rule in ISE Options 3,
Section 3 is applicable to Legging Orders. MIAX Rule 518(a)(10)(iii)
similarly provides that ISE's derived orders will not be created at a
price increment less than the minimum established by Rule 510.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ MIAX Rule 510 specifies the minimum increments for options
traded on MIAX.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange proposes to add proposed new paragraph ISE Options 3,
Section 7(k)(2) with the title ``When Legging Orders Will Not Be
Generated'' to describe the contents of the paragraph. The Exchange
proposes to state in proposed ISE Options 3, Section 7(k)(2),
When Legging Orders Will Not Be Generated. A Legging Order will
not be generated: (i) at a price that locks or crosses the best bid
or offer of another exchange, (ii) if there is a complex auction on
either side in the Complex Options Strategy, or a single-leg auction
on either side in any component of the Complex Options Strategy, or
a Posting Period in progress on the same side in the series,
pursuant to Options 3, Section 15 regarding Acceptable Trade Range;
(iii) if the price of the leg(s) of a Complex Options Order is
outside of the price limits described in Options 3, Section 16(a);
(iv) if there is already a Legging Order in that options series on
the same side of the market at the same price; or (v) for Complex
Orders with 2 option legs, where both legs are buying or both legs
are selling and both legs are calls or both legs are puts, as
described in Options 3, Section 14(d)(3)(A); or (vi) if the Exchange
has not opened; or a particular option series has not opened or such
options series is halted.
This paragraph will describe when Legging Orders will not be
generated.
First, a Legging Order will not be generated at a price that locks
or crosses the best bid or offer of another exchange as stated in the
last sentence of ISE Options 3, Section 7(k)(1). This concept is
consistent with ISE Options 5, Sections 2 and 3 which describe order
protection and locked and crossed markets.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ ISE Options 5 is incorporated by reference to ISE Options
5. Specifically, ISE Options 5, Section 2 and 3 apply to ISE.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Second, the Exchange proposes to add a provision which states that
a Legging Order will not be generated if there is a complex auction on
either side in the Complex Options Strategy,\15\ or a single-leg
auction on either side in any component of the Complex Options
Strategy, or a Posting Period in progress on the same side in the
series, pursuant to ISE Options 3, Section 15 regarding Acceptable
Trade Range (``ATR'').\16\ The last part of this proposed sentence
concerning ATR was relocated from the last sentence of ISE Options 3,
Section 7(k)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ A Complex Options Strategy is the simultaneous purchase
and/or sale of two or more different options series in the same
underlying security, for the same account, in a ratio that is equal
to or greater than one-to-three (.333) and less than or equal to
three-to-one (3.00) and for the purpose of executing a particular
investment strategy. Only those Complex Options Strategies with no
more than the applicable number of legs, as determined by the
Exchange on a class-by-class basis, are eligible for processing. See
ISE Options 3, Section 14(a)(1).
\16\ ATR is a risk protection which sets dynamic boundaries
within which quotes and orders may trade. ATR is designed to guard
the System from experiencing dramatic price swings by preventing the
immediate execution of quotes and orders beyond the thresholds set
by this risk protection.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Third, the Exchange proposes to add a provision which states that a
Legging Order will not be generated if the price of the leg(s) of a
Complex Options Order is outside of the price limits described in ISE
Options 3, Section 16(a). In the instance where a Legging Order
generated is currently outside the price parameter (because the ABBO
has moved), the System will remove the Legging Order that was outside
the price
[[Page 86165]]
limits pursuant to proposed ISE Options 3, Section 7(k)(2)(iii) and
will attempt to re-generate a new Legging Order that is in the price
limits described in ISE Options 3, Section 16(a) as proposed in ISE
Options 3, Section 7(k)(4)(v). Today, ISE Options 3, Section 16(a)
would restrict the execution of a Legging Order through price limits
for Complex Orders. By adding the aforementioned rule text in proposed
new paragraph Options 3, Section 7(k)(2), all limitations related to
the generation of Legging Orders will be memorialized in Options 3,
Section 7(k).\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ Phlx's rule similarly indicates that a Legging Order is
subject to certain price parameters by stating that a Legging Order
will not be generated if the price of the Complex Order is outside
of the relevant ACE Parameter. See Phlx Options 3, Section
7(b)(10)(2). The ACE Parameter differs from the price limits
described in ISE Options 3, Section 16(a). Phlx's ACE Parameter
defines a price range outside of which a Complex Order will not be
executed. The ACE Parameter is either a percentage or number as
defined by Phlx and may be set at a different percentage or number
for Complex Orders where one of the components is the underlying
security. The ACE Parameter price range is based on the cNBBO at the
time an order would be executed. A Complex Order to sell will not be
executed at a price that is lower than the cNBBO bid by more than
the ACE Parameter. A Complex Order to buy will not be executed at a
price that is higher than the cNBBO offer by more than the ACE
Parameter. A Complex Order or a portion of a Complex Order that
cannot be executed within the ACE Parameter pursuant to this rule
will be placed on the CBOOK. See Phlx Options 3, Section 16(b)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fourth, the Exchange proposes to add a provision which states that
a Legging Order will not be generated if there is already a Legging
Order in that options series on the same side of the market at the same
price. This provision addresses a situation of overlapping Legging
Orders. Phlx has a similar sentence in Phlx Options 3, Section
7(b)(10)(2).\18\ The addition of this rule text will make clear an
existing limitation to the generation of orders in ISE Options 3,
Section 7(k).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ Phlx Options 3, Section 7(b)(10)(2)) states, in part, that
Legging Order will not be generated if there is already a Legging
Order in that series on the same side of the market at the same
price (unless it has priority based on the participant type, under
existing Exchange rules). The phrase ``unless it has priority based
on the participant type, under existing Exchange rules'' is not
being added to ISE's Rule as Options 3, Section 10 which describes
allocation on the single-leg order book, because as stated in
proposed ISE Options 3, Section 7(k), ``Legging Orders are treated
as having no Priority Customer capacity on the single-leg order
book, regardless of being generated from Priority Customer Complex
Options Orders.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fifth, the Exchange proposes to add a provision which states that a
Legging Order will not be generated for Complex Orders with two option
legs, where both legs are buying or both legs are selling and both legs
are calls or both legs are puts, as described in ISE Options 3, Section
14(d)(3)(A). This limitation is currently provided for in ISE Options
3, Section 14(d)(3)(A) and is being added to proposed new paragraph ISE
Options 3, Section 7(k)(2) to provide Members with a complete list of
when Legging Orders will not be generated in Options 3, Section 7(k).
Sixth, the Exchange proposes to add a provision which states that a
Legging Order will not be generated if the Exchange has not opened; or
a particular option series has not opened or such options series is
halted. Since a complex strategy must be available for trading to
generate a Legging Order, the failure of an options series that is a
component of the complex strategy to open or a subsequent halt would
cause Legging Orders not to generate. Phlx has a similar rule in Phlx
Options 3, Section 7(b)(10)(1).\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ Phlx Options 3, Section 7(b)(10)(1) states, in part, that
Legging Orders will not be generated if the Exchange or a particular
option has not opened, is halted or is otherwise not available for
trading. ISE believes that not opening and a halt are the two
possible scenarios and therefore Phlx's rule and ISE's rule are
substantively the same in this regard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange proposes to renumber current ISE Options 3, Section
7(k)(2) as (k)(3) and add the title ``Execution of Legging Orders'' to
describe the contents of the paragraph. The Exchange proposes to state
in proposed ISE Options 3, Section 7(k)(3) that,
A Legging Order is executed only after all other executable
orders (including any non-displayed size) and quotes at the same
price are executed in full. When a Legging Order is executed, the
other leg of the Complex Options Order will be automatically
executed against the displayed best bid or offer on the Exchange and
any other Legging Order not executed as part of the Complex Options
Order will be removed. Two Legging Orders related to the same
Complex Options Order can be generated, and both can execute as part
of the execution of a particular Complex Options Order.
The Exchange's proposal, similar to Phlx Options 3, Section
7(b)(10)(3)describes current System handling when a Legging Order is
executed and subsequently the other leg of the Complex Order will be
automatically executed against the displayed best bid or offer on the
Exchange, and any other Legging Order based on that Complex Order will
be removed. The Exchange proposes to replace the word ``portion'' with
``leg'' to make the rule text more explicit. The Exchange proposes to
add the phrase ``and any other Legging order not executed as part of
the Complex Options Order will be removed'' to the end of the second
sentence in proposed ISE Options 3, Section 7(k)(3). Phlx has a
substantively similar sentence in Options 3, Section 7(b)(10)(3).\20\
The addition of this phrase is intended to provide additional
information regarding the treatment of unexecuted Legging Orders in ISE
Options 3, Section 7(k). By way of example,
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ Phlx Options 3, Section 7(b)(10)(3) states, ``A Legging
Order is executed only after all other executable orders (including
any non-displayed size) and quotes at the same price are executed in
full. When a Legging Order is executed, the other leg of the Complex
Order will be automatically executed against the displayed best bid
or offer on the Exchange and any other Legging Order based on that
Complex Order will be removed.'' ISE explicitly states ``not
executed as part of the Complex Options Order'' where Phlx says
``based on that Complex Order.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Example #2
Assume:
Complex A-B (ratio 1:1) strategy, ratio of 1 is created
MM Quote for leg A 4.20 (100) x 4.50 (100)
MM Quote for leg B 4.00 (100) x 4.10 (100)
A-B Derived BBO: 0.10 x 0.50
Complex Order to Buy A-B 10 @ net price of 0.45
System generates a Legging Order on leg A's bid for quantity of 10 @
4.45
System generates a Legging Order leg B's offer for quantity of 10 @
4.05
Single-leg order to sell 10 @ 4.45 on Leg A arrives
Execution:
Complex Order A-B Legging Order trades 10 with Single leg order on Leg
A @ 4.45
Complex Order A-B other leg trades 10 with MM Quote on Leg B @ 4.00
Removal of Legging Order:
Legging Order that was generated for quantity of 10 on Leg B @ 4.05
is removed from the order book.
Next, the Exchange proposes to add a new sentence to ISE Options 3,
Section 7(k)(3) which states, ``Two Legging Orders related to the same
Complex Options Order can be generated, and both can execute as part of
the execution of a particular Complex Options Order.'' As noted above,
two Legging Orders related to the same Complex Options Order can be
generated, and both can execute as part of the execution of a
particular Complex Options Order. This behavior differs from Phlx where
two legging orders may be generated, but only one of those can execute
as part of the execution of a particular complex order. The Exchange
believes that permitting both Legging Orders to execute as part of the
execution of a particular Complex Options Order will allow more Complex
Orders to execute while the price of the leg(s) will continue to be
bounded by
[[Page 86166]]
the price limits described in ISE Options 3, Section 16(a). By way of
example,
Example #3
Assume:
Complex A-B strategy, ratio of 1 is created
Complex 2A-B strategy, ratio of 2:1 is created
MM Quote for leg A 4.20 (100) x 4.50 (100)
MM Quote for leg B 4.00 (100) x 4.10 (100)
Complex BBO for A-B is 0.10 x 0.50
Complex BBO for 2A-B is 4.30 x 5.00
Leg Generation:
Complex Order to Buy A-B 10 @ 0.45
System generates a Legging Order on leg A's bid @ 4.45
System generates a Legging Order on leg B's offer @ 4.05
Execution:
Complex Order to Sell 2A-B 5 @ 4.85
2A-B Order trades with Legging Order on leg A 10 @ 4.45
2A-B Order trades with the Legging Order on leg B 5 @ 4.05
A-B trades with MM Quote on leg B 5 @ 4.00
The Exchange proposes to renumber ISE Options 3, Section 7(k)(3) as
(k)(4) and title the paragraph, ``Removal of Generated Legging Orders''
to describe the contents of the paragraph. This paragraph describes
when a Legging Order is automatically removed from the single-leg limit
order book. The Exchange proposes to add a clause to the end of
proposed ISE Options 3, Section 7(k)(4)(i) so that the sentence would
state, ``A Legging Order is automatically removed from the single-leg
limit order book if: (i) the price of the Legging Order is no longer at
the displayed best bid or offer on the single-leg limit order book or
is at a price that locks or crosses the best bid or offer of another
exchange . . .''(emphasis added). Current ISE Options 3, Section
7(k)(1) already notes that a Legging Order will not be created at a
price that locks or crosses the best bid or offer of another exchange.
Adding the same rule text to proposed ISE Options 3, Section 7(k)(4)
will make clear that a Legging Order that locks or crosses an away
market would be removed from the limit order book.
The Exchange proposes to add a clause to proposed ISE Options 3,
Section 7(k)(4)(ii) to provide that ``A Legging Order is automatically
removed from the single-leg limit order book if. . . (ii) execution of
the Legging Order would no longer achieve that net price of the Complex
Options Order when the other leg is executed against the best displayed
bid or offer on the single-leg limit order book, excluding other
Legging Orders'' (emphasis added). Phlx has a similar sentence in
Options 3, Section 7(b)(10)(4).\21\ A Legging Order is removed if the
BBO on the other leg worsens such that the Complex Order limit price
could no longer be achieved by trading with the quote, even if it could
be achieved by trading with a Legging Order generated by another
Complex Order. The Exchange would not rely solely on the price of
another Legging Order when calculating the net price of the Complex
Options Order for purposes of determining at which price a Legging
Order will execute. In the below example this point is illustrated in
that the Legging Order could not rely on the 4.05 offer on Leg B
derived from the other Legging Order, rather it must rely on the 4.10
offer on Leg B derived from the quote.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ Phlx Options 3, Section 7(b)(10)(4)provides, ``if execution
of the Legging Order would no longer achieve the net price of the
Complex Order when the other leg is executed against the Exchange's
best displayed bid or offer on the regular Limit Order book (other
than another Legging Order).'' This language is substantively the
same as ISE's proposed rule text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Example #4
Assume:
Leg A is quoted 4.20 (100) x 4.25 (100)
Leg B is quoted 4.00 (100) x 4.05 (100)
Leg C is quoted 3.80 (100) x 3.90 (100)
Create A-B strategy, ratio of 1 with a cBBO for A-B is 0.15 x 0.25
Create B-C strategy, ratio of 1 with a cBBO for B-C is 0.10 x 0.30
Generation of Legging Orders:
Complex Order is entered to Buy B-C (Buy B, Sell C) 10 @ 0.20
System generates Legging Orders on Leg B's bid @4.00 & Leg C's offer @
3.85.
Complex Order is entered to Buy A-B (Buy A, Sell B) 10 @ 0.20
System generates Legging Orders on Leg A's bid @ 4.20 & Leg B's offer @
4.05
Removal of Legging Order:
Market Maker updates their quote for Leg B with a worsened offer: 4.00
(100) x 4.10 (100)
Even though the displayed best offer for Leg B did not change in
price, it is derived from a Legging Order which is excluded from the
System's calculations in determining whether the net price of this
Complex Order can be achieved if its Legging Order trades. The Legging
Order at 3.85 on Leg C can no longer achieve the Complex Order's net
price were it to execute in addition to the quote for Leg B. The System
will remove the Legging Order at 3.85 on Leg C and will regenerate a
new Legging Order on Leg C at 3.90 and this would allow the Legging
Order to achieve the net price of the Complex Order if it trades along
with the quote on Leg B.
The Exchange proposes to add a new section ``(v)'' to proposed ISE
Options 3, Section 7(k)(4) which states, ``A Legging Order is
automatically removed from the single-leg limit order book if. . . (v)
the price of the leg(s) of a Complex Options Order is outside of the
price limits described in current ISE Options 3, Section 16(a).'' This
limitation is currently described in ISE Options 3, Section 16(a) and
is being added to this order type to complete the list of cases where a
Legging Order would be removed from the order book in Options 3,
Section 7(k). Phlx has similar rule text in Options 3, Section
7(b)(10)(4).\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ Phlx Options 3, Section 7(b)(10)(4)states that ``A Legging
Order is automatically removed from the regular order book: . . .
(v) if the price of the Complex Order is outside the ACE Parameter
of paragraph (i).'' As noted above, Phlx and ISE have different
price parameters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange proposes to add new section ``(vi)'' to proposed ISE
Options 3, Section 7(k)(4) which states, ``A Legging Order is
automatically removed from the single-leg limit order book if . . .(vi)
the System receives a complex auction on either side in the Complex
Options Strategy, or the System receives a single-leg auction on either
side in any component of the Complex Options Strategy.'' Phlx has
similar language in Options 3, Section 7(b)(10)(4).\23\ As noted above,
the Exchange believes from a System processing and user acceptance
standpoint, the best practice is to remove the System-generated Legging
Order from the order book during the course of the auction, as that
time is minimal, then the System can attempt to re-generate a Legging
Order once the auction has concluded.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, the Exchange proposes to add new section ``(vii)'' to
proposed ISE Options 3, Section 7(k)(4) which states, ``A Legging Order
is automatically removed from the single-leg limit order book if . . .
(vii) a Legging Order is generated by a different Complex Options Order
in the same leg at a better price or the same price for a participant
with a higher price priority.'' As noted in ISE Options 3, Section
7(k)(1), a Legging Order may be automatically generated at a price that
matches or improves upon the best displayed bid or offer on the single-
leg limit order book. The System removes the Legging Order because it
would have been at an inferior price. Phlx Options 3, Section
7(b)(10)(4)has similar language.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ Phlx Options 3, Section 7(b)(10)(4) states that ``A Legging
Order is automatically removed from the regular order book: . . .
(vii) if a Legging Order is generated by a different Complex Order
in the same leg at a better price or the same price for a
participant with a higher price priority. . .''. While Phlx's
Options 3, Section 14 has priority overlays for different market
participants within its allocation model, whereas ISE does not have
similar priority overlays and the remainder of the language is not
necessary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 86167]]
As revised, the rule text proposed in ISE Options 3, Section
7(k)(4) is intended to cover all circumstances where a Legging Order
would be automatically removed from the single-leg limit order.
Options 3, Section 16
The Exchange proposes to amend the language in ISE Options 3,
Section 16(a) related to price limits for Complex Orders. As provided
in ISE Options 3, Section 16(a)the legs of a complex strategy may be
executed at prices that are inferior to the prices available on other
exchanges trading the same options series. Notwithstanding the
foregoing, the System will not permit any leg of a complex strategy to
trade through the NBBO for the series or any stock component by a
configurable amount calculated as the lesser of (i) an absolute amount
not to exceed $0.10, and (ii) a percentage of the NBBO not to exceed
500%, as determined by the Exchange on a class, series or underlying
basis. A Member can also include an instruction on a Complex Order that
each leg of the Complex Order is to be executed only at a price that is
equal to or better than the NBBO on the opposite side for the options
series or any stock component, as applicable (``Do-Not-Trade-Through''
or ``DNTT''). The addition of the words ``on the opposite side'' is
intended to make clear the manner in which the System will handle a
DNTT instruction. That is, the System will check that the price is
equal to or better than the NBBO on the opposite side of the options
series or any stock component.
2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with section
6(b) of the Act,\25\ in general, and furthers the objectives of section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\26\ in particular, in that it is designed to
promote just and equitable principles of trade and to protect investors
and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
\26\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Options 3, Section 7
The Exchange's proposal to amend ISE Options 3, Section 7(k),
Legging Orders, is consistent with the Act because the proposal expands
the description of Legging Orders to describe in more detail the
current legging functionality, thereby increasing transparency with
respect to this order type. The proposed amendments reflect the way
Legging Orders work today. The Exchange is not amending its System
functionality with respect to Legging Orders, rather, the proposed rule
text is intended to be more descriptive and conform the level of detail
in the order type to Phlx Options 3, Section 7(b)(10)which describes
details of Phlx's legging orders and MIAX Rule 518(a)(10), which
describes derived orders.
Specifying that Legging Orders, which are an individual component
of a Complex Options Order, are ``one leg of a two-legged Complex
Options Order'' and are not routable in the first paragraph of ISE
Options 3, Section 7(k) is consistent with the Act because these terms
better describe a Legging Order. Similarly, specifying that Legging
Orders will be Limit Orders with a TIF of Day makes clear the way these
orders are handled by the System. Legging Orders are not based on
Member instruction and are intended to facilitate more interaction
between the single-leg order book and the Complex Order Book, resulting
in increased execution opportunities and better execution prices for
Complex Orders and for orders resting on the single-leg order book. For
this reason, Legging Orders do not route and have a TIF of Day to
permit Members to interact with this order type. The Exchange believes
the amended rule text more accurately describes a Legging Order and
makes clear to Members the behavior of Legging Orders. Also,
capitalizing the terms ``Legging Order'' and ``Limit Order'' and
referring to a ``single-leg'' order book throughout ISE Options 3,
Section 7(k) conforms terms with those of ISE Options 3, Section 14,
Complex Orders.
The proposed text in the new second paragraph of ISE Options 3,
Section 7(k) makes clear the current System processing for Legging
Orders. Specifically, the proposed rule text makes clear that the
System will evaluate whether Legging Orders may be generated, which
occurs at the time a Complex Options Order enters the Complex Order
Book or after a time interval (to be determined by the Exchange, not to
exceed one second) \27\ when the NBBO or Exchange best bid or offer in
any component of a Complex Options Order changes. Further, the Exchange
proposes to state that it may determine to limit the number of Legging
Orders generated on an objective basis and may determine to remove
existing Legging Orders, and cease the creation of additional Legging
Orders, to maintain a fair and orderly market in times of extreme
volatility or uncertainty. Phlx has similar rule text in Phlx Options
3, Section 14(f)(iii)(C).\28\ The proposed limitation is consistent
with the Act because it assists the Exchange in managing the number of
Legging Orders generated to ensure that Legging Orders do not
negatively impact the Exchange's System capacity and performance so
that ISE may maintain a fair and orderly market in times of extreme
volatility or uncertainty. Of note, the Exchange does not limit the
generation of Legging Orders on the basis of the entering Member or the
Member category of the order (i.e., Professional or Priority Customer).
The Exchange proposes to limit the number of Legging Orders, remove
existing Legging Orders, and cease creation of additional Legging
Orders, in order to permit the Exchange to maintain a fair and orderly
market in times of extreme volatility or uncertainty. This discretion
is consistent with the Act because it assists the Exchange in managing
the number of Legging Orders generated to ensure that Legging Orders do
not negatively impact the Exchange's System capacity and performance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ Today, the time interval is set to one hundred
milliseconds.
\28\ Phlx's rule states, in part, in Options 3, Section
14(f)(iii)(C) that, ``. . .The System will evaluate the CBOOK when a
Complex Order enters the CBOOK and at a regular time interval, to be
determined by the Exchange (which interval shall not exceed 1
second), following a change in the national best bid and/or offer
(``NBBO'') or Phlx best bid and/or offer (``PBBO'') in any component
of a Complex Order eligible to generate Legging Orders, to determine
whether Legging Orders may be generated. The Exchange may determine
to limit the number of Legging Orders generated on an objective
basis and may determine to remove existing Legging Orders in order
to maintain a fair and orderly market in times of extreme volatility
or uncertainty.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange's proposal to provide that Legging Orders are treated
as having no Priority Customer capacity on the single leg order book,
regardless of being generated from Priority Customer Complex Options
Orders is consistent with the Act and the protection of investor and
the public interest. A Legging Order is handled in the same manner as
other orders on the single-leg order book except as otherwise provided
in ISE Options 3, Section 7(k), and is executed only after all other
executable orders and quotes at the same price are executed in full.
When a Legging Order is executed, the other component of the Complex
Order on the Complex Order Book will be automatically executed against
the best bid or offer on the Exchange. The Exchange believes that a
Legging Order, created for the execution of a Complex Order, should not
be
[[Page 86168]]
afforded priority over resting orders and quotes on the single-leg
order book, and therefore has determined to protect the priority on the
single-leg order book of such resting orders and quotes. MIAX similarly
executes a derived order only after all other executable orders and
quotes at the same price are executed in full.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ See MIAX Rule 518(a)(10)(iv). See also Securities Exchange
Act Release No. 79072 (October 7, 2016), 81 FR 71131 (October 14,
2016) (SR-MIAX-2016-26) (Order Approving a Proposed Rule Change to
Adopt New Rules to Govern the Trading of Complex Orders).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange's proposal to amend ISE Options 3, Section 7(k)(1) to
make clear a Legging Order may be generated for each leg of a two-
legged Complex Order is consistent with the Act. Legging Orders may be
generated for each leg of a two-legged options orders with the same
quantity on both legs. Automatically generating Legging Orders promotes
just and equitable principles of trade because these orders will only
be executed after all other executable interest at the same price
(including non-displayed interest) is executed in full. This behavior
is consistent with the Act because it will provide additional execution
opportunities for Complex Orders, without negatively impacting any
investors in the single-leg market. In fact, the generation of Legging
Orders may enhance execution quality for investors in the single-leg
market by improving the price and/or size of the ISE BBO and by
providing additional execution opportunity for resting orders on the
single-leg order book. The generation of Legging Orders is fully
compliant with all regulatory requirements. In particular, Legging
Orders are firm orders that will be displayed at the ISE BBO. Also, a
Legging Order will be automatically removed if it is no longer
displayable at the ISE BBO or if the net price of the Complex Order can
no longer be achieved. Finally, the generation of Legging Orders is
limited in scope, as they may be generated only for Complex Options
Orders with two legs. Additionally, as noted herein, the Exchange will
closely manage and curtail the generation of Legging Orders to assure
that they do not negatively impact system capacity and performance.
Phlx's Legging Orders differ from ISE's Legging Orders in that, on
Phlx, two legging orders may be generated, but only one of those can
execute as part of the execution of a particular complex order.
The addition of ``resting on the top of the Complex Order Book'' in
the first sentence of ISE Options 3, Section 7(k)(1) is consistent with
the Act because it is consistent with existing Legging Order
functionality that considers the best price on Phlx's order book. This
addition will make clear that the priority of orders in the Complex
Order Book controls with respect to the generation of Legging Orders.
The Exchange's proposal to amend the second sentence of ISE Options
3, Section 7(k)(1) to add ``excluding other Legging Orders'' to the end
of the sentence is consistent with the Act because it makes clear that
the price of a Legging Order is not considered in the BBO for purposes
of determining whether the net price of a Complex Order could be
achieved were it to generate a Legging Order.
Finally, the Exchange's proposal to add a sentence to ISE Options
3, Section 7(k)(1) which states, ``Legging Orders will be generated and
executed in the minimum increment for that options series'' is
consistent with the Act because ISE Options 3, Section 3 describes the
minimum increments for options traded on ISE. Adding this rule text
will make clear that the minimum increment rule in Options 3, Section 3
is applicable to Legging Orders. MIAX Rule 518(a)(10)(iii) similarly
provides that ISE's derived orders will not be created at a price
increment less than the minimum established by Rule 510.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ MIAX Rule 510 specifies the minimum increments for options
traded on MIAX.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amending proposed new paragraph ISE Options 3, Section 7(k)(2) to
note that a Legging Order will not be generated at a price that locks
or crosses the best bid or offer of another exchange is already
provided for in the last sentence of current Options 3, Section
7(k)(1). This concept is consistent with the Act in that the Exchange
will not trade through away markets as specified in Options 5, Sections
2 and 3 which describe order protection and locked and crossed markets
rules.
Adding a provision to proposed new paragraph ISE Options 3, Section
7(k)(2) which states that a Legging Order will not be generated if
there is a complex auction on either side in the Complex Options
Strategy, or a single-leg auction on either side in any component of
the Complex Options Strategy, or a Posting Period in progress on the
same side in the series, pursuant to Options 3, Section 15 regarding
ATR is consistent with the Act. The Exchange believes from a System
processing and user acceptance standpoint, the best practice is to wait
for an auction in that options series to be complete, or for the ATR
Posting Period to complete, as that time is minimal. Phlx's legging
order rule in Options 3, Section 7(b)(10)(2)has the same restriction as
proposed to be added to ISE's Legging Orders rule.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ Phlx Options 3, Section 7(b)(1)(2) provides that ``A
Legging Order will not be created . . .``(ii) if there is an auction
on either side or a Posting Period under Options 3, Section 15
regarding Acceptable Trade Range on the same side in progress in the
series.'' Phlx's rules describe an auction on either side of the
Legging Order while ISE's auction breaks down the auction into
either a complex auction or single-leg auction. Of note, Phlx's
Acceptable Trade Range rule has a Posting Period described in
Options 3, Section 15. ISE does have an Acceptable Trade Range rule
as well in Options 3, Section 15, but that rule differs from Phlx as
there is no Posting Period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adding a provision to proposed new paragraph ISE Options 3, Section
7(k)(2) which states that a Legging Order will not be generated if the
price of the leg(s) of a Complex Options Order is outside of the price
limits described in Options 3, Section 16(a) is consistent with the
Act. Today, ISE Options 3, Section 16(a) would restrict the generation
of a Legging Order through price limits for Complex Orders, by adding
this rule text in Options 3, Section 7(k)(2) all limitations related to
the generation of Legging Orders will be memorialized in Options 3,
Section 7(k).\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ Phlx's rule similarly indicates that a Legging Order is
subject to certain price parameters by stating that a Legging Order
will not be generated if the price of the Complex Order is outside
of the ACE Parameter of paragraph in subparagraph (i) of Options 3,
Section 14. The ACE Parameter differs from the price limits
described in ISE Options 3, Section 16(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adding a provision to proposed new paragraph ISE Options 3, Section
7(k)(2) which states that a Legging Order will not be generated if
there is already a Legging Order in that options series on the same
side of the market at the same price is consistent with the Act. This
provision addresses a situation of overlapping Legging Orders and
Legging Order dependencies in other components. Phlx has a similar
sentence in Phlx Options 3, Section 7(b)(10)(2). Of note, the phrase
``unless it has priority based on the participant type, under existing
Exchange rules'' from Phlx Options 3, Section 7(b)(10)(2) is not being
added to ISE's Rule as Options 3, Section 10 which describes allocation
on the single-leg order book, because as stated in proposed ISE Options
3, Section 7(k), ``Legging Orders are treated as having no Priority
Customer capacity on the single-leg order book, regardless of being
generated from Priority Customer Complex Options Orders.'' The addition
of this rule text will make clear an existing limitation to the
generation of orders in Options 3, Section 7(k).
Adding a provision to proposed new paragraph ISE Options 3, Section
7(k)(2) which states that a Legging Order will
[[Page 86169]]
not be generated for Complex Orders with two option legs, where both
legs are buying or both legs are selling and both legs are calls or
both legs are puts, as described in Options 3, Section 14(d)(3)(A) is
consistent with the Act. This limitation is already provided for in
current ISE Options 3, section 14(d)(3)(A) and is being added to
proposed new paragraph Options 3, Section 7(k)(2) to provide Members
with a complete list of when Legging Orders will not be generated in
Options 3, Section 7(k).
Adding a provision to proposed new paragraph ISE Options 3, Section
7(k)(2) which states that a Legging Order will not be generated if the
Exchange has not opened; or a particular option series has not opened
or such options series is halted is consistent with the Act. Since a
complex strategy must be available for trading to generate a Legging
Order, the failure of an options series that is a component of the
complex strategy to open or a subsequent halt would cause Legging
Orders not to generate. Phlx has a similar rule in Phlx Options 3,
Section 7(b)(10)(1).
Amending proposed ISE Options 3. Section 7(k)(3), similar to Phlx
Options 3, Section 7(b)(10)(3)to describe current System handling when
a Legging Order is executed and subsequently the other leg of the
Complex Order is automatically executed against the displayed best bid
or offer on the Exchange, and, therefore, any other Legging Order based
on that Complex Order is removed is consistent with the Act. This
example demonstrates that the Exchange will execute against the best
bid or offer on the Exchange and will remove Legging Orders. The
proposal to replace the word ``portion'' with ``leg'' will make the
rule text more explicit. Adding the phrase ``and any other Legging
order not executed as part of the Complex Options Order will be
removed'' to the end of the second sentence in proposed Options 3,
Section 7(k)(3) is consistent with the Act because the phrase will
provide additional information regarding the treatment of unexecuted
Legging Orders in Options 3, Section 7(k). Phlx has a substantively
similar sentence in Options 3, Section 7(b)(10)(3).\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ Phlx Options 3, Section 7(b)(10)(3) states, ``A Legging
Order is executed only after all other executable orders (including
any non-displayed size) and quotes at the same price are executed in
full. When a Legging Order is executed, the other leg of the Complex
Order will be automatically executed against the displayed best bid
or offer on the Exchange and any other Legging Order based on that
Complex Order will be removed.'' ISE explicitly states ``not
executed as part of the Complex Options Order'' where Phlx says
``based on that Complex Order.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amending proposed ISE Options 3, Section 7(k)(3) to add a new
sentence to Options 3, Section 7(k)(3) which states, ``Two Legging
Orders related to the same Complex Options Order can be generated, and
both can execute as part of the execution of a particular Complex
Options Order'' is consistent with the Act. As noted above, two Legging
Orders related to the same Complex Options Order can be generated, and
both can execute as part of the execution of a particular Complex
Options Order. This behavior differs from Phlx where two legging orders
may be generated, but only one of those can execute as part of the
execution of a particular complex order. The Exchange believes that
permitting both Legging Orders to execute as part of the execution of a
particular Complex Options Order will allow more Complex Orders to
execute while the price of the leg(s) will continue to be bounded by
the price limits described in ISE Options 3, Section 16(a).
Amending proposed ISE Options 3, Section 7(k)(4)(i) to state, ``A
Legging Order is automatically removed from the single-leg limit order
book if: (i) the price of the Legging Order is no longer at the
displayed best bid or offer on the single-leg limit order book or is at
a price that locks or crosses the best bid or offer of another exchange
. . .'' (emphasis added) is consistent with the Act. Current Options 3,
Section 7(k)(2) already notes that a Legging Order will not be created
at a price that locks or crosses the best bid or offer of another
exchange. Adding the same rule text to proposed Options 3, Section
7(k)(4) will make clear that a Legging Order that locks or crosses an
away market would be removed from the limit order book.
Amending proposed ISE Options 3, Section 7(k)(4)(ii) to add a
clause to current Options 3, Section 7(k)(3) at (ii) to provide that
``A Legging Order is automatically removed from the single-leg limit
order book if . . . (ii) execution of the Legging Order would no longer
achieve that net price of the Complex Options Order when the other leg
is executed against the best displayed bid or offer on the single-leg
limit order book, excluding other Legging Orders'' (emphasis added) is
consistent with the Act. A Legging Order is removed if the BBO on the
other leg worsens such that the Complex Order limit price could no
longer be achieved by trading with the quote, even if it could be
achieved by trading with a Legging Order generated by another Complex
Order. Phlx has a similar sentence in Options 3, Section 7(b)(10)(4).
Amending proposed ISE Options 3, Section 7(k)(4) to add a new
section ``(v)'' to this paragraph which states, ``A Legging Order is
automatically removed from the single-leg limit order book if . . . (v)
the price of the leg(s) of a Complex Options Order is outside of the
price limits described in current Options 3, Section 16(a)'' is
consistent with the Act. This limitation is currently described in ISE
Options 3, Section 16(a) and is being added to this order type to
complete the list of cases where a Legging Order would be removed from
the order book in Options 3, Section 7(k). Phlx has similar rule text
in Options 3, Section 7(b)(10)(4).
Amending proposed ISE Options 3, Section 7(k)(4) to add a new
section ``(vi)'' to this paragraph which states, ``A Legging Order is
automatically removed from the single-leg limit order book if . . .
(vi) the System receives a complex auction on either side in the
Complex Options Strategy, or the System receives a single-leg auction
on either side in any component of the Complex Options Strategy'' is
consistent with the Act. As noted above, the Exchange believes from a
System processing and user acceptance standpoint, the best practice is
to remove the System-generated Legging Order from the order book during
the course of the auction, as that time is minimal, then the System can
attempt to re-generate a Legging Order once the auction has concluded.
Phlx has similar language in Options 3, Section 7(b)(10)(4).
Amending proposed ISE Options 3, Section 7(k)(4) to add a new
section ``(vii)'' to this paragraph which states, ``A Legging Order is
automatically removed from the single-leg limit order book if . . .
(vii) a Legging Order is generated by a different Complex Options Order
in the same leg at a better price or the same price for a participant
with a higher price priority.'' As noted in proposed Options 3, Section
7(k)(1), a Legging Order may be automatically generated at a price that
matches or improves upon the best displayed bid or offer on the single-
leg limit order book. The System removes the Legging Order because it
would have been at an inferior price. Phlx Options 3, Section
7(b)(10)(4) has similar language.
Options 3, Section 16
The Exchange's proposal to amend the language in ISE Options 3,
Section 16(a) related to price limits for Complex Orders is consistent
with the Act and protects investors and the general public by ensuring
that the DNTT instruction causes a Complex Order is to be executed only
at a price that is equal to or better than the NBBO on the opposite
side for the options series or any stock component. The proposed rule
text
[[Page 86170]]
makes transparent the manner in which the System is currently handling
the DNTT instruction.
B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
Options 3, Section 7
The Exchange's proposal to amend ISE Options 3, Section 7(k),
Legging Orders, does not impose an intra-market burden on competition
because all market participants may interact with Legging Orders on the
single-leg order book. The Exchange's proposal to amend ISE Options 3,
Section 7(k), Legging Orders, does not impose an inter-market burden on
competition because other options exchanges may offer Legging Orders
with similar functionality. Enhancing the description of the Legging
Orders functionality will allow ISE to compete effectively with other
options exchanges that offer similar functionality.
The Exchange's proposal to limit the number of Legging Orders and
the ability to remove existing Legging Orders does not impose an intra-
market burden on competition because the functionality will permit the
Exchange to maintain a fair and orderly market in times of extreme
volatility or uncertainty. Further, the Exchange does not limit the
generation of Legging Orders on the basis of the entering Member or the
Member category of the order (i.e., Professional or Priority Customer).
The Exchange's proposal to limit the number of Legging Orders and the
ability to remove existing Legging Orders does not impose an inter-
market burden on competition because this discretion is consistent with
the treatment of Legging Orders on other options exchanges.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ See Phlx Options 3, Section 14(f)(iii)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Options 3, Section 16
The Exchange's proposal to amend the language in ISE Options 3,
Section 16(a) related to price limits for Complex Orders to specify
that a Complex Order must be executed at a price that is equal to or
better than the NBBO on the opposite side for the options series or any
stock component does not impose an intra-market burden on competition
because the System applies this price check to all Members executing
Complex Orders in the same manner. The Exchange's proposal to amend the
language in ISE Options 3, Section 16(a) does not impose an inter-
market burden on competition because any options exchange could offer
similar functionality.
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 Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \35\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\36\
Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i) significantly
affect the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose
any significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative for
30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as
the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to
section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \37\ and subparagraph (f)(6) of
Rule 19b-4 thereunder.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
\36\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
\37\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
\38\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along
with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A proposed rule change filed pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the
Act \39\ normally does not become operative for 30 days after the date
of its filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) \40\ permits the
Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent
with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange
has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay so
that the Exchange may immediately update its rules to provide greater
detail with respect to the generation, execution, and removal of
Legging Orders. The Commission believes that the proposed rule change
presents no novel issues and that waiver of the 30-day operative delay
is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest.
Accordingly, the Commission hereby waives the operative delay and
designates the proposed rule change operative upon filing.\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\39\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
\40\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
\41\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has also considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
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-ISE-2023-31 on the subject line.
Paper Comments
Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.
All submissions should refer to file number SR-ISE-2023-31. 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
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the
[[Page 86171]]
Exchange. Do not include personal identifiable information in
submissions; you should submit only information that you wish to make
available publicly. We may redact in part or withhold entirely from
publication submitted material that is obscene or subject to copyright
protection. All submissions should refer to file number SR-ISE-2023-31
and should be submitted on or before January 2, 2024.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\42\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12), (59).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-27163 Filed 12-11-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P