United States: CFTC Holds Roundtable To Consider Proposed Regulation AT

Last Updated: June 20 2016
Article by Neal E. Kumar, Michael Selig, Mary Treanor, Gregory Mocek and Paul J. Pantano, Jr.

Most Read Contributor in United States, August 2018

On June 10, 2016, Staff for the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC”) held a public roundtable to discuss its proposed Regulation Automated Trading (“Regulation AT”).1 The CFTC proposed Regulation AT in an attempt to reduce the risk of market disruptions caused by automated trading.  Proposed Regulation AT includes risk controls and transparency measures for futures commission merchants (“FCMs”), designated contract markets (“DCMs”), and CFTC registrants using algorithmic trading systems.  The proposed rule also includes a new registration requirement for persons engaged in proprietary algorithmic trading on a DCM through direct electronic access (“DEA”).  Panelists at the roundtable – including representatives of FCMs, DCMs, and market participants with DEA – expressed concerns about the broad and prescriptive scope of Regulation AT and advocated a more flexible, principles-based, approach.

The roundtable explored several issues, including:  (1) the appropriate definition of an “AT Person”; (2) amendments to the definition of DEA; (3) an alternative to imposing certain regulatory burdens on AT Persons; and (4) the requirement that AT Persons maintain and make available for inspection source code repositories.  In his opening remarks, Commissioner Giancarlo expressed concern that the CFTC does not yet fully understand the implications of the new digital trading environments and cautioned that Regulation AT is “a 20th Century analog response to the 21st Century digital revolution in trading markets.”  Chairman Massad, in turn, emphasized the need to proceed with a deliberate approach.  Despite expressing her goal to finalize Regulation AT by the end of the year, Commissioner Bowen recognized that the current proposal is a “first cut” that may need to be updated.  The CFTC reopened the comment period to June 24, 2016 so that it may receive comments related to the specific issues discussed at the roundtable.

Possible Revisions to the Definition of AT Person and Appropriate Quantitative Metrics to Identify AT Persons

In one of the roundtable panels, the CFTC and industry panelists discussed Regulation AT’s broad definition of “AT Person,” which includes market participants that use algorithmic trading systems and are registered with the CFTC as one of the following:  (1) FCM; (2) floor trader; (3) swap dealer; (4) major swap participant; (5) commodity pool operator; (6) commodity trading advisor; or (7) introducing broker.2  Based on this structure, algorithmic traders that are not registered with the CFTC and do not engage in DEA trading are not subject to the proposed requirements.  Industry panelists questioned the logic of distinguishing between CFTC and non-CFTC registrants that use algorithmic trading.  In addition, Regulation AT does not define AT Persons on a granular level, including through means of access or trading frequency.  All of the panelists agreed that the definition captures too many market participants, with some panelists asserting that the definition should focus more on the “who” – the trader’s specific attributes – and others advocating a focus on the “what” – the type of activity. 

In light of these extensive regulations, and the fact that the current definition of AT Person includes a broad swath of market participants, this panel considered potential quantitative metrics to better identify what constitutes an AT Person.  One panelist, a representative of the European Securities and Markets Authority (“ESMA”), described the quantitative metrics developed by the organization to identify algorithmic trading, high-frequency trading, and investment firms.  The CFTC then solicited the panelists’ feedback regarding thresholds on, for example, order resting time, trade counts, and trade volume.  Most panelists urged a principles-based approach to defining AT person that targets market risk, as opposed to specific quantitative measures.  These panelists warned that any quantitative metrics would be too difficult to apply in a one-size-fits-all approach across several markets and product types.  Moreover, they advised, quantitative measures may create artificialities by incentivizing market participants to change their behavior to avoid arbitrary thresholds. 

Potential Amendments to the Direct Electronic Access Definition

Industry panelists also expressed concerns that the proposed definition of DEA in Section 1.3(yyyy) is overly broad and vague.  As proposed, DEA is “an arrangement where a person electronically transmits an order to a DCM, without the order first being routed through a separate person who is a member of a [DCO] to which the DCM submits transactions for clearing.3  When an AT Person with DEA submits an algorithmic order to a DCM, Regulation AT obligates the DCM to create risk controls for the order and the clearing member FCM must use the DCM-created risk controls.

During the panel, industry panelists advocated a more precise definition of DEA that strikes an appropriate balance between addressing the various means of accessing the market directly and avoiding a definition that ensnares all market participants.  For example, a representative of CME Group argued that the DEA definition should not consider whose server the order goes through and whether human involvement exists, but rather hinge on whether an order passes through market risk controls administered by a DCO clearing member.  The panelist explained that this definition aligns with a principles-based approach that more precisely addresses the market risk that Regulation AT seeks to prevent. 

The panelists also asserted that flexible, principles-based requirements for DEA trading would enable risk controls to adapt as the market evolves and to be tailored to specific types of market access.  Echoing this, one panelist stated that the proposed rule should focus on defining “risks” and permit market participants to build controls around these defined risks.  All panelists supported imposing risk controls on market participants engaged in DEA trading, reasoning that “with direct access comes direct responsibility.”  Some panelists also advocated for a second layer of risk control at the DCM level as an “ultimate backstop” to prevent market disruption.  However, they noted that DCMs typically lack knowledge of customer trading patterns to tailor their risk controls to specific customers.  The panelists generally agreed that the CFTC should require two layers of risk controls.  The first layer is the matching engine run by the DCM, and the second layer should be with the FCM or AT Person with DEA who implements the interface provided by the DCM.  One of the panelists advocated a separation of risk controls between the source of the technology and the user.  He asserted that the provider of the technology, the FCM, should have responsibility for risk controls and not the trader using it, explaining as an analogy that “there are drivers who are using the FCM’s car, but the FCM is the exclusive owner of the car, so it should be responsible for the risk controls.”

Alternatives to Imposing Certain Regulatory Burdens on AT Persons

The CFTC considered alternative risk control structures in one of the panels, noting commenters’ concerns that the proposed risk controls were duplicative and applied in a one-size-fits-all fashion. The ESMA representative described the organization’s regulatory framework establishing risk controls for automated trading with trading firms and DEA providers.  The CFTC then solicited the panelists’ feedback on an FCM-based risk control alternative that would require FCMs to:  (1) implement their own risk controls for all proprietary and customer orders; (2) require that AT Person customers apply pre-trade risk controls and develop, test, and monitor standards for their own algorithmic trading systems; and (3) perform due diligence regarding the compliance of AT Person customers. 

Industry panelists urged against an FCM-based approach because of the significant personnel and technology costs that FCMs would incur in their compliance efforts.  For example, an FCM representative estimated that his company would spend about $1 million annually and need to embed one employee in each of its customer’s businesses to ensure effective due diligence.  He also emphasized that this approach would need to reflect the significant differences among FCMs and their clients.  Other market participants expressed similar reluctance to adopt this alternative because those qualifying as AT Persons would have to pay FCMs for their enhanced due diligence.  Moreover, as one FCM panelist noted, FCMs compete with their customers in certain circumstances and an FCM-based approach would create an un-level playing field in certain markets.  Instead, industry panelists generally expressed a preference for a DCM-based approach.  All panelists, however, supported risk control parameters on AT Persons.

One panel also discussed the potential compliance issues regarding AT Persons using third-party algorithms, an issue raised by some commenters.  Panelists who develop and lease algorithms described the exhaustive testing that their companies undertake, in collaboration with their customers, before that algorithm goes into operation.  In light of this extensive testing, these panelists argued that Regulation AT should not distinguish between AT Persons that use third-party algorithms from those that develop their own algorithm.  Others expressed concern that traders using vended algorithms should not bear responsibility for code that they did not design.

Source Code Access and Retention

In the final panel, the CFTC addressed the concerns of several commenters – and Commissioner Giancarlo – that Regulation AT requires AT Persons to maintain and provide the CFTC and Justice Department with access to a source code repository.  In his opening remarks, Commissioner Giancarlo described the “extraordinary requirement” that proprietary source code be accessible without a subpoena as “unsettling.”  Panelists emphasized that source code is not analogous to books and records because it exceeds documenting an order.  By contrast, source code reveals higher-level details about why and how a trading decision was made.  During the roundtable, Chairman Massad recognized that source code provides significant value to firms and emphasized the CFTC’s commitment to protecting confidentiality.  One panelist recommended defining source code to account for the execution path of an order, how and why an order was created, and the decision to create, modify or cancel that order. 

Moreover, the panelists argued that this requirement would not benefit the CFTC because of the difficulty in identifying operational issues solely by looking at source code.  Two industry panelists explained that, in the rare instances where they had seen the CFTC request source code, the CFTC reviewed the source code on-site, a developer explained the code, and the parties carefully recorded who viewed which portions of the code.  The industry panelists all argued that in light of the significant risks, and lack of clear benefits, the CFTC should revise the proposed rule to require only the preservation of source code. 


The roundtable discussion revealed significant concerns related to the broad nature of proposed Regulation AT along with the extensive regulations imposed on AT Persons.  Industry panelists generally urged against prescriptive risk control parameters that apply across all markets and product types.  Such an approach, they argued, would drastically increase regulatory costs, decrease market liquidity, and potentially undermine the proposal’s underlying goal of minimizing market disruptions.  In a public speech the day before the roundtable, Chairman Massad expressed his willingness to finalize Regulation AT in phases.4


1 Proposed Rule, Regulation Automated Trading, 80 Fed. Reg. 78824 (Dec. 17, 2015).

2 Id. at 78843.

3 Proposed Rule at 78844.

4 Keynote Remarks of Chairman Timothy Massad before the Global Exchange and Brokerage Conference (June 9, 2016), available at http://www.cftc.gov/PressRoom/SpeechesTestimony/opamassad-47.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions