Trades, orders, and physicals: the three data layers trade surveillance needs
Whitepaper
Order coverage is not full lifecycle coverage
Most surveillance platforms in energy and commodity markets are certified on order feeds only. Trade feeds are rarely part of standard integration, and physical data is almost never ingested at all. That gap defines what a surveillance program can and cannot see, and it is rarely tested before it becomes a regulatory problem.
Risk-system data does not close that gap. Risk systems transform trades for P&L and position management. That transformation is useful for its intended purpose, but it can obscure the original market event that surveillance needs to examine, particularly where a give-up, allocation, or exchange-for-physical trade sits between the original order and the final position.
Request whitepaper
This whitepaper sets out why order data became the industry default, what a firm gives up by treating it as complete coverage, and how order, trade, and physical data need to work together to close the gap. It includes the enforcement cases where that gap became the difference between a routine order flag and a manipulation charge, and the questions worth asking before assuming a surveillance solution is complete.
Perspectives
Insights
- Whitepapers
Energy trade surveillance under REMIT II and MAR: data, algorithms and inside information
- Blog
REMIT II: 37% cite data as the top trade surveillance barrier
- Blog