Content Options

Content Options

View Options

MAR 6.3 Criteria for determining whether an investment firm is a systematic internaliser

MAR 6.3.1EU


Where an investment firm deals on own account by executing client orders outside a regulated market or an MTF, it shall be treated as a systematic internaliser if it meets the following criteria indicating that it performs that activity on an organised, frequent and systematic basis:


the activity has a material commercial role for the firm and is carried on in accordance with non-discretionary rules and procedures;


the activity is carried on by personnel, or by means of an automated technical system, assigned to that purpose, irrespective of whether those personnel or that system are used exclusively for that purpose;


the activity is available to clients on a regular or continuous basis.


An investment firm will cease to be a systematic internaliser in one or more shares if it ceases to carry on the activity specified in paragraph 1 in respect of those shares, provided that it has announced in advance that it intends to cease that activity using the same publication channels for that announcement as it uses to publish its quotes or, where that is not possible, using a channel which is equally accessible to its clients and other market participants.


The activity of dealing on own account by executing client orders shall not be treated as performed on an organised, frequent and systematic basis where the following conditions apply:


the activity is performed on an ad-hoc and irregular bilateral basis with wholesale counterparties as part of business relationships which are themselves characterised by dealings above standard market size;


the transactions are carried out outside the systems habitually used by the firm concerned for any business that it carries out in the capacity of a systematic internaliser.

[Note: Article 21(1) to (3) of the MiFID Regulation]

MAR 6.3.2EU

An activity should be considered as having a material commercial role for an investment firm if the activity is a significant source of revenue, or a significant source of cost. An assessment of significance for these purposes should, in every case, take into account the extent to which the activity is conducted or organised separately, the monetary value of the activity, and its comparative significance by reference both to the overall business of the firm and to its overall activity in the market for the share concerned in which the firm operates. It should be possible to consider an activity to be a significant source of revenue for a firm even if only one or two of the factors mentioned is relevant in a particular case.

[Note: Recital 15 to the MiFID Regulation]