9.IV.2.2.8 Interim conclusion

From MiFID I to MiFID II a substantial increase in harmonisation is visible for EU equity post-trade transparency calculations and estimates (top-down approach). The increase in harmonisation is the result of several factors, primarily being: (1) a broader scope of the MiFID II equity post-trade transparency regime (MiFID I was confined to shares admitted to trading on an RM) and (2) issues under MiFID I (in particular the collection of data). The MiFID II equity post-trade transparency regime requires high operational standards (albeit to a less extent than the MiFID II equity pre-trade transparency regime) to ensure high quality data is available for the required calculations and estimations.

The top-down approach reflects the aim to find a balance between: (a) high quality data and harmonised calculation/estimation provisions and (b) alleviating the workload of NCAs and the industry. An example of alleviating the workload for both NCAs and the industry is the MiFID II requirement of sending data for periodic calculations on a daily basis. The MiFID II daily basis requirement results in slicing the amount of data NCAs need to process in smaller chunks and a daily basis constitutes a simple timeframe for RMs, MTFs, and APAs (and CTPs). The workload of NCAs is reduced even further by the possibility to delegate data collection and/or calculation and estimation tasks to ESMA. In practice many NCAs (not: all) have delegated data collection and/or calculation and estimation tasks to ESMA.

The delegations should be viewed in conjunction with delegation of MiFID II reference data tasks from NCAs to ESMA (see paragraph 1 above). With MiFID II the EU has entered new ground to improve data quality. MiFID II is characterised by greater emphasis on data quality with top-down (i.e. EU) approach. ESMA has become a central facility in relation to: (i) reference data and trading data, as well as (ii) calculations/estimations of MiFID II equity post-trade transparency thresholds for deferral.