9.IV.3.5 Interim conclusion

The expansion of the MiFID II equity post-trade (and pre-trade) transparency regime in terms of financial instruments and transparency thresholds, resulted in a highly top-down approach for databases. Where MiFID I introduced the first EU approach for equity transparency databases, MiFID II takes the EU approach to the next level. The result is a greater implementation challenge of EU equity post-trade transparency regulation compared to MiFID I. The MiFID II equity (pre- and) post-trade transparency regime (and other MiFID II and even MAR provisions) are highly data-driven and accordingly a new technical infrastructure has been created at the EU level. ESMA plays a pivotal role in ensuring the databases function in practice. ESMA is, among other things, required to publish consolidated reference data (FIRDS) and results of transparency calculations and estimates (FITRS).1 Although the ESMA efforts – in cooperation with the NCAs and industry – are praiseworthy, the situation is not perfect. Problems have been encountered with the databases, such as inaccurate data.2 The databases are part of the MiFID II Review of ESMA. The MiFID II Review is examined in section V below.