About a-team Marketing Services
The knowledge platform for the financial technology industry

A-Team Insight Blogs

FCA Cracks Down on OMS Reporting Errors: Regulated Firms Pay the Price

Subscribe to our newsletter

By Matt Smith, CEO, SteelEye.

Certain Order Management Systems (OMSs) have recently come under scrutiny from the FCA because of quality issues around MiFIR reporting. Firms that heavily rely on their OMS for daily regulatory reporting have been found to consistently over or under report their transactions.

The responsibility for accurate reporting rests solely with the regulated entity, and soon reporting errors from certain OMSs will no longer be tolerated.

Some OMSs are likened to black boxes when it comes to transaction reporting. There is very little transparency and visibility into what goes in the daily transaction reports downloaded by clients. As a result, regulated firms relying on this method have little to no way of knowing if the daily extract of transactions is in alignment with regulatory standards.

In fact, a couple of common issues with these systems is that they have slow or inaccurate MiFIR eligibility checks and struggle with security identification for anything more complex than listed products. To give an example, when a security is unknown to the system, certain fields are populated with default values. Take FX Forwards for example – through various consultations, we have seen multiple examples where these have been reported as Indices. Whilst this passes the validation checks (by defaulting the [Underlying Index Id] field value), it produces an inaccurate transaction report.

Because of these issues and the lack of visibility into the reporting process, many firms have unknowingly over, under or mis-reported.

The regulator’s intensified push on data accuracy is certainly being felt and several firms have already been approached – often given less than 3 months to remediate their reporting. The implications are grave, and fines are rife for reporting errors. In 2019, Goldman Sachs was fined £34.3 million for failing to provide accurate and timely reporting. The same year, UBS were fined £27.6 million for reporting issues. And that does include the reputational and commercial consequences of such bad press. Is now the time for firms to start taking their reporting more seriously?

Subscribe to our newsletter

Related content

WEBINAR

Upcoming Webinar: From Monolith to Modular: Architecting Equity Trading Platforms for 24/5 and Beyond

Date: 14 October 2026 Time: 10:00am ET / 3:00pm London / 4:00pm CET Duration: 50 minutes Equities markets are entering a more distributed, always-on phase. Liquidity is fragmenting across venues and geographies, trading hours are extending toward 24/5 and beyond, and market data volumes, investor expectations and competitive pressure are all rising at once. Many...

BLOG

Delta Capita Report Hub Extends Controls into Post-Reporting Assurance

Regulatory reporting teams have spent much of the past two years focused on rewrites, implementation deadlines and submission mechanics. The priority is now shifting to Post-Reporting Assurance: once a report has been filed, can the firm evidence that the data was accurate, complete, reconciled and subject to proper oversight? That shift is shaping the next...

EVENT

Data Management Summit London

Now in its 17th year, Data Management Summit (DMS) London returns In April 2027, to explore how to use data and AI to drive measurable business outcomes reliably, repeatedly and at scale.

GUIDE

AI in Capital Markets Handbook 2026

AI adoption in capital markets has moved into a more disciplined phase. The priority is now controlled deployment: where AI can be used safely, where it can deliver measurable value, and how outputs can be governed, monitored and evidenced. The 2026 edition of the AI in Capital Markets Handbook examines how AI is being applied...