Blog & News | TRG Screen

Webinar recap: Staying on the right side of exchange declarations

Written by TRG Screen | 11-11-2025

More exchanges are demanding granular reporting, audits are tougher and more frequent and the scope of what counts as ‘chargeable data’ continues to expand. 

In TRG Screen’s latest webinar, Eimear Keane, Senior Manager of Market Data Compliance, joined Julian Morris, Senior Sales Executive, to unpack the fast-changing landscape and share practical steps firms can take to stay ahead of the next audit. 

The exchange rulebook is being rewritten 

The compliance environment is shifting on multiple fronts. Exchanges are auditing more often, asking for greater detail in reports, and applying new fees to delayed or historical data.

“Where exchanges once overlooked delayed or stored data, many are now charging for it,” Eimear explained. “We’re also seeing new audits from venues that previously didn’t perform them.”

Among the trends highlighted during the discussion:

  • Delayed and historical data now fee-liable across multiple venues.
  • Audits from new sources such as OPRA (Options Price Reporting Authority) and other regional exchanges.
  • Audits expanding in scope, often run remotely and dragging on for months.
  • Compound interest on back-charges making audit outcomes costlier.
  • Annual cost inflation of 10 percent or more for many data licenses.


The result: rising pressure on teams to prove compliance under rules that change faster than their internal systems.

The true cost of an audit 

Audits aren’t just an administrative afterthought; they can expose serious financial and operational risk. Interest penalties alone have, in some cases, exceeded the original liability, leaving firms with unexpected exposure. 

They’re also taking longer. Remote audits have removed the old face-to-face urgency to close quickly, any many now stretch for six months to a year or more. 

“Certain exchanges apply compound interest month on month for the entire audit period… for some firms, the interest amount is actually greater than the underlying liability,” Eimear noted. 

The challenges run deeper than timing. A lack of transparency around vendor netting, entitlement mismatches and outdated permissioning can trigger costly discrepancies. And when it comes to data access, auditors take a strict view. 

“If an application had the potential to access data – even if it didn’t – they’ll assume a charge,” Eimear warned. “Potential consumption counts.” 

The best defense is preparation: define the audit scope early, confirm which systems and users fall within it, and maintain complete, auditable permissioning records. With the right controls in place, firms can reduce the duration and the cost of an audit. 

Agreements that keep getting harder to interpret

Exchange agreements are becoming increasingly intricate. From affiliate ownership thresholds to cloud-based delivery models and derived data, the definitions that determine compliance are nuanced and open to interpretation. 

Non-display usage – once largely confined to algorithmic trading – now covers a much broader range of functions including risk management, portfolio valuation and quantitative analytics. Each may require separate licenses or attestations. 

“Even determining whether an affiliate is covered under a parent license can be a challenge,” Eimear noted. “You have to understand the precise language of each agreement.”

Finding savings in the complexity 

Not all the news is bad. Several exchanges are offering netting and savings programs that can offset costs; if managed correctly and if firms meet the reporting demands.

  • MISU (Multiple Instance Single User) schemes, offered by venues like NYSE, OPRA and others, allow users to claim back credits across multiple platforms.
  • Pay-Per-User models, from CME, Deutsche Börse, Euronext and others, provide more granular cost models, but require accurate user-level reporting. 

    “These programs can deliver real savings,” Eimear said, “but only if firms meet the reporting and audit requirements that come with them.” 

In-house or outsourced? The right model for you

A live poll during the session showed a near-even split between firms managing exchange declarations entirely in-house and those outsourcing some or all of the process. 

Eimear’s advice: there’s no universal answer. What matters is control, consistency and transparency. 

Teams should focus on:

  • Centralized oversight of exchange declarations and fee models.
  • Clear unit-of-count logic (per user, per platform, or per access).
  • Regular policy reviews to capture price and rule changes.
  • Governance mechanisms and audit ready reporting.


“The firms that stay audit-ready all year round, not just when the notice arrives, are the ones avoiding unnecessary cost and disruption,” Eimear concluded. 

If you missed the live webinar, watch the recording 


For more information on how TRG Screen helps firms simplify exchange compliance and reduce audit exposure through automation and expert guidance, get in touch with our team. We’d love to help you feel more confident about exchange compliance and your readiness to face audits.