Efficient Fulfillment of Complex Transparency Requirements under RTS 27/28
MiFID Transparency and Reporting Obligations (RTS 27/28)
The MiFID transparency requirements under RTS 27 and 28 present securities firms and trading venues with complex challenges in data collection, processing, and reporting. We support you in the efficient and sustainable implementation of these requirements – from technical integration to continuous reporting.
- ✓Complete compliance with all RTS 27/28 requirements
- ✓Efficient data collection and processing through automated processes
- ✓Quality-assured reports with highest data integrity
- ✓Sustainable reporting solution with minimal manual intervention
Your strategic success starts here
Our clients trust our expertise in digital transformation, compliance, and risk management
30 Minutes • Non-binding • Immediately available
For optimal preparation of your strategy session:
- Your strategic goals and objectives
- Desired business outcomes and ROI
- Steps already taken
Or contact us directly:
Certifications, Partners and more...
MiFID Transparency and Reporting Obligations (RTS 27/28)
Our Strengths
- Deep expertise in all aspects of MiFID transparency requirements and their practical implementation
- Extensive experience in implementing efficient data collection and reporting solutions
- Innovative technology approaches for automating complex reporting processes
- Holistic implementation approach that combines compliance, technical integration, and operational efficiency
⚠
Expert Tip
Fulfilling MiFID transparency requirements should not be viewed as an isolated compliance task. A strategically designed implementation can simultaneously contribute to optimizing trade execution and provide valuable business insights. Invest in a future-proof, scalable architecture that meets regulatory requirements while creating operational added value.
ADVISORI in Numbers
11+
Years of Experience
120+
Employees
520+
Projects
We follow a structured, phase-based approach to implementing MiFID transparency requirements under RTS 27/28, ensuring efficient implementation and sustainable compliance.
Our Approach:
Detailed gap analysis and requirements specification for RTS 27/28 compliance
Design of efficient data collection and processing processes
Technical implementation and integration into existing system landscape
Comprehensive validation and quality assurance of reporting processes
Establishment of sustainable governance and continuous improvement processes
"Implementing MiFID transparency requirements under RTS 27/28 offers financial institutions not only the opportunity to ensure regulatory compliance but also to modernize their data infrastructure and gain valuable insights into trading quality and efficiency. Our experience shows that a strategically designed implementation can generate significant added value beyond pure compliance."
Andreas Krekel
Head of Risk Management, Regulatory Reporting
Expertise & Experience:
10+ years of experience, SQL, R-Studio, BAIS-MSG, ABACUS, SAPBA, HPQC, JIRA, MS Office, SAS, Business Process Manager, IBM Operational Decision Management
Our Services
We offer you tailored solutions for your digital transformation
Implementation of RTS 27 Reporting for Trading Venues
We support trading venues in the efficient implementation of all RTS 27 reporting obligations for execution quality.
- Design and implementation of data collection for all required metrics
- Development of automated data processing and aggregation processes
- Implementation of efficient publication mechanisms according to regulatory requirements
- Establishment of robust data quality and validation mechanisms
Implementation of RTS 28 Best Execution Reporting
We support securities firms in the efficient implementation of all RTS 28 reporting obligations for best execution.
- Design and implementation of data collection for top 5 execution venues and quality
- Development of efficient processes for analyzing and evaluating execution quality
- Integration into existing best execution frameworks and trading systems
- Automated creation and publication of annual reports
Looking for a complete overview of all our services?
View Complete Service OverviewOur Areas of Expertise in Regulatory Compliance Management
Our expertise in managing regulatory compliance and transformation, including DORA.
DORA Digital Operational Resilience Act
Stärken Sie Ihre digitale operationelle Widerstandsfähigkeit gemäß DORA.
▼
Regulatory Transformation Projektmanagement
Wir steuern Ihre regulatorischen Transformationsprojekte erfolgreich – von der Konzeption bis zur nachhaltigen Implementierung.
▼
Frequently Asked Questions about MiFID Transparency and Reporting Obligations (RTS 27/28)
What specific requirements do RTS 27 and 28 place on securities firms and trading venues, and how do they differ in detail?
The regulatory technical standards RTS
27 and
28 define comprehensive transparency and reporting obligations that differ significantly in their target audience, content, and publication frequency. While both standards serve the overarching goal of increasing transparency in financial markets, they address different aspects of MiFID II requirements with specific data collection and reporting mechanisms.
📊 RTS
27
•
Requirements for Trading Venues, Systematic Internalizers, and Execution Venues:
•
Comprehensive execution quality reports with detailed metrics on prices, costs, speed, and probability of execution for various financial instrument classes.
•
Granular breakdown of execution quality by instrument type, order type, and market phase, including detailed statistics on price deviations and execution interruptions.
•
Quarterly publication frequency with standardized format that must be machine-readable and publicly accessible.
•
Specific metrics for different trading venue types, including detailed information on market depth, spread levels, and volatility interruptions.
📈 RTS
28
•
Requirements for Securities Firms:
•
Annual publication of the five most important execution venues for each financial instrument class, based on trading volume and number of executed orders.
•
Qualitative assessment of execution quality with specific analysis of the five most important execution factors: price, costs, speed, probability of execution, and other relevant factors.
•
Transparent disclosure of potential conflicts of interest and connections to execution venues, including common ownership or specific agreements.
•
Analysis of the impact of routing decisions on execution quality and explanation of the use of data and tools for execution quality monitoring.
How can an efficient data collection and processing process for RTS 27/28 reporting obligations be implemented that meets regulatory requirements while minimizing operational effort?
Implementing an efficient data collection and processing process for RTS 27/28 reporting obligations requires a strategic approach that combines regulatory precision with operational efficiency. The challenge lies not only in capturing and processing extensive datasets but also in ensuring their quality, consistency, and timely availability. A well-designed architecture forms the foundation for a sustainable and resource-efficient compliance solution.
🔄 Architecture Principles for Efficient Data Collection:
•
Centralized Data Integration: Establishing a central data integration layer that connects heterogeneous source systems (trading systems, order management systems, market data feeds) via standardized interfaces and enables unified data access.
•
Event-based Data Collection: Implementation of an event-driven collection mechanism that captures relevant trading events in real-time or near real-time and transforms them into a structured data stream.
•
Data Aggregation in Various Time Dimensions: Development of a multi-level aggregation system that consolidates raw data at various time levels (intraday, end-of-day, end-of-quarter) and thus supports both operational monitoring and regulatory reporting.
•
Data Historization with Point-in-Time Recovery: Implementation of a historization concept that not only stores current data but also enables point-in-time reconstruction of historical states.
🛠 ️ Technological Building Blocks for Optimized Data Processing:
•
Automated Data Quality Assurance: Setting up automated validation routines that continuously check data for completeness, consistency, and plausibility and identify and escalate anomalies early.
•
Rule-based Transformation Engine: Development of flexible transformation logic that transforms raw trading data into regulatory-compliant report formats and can be quickly adapted to changing requirements.
What technical and methodological challenges arise in implementing best execution monitoring according to RTS 28, and how can these be effectively addressed?
Implementing effective best execution monitoring according to RTS
28 presents securities firms with complex technical and methodological challenges. These range from establishing suitable data structures to defining relevant metrics to developing meaningful analysis models. A systematic approach that considers both technological and professional aspects is crucial for successful implementation that not only meets regulatory requirements but also creates operational added value.
🔍 Central Challenges of Best Execution Monitoring:
•
Multidimensional Data Collection: Comprehensive assessment of execution quality requires integration of heterogeneous data points from various source systems, including order details, market data, reference data, and execution information.
•
Instrument-specific Complexity: Different financial instrument classes require specific assessment approaches and metrics that account for the respective market mechanisms and liquidity profiles.
•
Benchmark Definition: Establishing objective and representative benchmarks for various execution factors (price, costs, speed) presents a methodological challenge, especially for illiquid or complex instruments.
•
Interdependency Analysis: Simultaneous consideration of multiple execution factors and their interactions requires sophisticated analysis methods that enable a balanced overall assessment.
💡 Methodological Solution Approaches for Effective Implementation:
•
Hierarchical Data Model: Development of a structured data model that organizes all relevant execution factors in a hierarchical structure and maps both instrument-specific characteristics and overarching assessment categories.
•
Multifactorial Scoring Methodology: Implementation of a weighted scoring system that enables objective, reproducible assessment of execution quality across different dimensions and instruments.
•
Dynamic Benchmark Calibration: Establishment of adaptive benchmark mechanisms that adjust to changing market conditions and instrument-specific characteristics.
•
Integrated Analysis Platform: Development of a central analysis platform that consolidates all relevant data and enables both automated monitoring and ad-hoc analyses.
How can financial institutions use RTS 27/28 compliance implementation to generate strategic added value and competitive advantages beyond pure regulatory compliance?
Implementing MiFID transparency requirements under RTS 27/28 offers financial institutions far more than just fulfilling regulatory obligations. Forward-thinking institutions recognize in these requirements a strategic opportunity to transform business processes, data infrastructures, and customer relationships. With a value-centered implementation approach, significant competitive advantages can be achieved and new business potential unlocked.
🚀 Strategic Transformation Potential:
•
Data-driven Business Optimization: Using the extensive execution and quality data collected for RTS 27/28 as a basis for data-based business decisions and continuous process optimization in the trading area.
•
Building a Future-proof Data Architecture: Developing a scalable, integrated data infrastructure that not only meets regulatory requirements but also serves as a foundation for further analytics applications and future business initiatives.
•
Differentiation through Transparency: Transforming regulatory-required transparency into a differentiating feature that builds trust and serves as a basis for improved customer advisory and retention.
•
Catalyst for Digital Transformation: Using RTS implementation as an occasion for broader digitalization and automation of trading processes and reporting functions.
💼 Concrete Value Dimensions and Implementation Strategies:
•
Best Execution Excellence: Developing a best execution practice that goes far beyond regulatory minimum requirements and creates measurable added value for customers through systematic analysis and continuous optimization of all execution factors.
•
Customer Experience Enhancement: Integrating transparency data into customer-oriented advisory and reporting tools that give customers deeper insights into order execution quality.
•
Operational Efficiency Gains: Leveraging automation and process optimization opportunities arising from RTS implementation to achieve sustainable efficiency improvements in trading and reporting operations.
•
Strategic Data Asset Development: Building a comprehensive data asset that can be used not only for regulatory purposes but also for strategic analyses, product development, and customer segmentation.
What governance structures and control mechanisms are required for sustainable RTS 27/28 compliance, and how can these be effectively implemented?
Sustainable compliance with RTS 27/28 transparency requirements demands robust governance structures and effective control mechanisms that go far beyond technical implementation. Continuous adherence to complex regulatory requirements calls for a well-designed framework that encompasses clear responsibilities, effective monitoring mechanisms, and systematic improvement processes. Such a holistic governance approach not only ensures regulatory conformity but also promotes a culture of quality and transparency.
🏛 ️ Core Elements of a Robust Governance Structure:
•
Dedicated Transparency Office: Establishing a specialized organizational unit with clearly defined responsibility for monitoring and controlling all RTS 27/28-related activities, serving as a central point of contact for all transparency topics.
•
Multi-Level Responsibility Model: Implementing a multi-tiered responsibility model with clear task separation between operational data collection, quality assurance, technical implementation, and overarching compliance monitoring.
•
Executive Sponsorship: Anchoring transparency compliance at the highest management level through regular reporting to executive management and integration into the enterprise-wide risk management framework.
•
Cross-Functional Steering Committee: Establishing a cross-departmental steering committee with representatives from Trading, Compliance, IT, Legal, and Risk Management that makes strategic decisions and sets implementation priorities.
🔍 Effective Control and Monitoring Mechanisms:
•
Multi-Layer Control System: Building a multi-layered control system with automated frontline controls, independent second-line validations, and periodic third-line reviews by internal audit.
•
Systematic Exception Management: Implementing a structured process for identifying, documenting, escalating, and resolving exceptions and deviations, with clear escalation paths and defined resolution timeframes.
•
Continuous Monitoring Dashboard: Developing a real-time monitoring dashboard that provides transparency on key quality metrics, process status, and potential risk areas.
•
Regular Compliance Assessments: Conducting periodic self-assessments and compliance reviews to identify gaps and improvement opportunities proactively.
How can trading venues and securities firms establish a sustainable data quality management process for their RTS 27/28 reporting?
Robust data quality management forms the foundation of reliable and sustainable RTS 27/28 reporting. The high regulatory requirements for accuracy, completeness, and consistency of reports demand a systematic approach to ensuring and continuously improving data quality. A well-designed data quality management goes far beyond point-in-time controls and establishes a holistic process that encompasses all phases of the data lifecycle.
🔄 Holistic Data Quality Lifecycle:
•
Preventive Quality Assurance: Implementing quality measures at the data source through standardized collection processes, validation rules, and clear data responsibilities to prevent quality problems from the outset.
•
Continuous Monitoring: Establishing automated monitoring mechanisms that check data streams in real-time for anomalies, inconsistencies, and completeness and issue early warnings for potential quality problems.
•
Systematic Validation: Conducting multi-stage validation processes with technical plausibility checks, professional controls, and cross-checks against independent data sources before final report approval.
•
Continuous Improvement: Implementing a closed feedback loop that systematically translates insights from quality reviews, audits, and regulatory feedback into process improvements and control adjustments.
📏 Dimensions and Metrics of Data Quality:
•
Completeness: Developing comprehensive completeness checks that ensure all required data elements are present for all relevant instruments, time periods, and execution venues.
•
Accuracy and Precision: Implementing specific control mechanisms to ensure the precision of numerical values, especially for calculated metrics such as spreads, execution times, and price deviations.
•
Consistency and Coherence: Establishing cross-validation mechanisms that ensure internal consistency between different data points, reports, and time periods as well as external consistency with other regulatory reports.
•
Timeliness: Ensuring timely availability of current data for regulatory reporting and prompt updates when changes or corrections occur.
To what extent can cloud technologies and modern data architectures optimize and scale the implementation of RTS 27/28 requirements?
Cloud technologies and modern data architectures offer transformative possibilities for optimizing and scaling RTS 27/28 implementation. The inherent characteristics of these technologies – flexibility, scalability, cost efficiency, and innovation speed – precisely address the central challenges of regulatory reporting: extensive data processing, complex analytics, strict time requirements, and continuous adaptability. A strategically designed cloud-based data architecture can transform RTS 27/28 compliance from a resource-intensive mandatory program into an efficient, value-creating component of the data infrastructure.
☁ ️ Strategic Advantages of Cloud-based Solutions:
•
Elastic Scalability: Dynamic adjustment of computing capacities to the cyclical demand peaks of quarterly and annual report generation without over-provisioning hardware resources.
•
Cost Optimization: Significant reduction of total operating costs through demand-based resource utilization, automated scaling, and elimination of hardware investments and maintenance.
•
Accelerated Time-to-Compliance: Drastic shortening of implementation times through use of pre-configured services, Infrastructure-as-Code, and DevOps methods that enable rapid adaptation to regulatory changes.
•
Innovation Potential: Easy access to advanced analytics, AI, and machine learning services that open new possibilities for data analysis, quality assurance, and process automation.
🏗 ️ Modern Data Architecture Patterns for Regulatory Reporting:
•
Data Mesh Architecture: Implementing a domain-oriented, decentralized data architecture that shifts data responsibility to business areas while providing central governance, standards, and infrastructure.
•
Lambda Architecture: Establishing a hybrid processing architecture that combines batch processing for comprehensive historical analyses with stream processing for near-real-time monitoring and alerting.
•
Data Lakehouse: Developing a unified data platform that combines the flexibility and cost efficiency of data lakes with the structure and performance of data warehouses.
•
Event-Driven Architecture: Implementing an event-based architecture that enables real-time data capture and processing and supports both operational monitoring and regulatory reporting.
How should financial institutions respond to regulatory changes and developments in the area of MiFID transparency requirements to ensure long-term compliance?
MiFID transparency requirements, particularly RTS 27/28, are subject to a continuous development and adaptation process by European supervisory authorities. Financial institutions face the challenge of not only meeting current requirements but also proactively responding to regulatory developments and making their compliance infrastructure future-proof. A strategic, forward-looking approach to regulatory change management is crucial to ensure long-term compliance and avoid unnecessary implementation costs.
🔍 Systematic Regulatory Intelligence:
•
Multi-Channel Monitoring: Establishing a comprehensive monitoring system for regulatory developments that includes official sources (ESMA, EBA, national supervisory authorities), industry associations, trade publications, and specialized regulatory intelligence services.
•
Impact Assessment Framework: Developing a structured methodology for early assessment of potential regulatory changes regarding their operational, technical, and strategic impacts on existing compliance infrastructure.
•
Regulatory Horizon Scanning: Implementing a systematic process for identifying and analyzing longer-term regulatory trends and developments that looks beyond immediately pending changes.
•
Stakeholder Engagement: Active participation in consultation processes, industry initiatives, and dialogue formats with regulatory authorities to understand regulatory developments early and potentially influence them.
🏗 ️ Adaptive Compliance Architecture:
•
Modular System Design: Designing technical infrastructure according to modular principles that enable targeted adaptation of individual components without comprehensive system changes.
•
Configurative Implementation: Shifting regulatory specifics from the code level to configurable parameters and rules that can be adjusted without development effort.
•
Version-controlled Rule Management: Implementing a version-controlled rule management system that enables transparent tracking of regulatory changes and their implementation in the system.
•
Automated Testing and Validation: Establishing automated test suites that enable rapid validation of system adjustments to new regulatory requirements.
What synergies and integration potential exist between RTS 27/28 and other regulatory reporting obligations in securities trading?
MiFID transparency requirements under RTS 27/28 do not exist in isolation but are part of a comprehensive regulatory ecosystem in securities trading. A strategically designed implementation recognizes and leverages the numerous synergies and integration potential with other reporting obligations to realize efficiency gains, avoid data inconsistencies, and establish holistic governance. Intelligent harmonization of various regulatory requirements offers significant potential for reducing complexity and resource expenditure.
🔄 Data Synergies and Common Information Bases:
•
Transaction Reporting under MiFIR Article 26: Significant overlaps in transaction and execution data, including trading venue identifiers, instrument information, and price data, enabling a common data basis.
•
PRIIP-KID and MiFID Cost Transparency: Common requirements for cost and fee information that enable a unified methodology and data basis for various transparency documents.
•
EMIR Reporting: Parallel requirements for capturing and reporting derivative transactions that can be made more efficient through integrated data management.
•
MAR Compliance: Overlapping requirements for monitoring and documenting execution quality and conditions that can create a common analysis basis.
🏗 ️ Integrated Architecture Approaches for Regulatory Efficiency:
•
Regulatory Data Hub: Developing a central data platform that serves as a Single Source of Truth for all regulatory reporting obligations and eliminates redundant data collection.
•
Common Data Model: Establishing an overarching data model that maps the requirements of various regulations in a harmonized structure while enabling regulation-specific extensions.
•
Unified Reporting Engine: Implementing a central reporting engine that generates various regulatory reports from a common data basis and ensures consistency across different reporting obligations.
•
Integrated Governance Framework: Developing a holistic governance framework that coordinates responsibilities, controls, and processes across different regulatory requirements.
How should securities firms design and continuously develop their best execution policies in the context of RTS 28 reporting obligations?
Effective design and continuous development of best execution policies in the context of RTS
28 reporting obligations requires a holistic approach that combines regulatory compliance with operational excellence. A forward-looking best execution policy transcends mere fulfillment of formal requirements and establishes a dynamic framework for systematic optimization of execution quality. Intelligent integration of policy design, monitoring processes, and RTS
28 reporting creates a self-reinforcing cycle of continuous improvement.
📜 Fundamental Elements of a Robust Best Execution Policy:
•
Multidimensional Assessment Framework: Developing a differentiated assessment framework that defines all relevant execution factors (price, costs, speed, probability, size, type) in their specific significance for different customer segments, instrument classes, and market conditions.
•
Dynamic Weighting Models: Establishing transparent, traceable weighting methods for the various execution factors that flexibly map their relative importance depending on customer classification, instrument type, and order parameters.
•
Governance Structures and Responsibilities: Clear definition of roles, responsibilities, and decision processes for all aspects of best execution, from strategic venue selection to operational order routing.
•
Comprehensive Documentation Standards: Establishing detailed requirements for documenting execution decisions, venue assessments, and exception handling that ensure complete traceability.
🔍 Integration of Monitoring and RTS
28 Reporting:
•
Alignment of Monitoring Metrics and Reporting Data: Harmonizing internal monitoring metrics with the reporting data required in RTS
28 to ensure consistency and leverage synergies.
•
Feedback Loop from Reporting to Policy: Establishing a systematic process that translates insights from RTS
28 reporting into policy adjustments and optimization measures.
•
Continuous Venue Assessment: Implementing ongoing venue assessment processes that go beyond annual RTS
28 reporting and enable proactive optimization of venue selection.
•
Customer-centric Transparency: Developing customer-oriented communication formats that make RTS
28 data accessible and understandable for different customer groups.
What challenges arise when integrating RTS 27/28 requirements into complex, international trading infrastructures, and how can these be overcome?
Integrating RTS 27/28 requirements into complex, international trading infrastructures presents financial institutions with multifaceted challenges ranging from technical complexities to organizational fragmentation to regulatory divergences. Successfully overcoming these challenges requires a strategic approach that equally addresses technical, organizational, and regulatory dimensions while considering the particularities of globally distributed trading activities.
🌐 Central Challenges in International Trading Infrastructures:
•
Fragmented System Landscapes: Historically grown, heterogeneous IT landscapes with different trading systems, order management systems, and database technologies at various international locations that complicate unified data collection and consolidation.
•
Multi-Entity and Multi-Venue Complexity: Distribution of trading activities across multiple legal entities and diverse trading venues worldwide that complicate coordinated implementation of regulatory requirements and consistent reporting.
•
Diverging Regulatory Requirements: Different, sometimes contradictory transparency and reporting requirements in various jurisdictions that require parallel compliance structures and complex coordination processes.
•
Timezone and Synchronization Problems: Challenges in precise time capture and synchronization across different time zones, especially for time-critical execution quality metrics such as latency and market impact.
🛠 ️ Technical Solution Approaches for Global Integration:
•
Global Data Integration Layer: Implementing an overarching data integration layer that consolidates trading data from various regional systems via standardized interfaces and enables a unified view of all trading activities.
•
Cross-Regional Data Harmonization: Developing harmonization mechanisms that transform data from different source systems into a consistent format and resolve regional differences in data structures and semantics.
•
Distributed Processing Architecture: Implementing a distributed processing architecture that enables local data processing while ensuring global consolidation and consistent reporting.
•
Global Time Synchronization: Establishing precise time synchronization mechanisms across all trading systems and locations to ensure accurate capture of time-critical metrics.
What role do advanced analytics techniques and AI-based approaches play in optimizing RTS 27/28 reporting and gaining valuable business insights?
Advanced analytics techniques and AI-based approaches transform RTS 27/28 reporting from a regulatory compliance exercise into a strategic resource for data-driven business decisions. These innovative technologies enable not only more efficient, precise fulfillment of reporting obligations but also unlock valuable insights into trading efficiency, customer behavior, and market dynamics. Intelligent use of these analytical capabilities creates significant added value beyond pure compliance.
🧠 AI-supported Optimization of Report Generation:
•
Automated Data Validation: Using machine learning methods for intelligent detection of data anomalies, inconsistencies, and quality problems that go beyond rule-based checks and consider contextual relationships.
•
Predictive Data Completion: Using predictive models for intelligent completion of missing or incomplete data points based on historical patterns and contextual information, significantly improving data quality and completeness.
•
Natural Language Generation: Implementing NLG technologies for automated creation of qualitative report elements and explanations that are consistent, precise, and adapted to regulatory requirements.
•
Adaptive Processing Pipelines: Developing self-optimizing data processing processes that learn from experience and continuously improve their efficiency, accuracy, and robustness.
📊 Advanced Analytics for Deep Trading Insights:
•
Multi-Dimensional Execution Analysis: Applying multi-dimensional analysis methods for holistic assessment of execution quality across different instrument classes, market phases, and order types.
•
Cluster Analysis for Venue Performance: Using clustering algorithms to identify patterns and relationships in the performance of different execution venues that enable targeted optimization of venue selection.
•
Predictive Execution Quality Modeling: Developing predictive models that forecast expected execution quality for different venues and market conditions and support proactive routing decisions.
•
Anomaly Detection for Market Behavior: Implementing anomaly detection algorithms that identify unusual market behavior and execution patterns and enable early response to changing market conditions.
How should financial institutions approach the publication and communication of their RTS 27/28 reports to maximize transparency and minimize regulatory risks?
The publication and communication of RTS 27/28 reports represents far more than a formal compliance task – it is a strategic element of market and customer communication. A well-designed publication and communication strategy can not only minimize regulatory risks but also strengthen the trust of customers and market partners and promote the institution's reputation as a transparent, responsible market participant. The balance between regulatory precision, comprehensibility, and strategic positioning requires a differentiated approach.
🌐 Strategic Publication Approaches:
•
Integrated Publication Platform: Developing a central, easily accessible online platform for all regulatory reports that offers standardized access paths while flexibly addressing different user groups and their information needs.
•
Machine-readable Formats and Open Data: Providing reports not only in PDF format but also in standardized, machine-readable formats (CSV, XML, JSON) that enable automated further processing and analysis by customers, analysts, and data providers.
•
Contextual Embedding: Strategic embedding of regulatory reports in a broader information context that facilitates interpretation and provides additional background information on market conditions, methodological approaches, and industry standards.
•
Versioning and Archiving Strategy: Implementing a transparent versioning strategy that clearly marks updates or corrections and ensures seamless access to historical reports for comparison purposes.
📝 Communicative Preparation and Contextualization:
•
Executive Summaries and Highlights: Supplementing technical reports with concise summaries that highlight key findings and significant developments and make them accessible to non-specialist audiences.
•
Visual Data Presentation: Developing visual representations and interactive dashboards that make complex data sets accessible and enable intuitive exploration of execution quality metrics.
•
Comparative Analyses: Providing contextual comparative analyses that place own performance in relation to market benchmarks and industry standards and enable meaningful interpretation.
•
Proactive Stakeholder Communication: Establishing proactive communication channels that inform relevant stakeholders about new publications, significant changes, and relevant developments.
What specific challenges do RTS 27/28 requirements pose for smaller and medium-sized securities firms, and what efficient implementation strategies are available?
Smaller and medium-sized securities firms face particular challenges in implementing RTS 27/28 requirements that arise from limited resources, lower specialization, and often less mature system landscapes. At the same time, specific strategies and approaches are available to these firms that enable efficient, cost-conscious implementation while fully meeting regulatory requirements. A careful balance between compliance necessities and operational feasibility is crucial.
🏢 Specific Challenges for Smaller and Medium-sized Institutions:
•
Resource Limitations: Limited financial, personnel, and technical resources for implementing complex regulatory requirements compared to large institutions with dedicated regulatory teams.
•
Expertise Gaps: Fewer specialization opportunities and often limited expertise in highly specific regulatory and technical areas relevant to RTS 27/28 implementation.
•
System and Data Architecture: Often less mature, partially fragmented system landscapes with lower automation and data integration that complicate systematic capture and processing of required data.
•
Cost Pressure and ROI Challenge: Higher relative implementation costs with simultaneously lower trading volume, making business case justification for extensive technical solutions difficult.
🛠 ️ Efficient Implementation Approaches and Solution Strategies:
•
Proportionality Principle: Consistent application of the regulatory-recognized proportionality principle that adapts implementation depth to the size, complexity, and risk profile of the institution without compromising core principles.
•
Focused Scope Definition: Precise analysis of actually relevant report components based on the specific business model and trading activities to avoid unnecessary implementation effort.
•
Standardized Solutions and Templates: Use of standardized solutions, templates, and best practices that reduce implementation effort and leverage proven approaches.
•
Outsourcing and Managed Services: Strategic use of external service providers and managed services for specific components of RTS 27/28 compliance that enable access to specialized expertise without building internal capacities.
•
Collaborative Approaches: Participation in industry initiatives and collaborative approaches that enable sharing of resources, knowledge, and solutions among similar institutions.
How can trading venues use the implementation of RTS 27 to improve their market quality and achieve competitive advantages?
For trading venues, implementing RTS
27 requirements offers far more than just a regulatory obligation – it opens strategic opportunities for differentiation in competition, improving market quality, and sustainably strengthening market position. A forward-looking implementation strategy uses the data, processes, and transparency mechanisms required for RTS
27 as a catalyst for operational excellence and as an instrument for targeted market positioning. Through intelligent integration of regulatory compliance with strategic business goals, significant competitive advantages can be achieved.
📊 Strategic Use of Execution Quality Data:
•
Data-driven Market Model Optimization: Systematic analysis of RTS
27 quality metrics for continuous optimization of market models, trading rules, and pricing mechanisms that enable demonstrably improved execution quality for market participants.
•
Micro-Structure Performance Analytics: Developing sophisticated analysis tools for granular examination of market behavior under various conditions that enable targeted improvements to market microstructure and promote liquidity and stability.
•
Benchmark-based Product Development: Using structured quality data as a basis for developing new trading products and services that address specific quality requirements of different market participant groups.
•
Cross-Asset-Class Optimization: Identifying optimization potential across different asset classes through comparative analysis of execution quality metrics that unlock synergies between different market segments.
🔍 Transparency as Competitive Advantage:
•
Quality-Based Market Positioning: Developing differentiated market positioning based on demonstrated execution quality that distinguishes the trading venue from competitors and attracts specific customer segments.
•
Proactive Quality Communication: Establishing proactive communication strategies that highlight quality advantages and position the trading venue as a leader in execution quality and transparency.
•
Customer-centric Quality Reporting: Developing customer-oriented reporting formats that make RTS
27 data accessible and understandable for different customer groups and support informed venue selection decisions.
•
Continuous Quality Improvement: Implementing systematic quality improvement processes that use RTS
27 data as a basis for continuous optimization and demonstrable quality progress.
What role does data quality assurance play in implementing RTS 27/28, and how can a robust data quality management be established?
Data quality assurance forms the foundation of successful RTS 27/28 implementation and significantly determines the reliability, credibility, and strategic value of regulatory reporting. The complex requirements for precision, completeness, and consistency of data to be captured and reported require systematic, holistic data quality management that goes far beyond point-in-time controls. A robust Data Quality Framework not only ensures regulatory compliance but also creates the basis for value-adding data analyses and data-driven business decisions.
🎯 Dimensions of Data Quality in the RTS 27/28 Context:
•
Accuracy and Precision: Ensuring factual correctness and sufficient precision of all data points, especially for time-critical metrics such as execution times, latency values, and price references that have significant influence on quality assessment.
•
Completeness and Coverage: Ensuring seamless capture of all relevant data points for all reportable instruments, time periods, and execution venues without systematic gaps or distortions.
•
Consistency and Coherence: Ensuring internal consistency between different data points, reports, and time periods as well as external consistency with other regulatory reports and market data.
•
Timeliness and Currency: Ensuring timely availability of current data for regulatory reporting and prompt updates when changes or corrections occur.
🏗 ️ Architecture of a Robust Data Quality Management Framework:
•
Multi-Layer Control Model: Implementing a multi-layered control model with automated first-line controls at data sources, independent second-line validations in the processing process, and systematic third-line reviews before final report release.
•
Data Quality Metrics and KPIs: Defining specific data quality metrics and KPIs that enable objective measurement and monitoring of data quality across all relevant dimensions.
•
Root Cause Analysis and Remediation: Establishing systematic processes for identifying root causes of data quality problems and implementing sustainable remediation measures.
•
Continuous Improvement Cycle: Implementing a continuous improvement cycle that systematically translates insights from quality monitoring, audits, and regulatory feedback into process and control improvements.
How can systematic testing and comprehensive validation of the RTS 27/28 reporting solution be designed?
A systematic testing and validation approach for RTS 27/28 reporting solutions is crucial for ensuring regulatory compliance, operational reliability, and long-term sustainability. The complexity of requirements, the multitude of involved systems, and the far-reaching consequences of erroneous reporting require a well-designed, multi-layered validation strategy that goes far beyond simple functional tests. A robust testing and validation approach addresses not only technical aspects but also considers professional, regulatory, and operational dimensions.
🧪 Multi-dimensional Testing Approach:
•
End-to-End Process Validation: Conducting comprehensive tests of the entire reporting process from data capture through transformations and calculations to final report generation and publication to ensure consistency and integrity across all process stages.
•
Multi-Layer Test Pyramid: Implementing a structured test pyramid with unit tests for individual calculations and functions, integration tests for interface components, system tests for the overall solution, and acceptance tests with business area participation.
•
Cross-System Data Validation: Conducting systematic cross-checks between different systems and data sources to validate consistency and correctness of the data basis and identify potential deviations or anomalies.
•
Multi-Perspective Validation: Including different perspectives in the validation process, including technical correctness, professional plausibility, regulatory compliance, and operational efficiency.
📊 Data Quality Validation and Professional Review:
•
Reference Data-based Validation: Developing extensive sets of reference data with known results for various scenarios and instrument classes that serve as benchmarks for validating calculation logic.
•
Scenario-based Testing: Implementing comprehensive scenario tests that cover various market conditions, instrument types, and edge cases to ensure robustness and correctness under different conditions.
•
Regulatory Compliance Checks: Conducting specific compliance checks that verify adherence to all regulatory requirements and formats and identify potential deviations early.
•
User Acceptance Testing: Involving business users in acceptance testing to ensure practical usability and professional correctness of reports.
What role do external service providers and RegTech solutions play in implementing and continuously fulfilling RTS 27/28 requirements?
External service providers and specialized RegTech solutions play an increasingly central role in efficiently implementing and sustainably fulfilling complex RTS 27/28 requirements. The combination of regulatory complexity, technical challenges, and continuous adaptation needs makes the use of specialized expertise and innovative technology solutions a strategic imperative for many financial institutions. A well-designed sourcing strategy and intelligent integration of external components can achieve significant efficiency gains, quality improvements, and risk reductions.
🤝 Strategic Role of External Service Providers:
•
Specialized Implementation Partners: Leveraging the expertise of specialized consulting and implementation partners who bring deep experience with RTS 27/28 projects, proven methods, and implementation accelerators.
•
Managed Service Providers: Outsourcing specific components of the RTS 27/28 process to specialized service providers who can offer dedicated expertise, economies of scale, and continuous optimization.
•
Regulatory Experts and Legal Advisors: Involving specialized regulatory experts and legal advisors for interpreting complex requirements, assessing edge cases, and providing assurance in regulatory uncertainties.
•
Data and Analytics Specialists: Leveraging specialized data experts for optimizing data architectures, data quality management, and advanced analysis methods in the context of RTS 27/28 reporting.
💻 Typologies and Use Cases of RegTech Solutions:
•
End-to-End Reporting Platforms: Integrated platforms that cover the entire RTS 27/28 reporting process from data capture through calculations to report generation and publication, serving as comprehensive solutions for institutions without established infrastructure.
•
Specialized Component Solutions: Focused solutions for specific aspects of RTS 27/28 compliance, such as data quality management, calculation engines, or publication platforms that can be integrated into existing architectures.
•
Data Integration and Aggregation Tools: Specialized tools for integrating and aggregating data from heterogeneous source systems that address the central challenge of data consolidation.
•
Validation and Quality Assurance Solutions: Dedicated solutions for validating and quality-assuring RTS 27/28 data and reports that complement internal controls and provide additional assurance.
How can financial institutions effectively design change management and training measures to ensure sustainable RTS 27/28 compliance?
Effective change management and well-designed training measures are crucial success factors for sustainable implementation and continuous adherence to RTS 27/28 requirements. Successful introduction and lasting anchoring of complex regulatory requirements demands not only technical and procedural adjustments but also profound organizational and cultural transformation. A holistic change management strategy combined with targeted competency development measures creates the necessary prerequisites for a sustainable compliance culture and operational excellence in transparency reporting.
🔄 Holistic Change Management for RTS 27/28 Implementation:
•
Stakeholder-centric Transformation Strategy: Developing a differentiated change strategy that systematically addresses the specific needs, perspectives, and concerns of all relevant stakeholder groups – from business areas through IT to top management – and ensures their active involvement in the change process.
•
Impact Assessment and Change Readiness: Conducting detailed analyses of organizational, procedural, and personnel impacts of RTS 27/28 implementation as well as change readiness of affected organizational units as a basis for targeted transformation strategy.
•
Integrated Communication Concept: Developing a multi-layered communication concept that accompanies the entire transformation process, creates transparency, promotes understanding, and enables continuous feedback, with specific messages and channels for different target groups.
•
Collaborative Implementation Approaches: Using participative, collaborative implementation approaches that actively involve subject matter experts and end users in designing and optimizing processes, systems, and controls, thereby promoting acceptance, practicality, and ownership.
📚 Targeted Competency Development and Training:
•
Role-based Training Programs: Developing differentiated training programs tailored to the specific requirements and responsibilities of different roles – from data analysts through compliance officers to management.
•
Blended Learning Approaches: Implementing blended learning approaches that combine various learning formats (e-learning, classroom training, workshops, on-the-job training) and enable flexible, effective knowledge transfer.
•
Continuous Knowledge Updates: Establishing mechanisms for continuous knowledge updates that keep employees informed about regulatory changes, process adjustments, and best practices.
•
Competency Assessment and Certification: Implementing competency assessments and certification programs that verify knowledge acquisition and identify further development needs.
How are MiFID transparency requirements expected to evolve, and how can financial institutions prepare for future regulatory changes?
MiFID transparency requirements are in a continuous development process, driven by market changes, technological developments, experiences from practical implementation, and changing regulatory priorities. For financial institutions, a forward-looking view of potential developments and strategic preparation for future requirements is crucial to minimize regulatory risks and optimize implementation costs. A future-oriented perspective and adaptive compliance infrastructure form the basis for sustainable competitiveness in a dynamic regulatory environment.
🔮 Expected Development Trends of MiFID Transparency Requirements:
•
Granularity Increase and Data Enrichment: Increasing requirements for detail depth and granularity of data to be captured and reported, supplemented by additional data points that enable a more comprehensive picture of execution quality and market dynamics.
•
Consolidation and Harmonization: Progressive harmonization of various regulatory reporting obligations in the area of market and execution transparency, with the goal of reducing redundancies and increasing consistency.
•
Technological Modernization: Gradual modernization of technical standards and formats for reporting, with increased focus on machine-readable formats, API-based transmission, and potential real-time transparency for certain data points.
•
ESG Integration: Growing integration of ESG factors (Environmental, Social, Governance) into transparency requirements, reflecting the broader trend toward sustainability in financial regulation.
🛠 ️ Technological Developments and Their Influence on Regulation:
•
AI and Machine Learning in Regulation: Increasing use of AI and machine learning by supervisory authorities for analyzing large data volumes, identifying anomalies, and detecting potential compliance violations.
•
Distributed Ledger Technology: Potential use of blockchain and distributed ledger technologies for transparent, tamper-proof documentation of trading activities and execution quality.
•
Real-time Reporting Capabilities: Technological enablement of real-time or near-real-time reporting that could replace or supplement current periodic reporting requirements.
•
Advanced Analytics for Regulatory Supervision: Use of advanced analytics methods by regulators for deeper analysis of market structures, execution patterns, and potential market abuses.
🏗 ️ Strategic Preparation for Future Requirements:
•
Flexible Architecture Design: Designing technical infrastructure with flexibility and adaptability as core principles that enable rapid response to changing requirements.
•
Regulatory Monitoring and Early Warning: Establishing systematic regulatory monitoring that identifies relevant developments early and enables proactive preparation.
•
Scenario Planning and Impact Assessment: Conducting regular scenario analyses that assess potential regulatory developments and their impacts and inform strategic planning.
•
Industry Engagement and Dialogue: Active participation in industry associations, working groups, and regulatory consultations to understand developments early and potentially influence them.
Success Stories
Discover how we support companies in their digital transformation
Generative KI in der Fertigung
Bosch
KI-Prozessoptimierung für bessere Produktionseffizienz
Fallstudie
Ergebnisse
Reduzierung der Implementierungszeit von AI-Anwendungen auf wenige Wochen
Verbesserung der Produktqualität durch frühzeitige Fehlererkennung
Steigerung der Effizienz in der Fertigung durch reduzierte Downtime
AI Automatisierung in der Produktion
Festo
Intelligente Vernetzung für zukunftsfähige Produktionssysteme
Fallstudie
Ergebnisse
Verbesserung der Produktionsgeschwindigkeit und Flexibilität
Reduzierung der Herstellungskosten durch effizientere Ressourcennutzung
Erhöhung der Kundenzufriedenheit durch personalisierte Produkte
KI-gestützte Fertigungsoptimierung
Siemens
Smarte Fertigungslösungen für maximale Wertschöpfung
Fallstudie
Ergebnisse
Erhebliche Steigerung der Produktionsleistung
Reduzierung von Downtime und Produktionskosten
Verbesserung der Nachhaltigkeit durch effizientere Ressourcennutzung
Digitalisierung im Stahlhandel
Klöckner & Co
Digitalisierung im Stahlhandel
Fallstudie
Ergebnisse
Über 2 Milliarden Euro Umsatz jährlich über digitale Kanäle
Ziel, bis 2022 60% des Umsatzes online zu erzielen
Verbesserung der Kundenzufriedenheit durch automatisierte Prozesse
Let's
Work Together!
Is your organization ready for the next step into the digital future? Contact us for a personal consultation.
Your strategic success starts here
Our clients trust our expertise in digital transformation, compliance, and risk management
Ready for the next step?
Schedule a strategic consultation with our experts now
30 Minutes • Non-binding • Immediately available
For optimal preparation of your strategy session:
Your strategic goals and challenges
Desired business outcomes and ROI expectations
Current compliance and risk situation
Stakeholders and decision-makers in the project
Prefer direct contact?
Direct hotline for decision-makers
Strategic inquiries via email
Detailed Project Inquiry
For complex inquiries or if you want to provide specific information in advance