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

Recorded Webinar: Sponsored by FundGuard: NAV Resilience Under DORA, A Year of Lessons Learned

The EU’s Digital Operational Resilience Act (DORA) came into force a year ago, and is reshaping how asset managers, asset owners and fund service providers think about operational risk. While DORA’s focus is squarely on ICT resilience and third-party dependencies, its implications extend deep into core operational processes that are critical to market integrity, investor...

BLOG

FIX Trading Community Unveils Reforms to Boost European Markets

The FIX Trading Community has put forward a series of proposals aimed at enhancing the transparency and appeal of European capital markets. In a whitepaper titled “FIXing Europe – How the European Consolidated Tape can radically improve the image of European capital markets,” the industry association outlines four key reforms to address long-standing issues with...

EVENT

Eagle Alpha Alternative Data Conference, Spring, New York, hosted by A-Team Group

Now in its 9th year, the Eagle Alpha Alternative Data Conference managed by A-Team Group, is the premier content forum and networking event for investment firms and hedge funds.

GUIDE

Enterprise Data Management, 2010 Edition

The global regulatory community has become increasingly aware of the data management challenge within financial institutions, as it struggles with its own challenge of better tracking systemic risk across financial markets. The US regulator in particular is seemingly keen to kick off a standardisation process and also wants the regulatory community to begin collecting additional...