<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Turquoise and the Tale of Tape</title>
	<atom:link href="http://fragmentation.fidessa.com/2009/01/22/turquoise-and-the-tale-of-tape/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://fragmentation.fidessa.com/2009/01/22/turquoise-and-the-tale-of-tape/</link>
	<description>Making Sense of Fragmentation</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2012 14:55:28 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Artur Fischer</title>
		<link>http://fragmentation.fidessa.com/2009/01/22/turquoise-and-the-tale-of-tape/comment-page-1/#comment-82</link>
		<dc:creator>Artur Fischer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Jan 2009 22:44:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://46.51.189.55/?p=461#comment-82</guid>
		<description>Steve

Thanks for shedding light on the complex issue of a consolidated tape. I agree that there might be different solution to the problem. However those customizations will be implemented on a local user basis and are therefore not relevant. The aim of a consolidated tape is to serve as a meaningful benchmark in a fragmented market. Equiduct takes great care in the selection of venues we include in our OrangeVBBO.  Only those venues which have firm prices and are utilizing a clearing house are used. The same is true for the 500 plus instruments we calculate the OrangeVBBO for. Only instruments which are traded at least in 2 venues and which have a sufficient number of trades during the day are included in our calculation. However the main differentiator to other solution is our ability to calculate a volume weighted benchmark using two distinct volumes : RMS (7.500 €) and SMS (up to 100.000 e) as defined by CESR.  A solution which only allows  a top of the book (EBBO)  view is as vague as a house price without the information about the  number of bedrooms.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Steve</p>
<p>Thanks for shedding light on the complex issue of a consolidated tape. I agree that there might be different solution to the problem. However those customizations will be implemented on a local user basis and are therefore not relevant. The aim of a consolidated tape is to serve as a meaningful benchmark in a fragmented market. Equiduct takes great care in the selection of venues we include in our OrangeVBBO.  Only those venues which have firm prices and are utilizing a clearing house are used. The same is true for the 500 plus instruments we calculate the OrangeVBBO for. Only instruments which are traded at least in 2 venues and which have a sufficient number of trades during the day are included in our calculation. However the main differentiator to other solution is our ability to calculate a volume weighted benchmark using two distinct volumes : RMS (7.500 €) and SMS (up to 100.000 e) as defined by CESR.  A solution which only allows  a top of the book (EBBO)  view is as vague as a house price without the information about the  number of bedrooms.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

