Sep. 08, 2020
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Mr. Fields, I am trying to receive clarity on the non-display fees charged by UTPPlan and other SIP / exchanges. I am one of the "small businesses" put at an unfair disadvantage, as first voiced by David Jenkins here: https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-ctacq-2017-02/ctacq201702-1718161-150439.pdf Like Mr. Jenkins, my usage of API data is similarly infrequent to Mr. Jenkins'. I make an average 4 trades a day and hold generally for an average 1-2 months per stock. On most days I don't even trade at all, and when closing a position, no real-time data is used - meaning that of the few trades I do already, half of them don't use real-time data. Unlike Mr. Jenkins, however, I fall just narrowly into the category of a professional investor based on the fact that I manage a small fund currently of just money from friends and family. It is small enough that the aggregate SIP fees (about $15k/month) would easily destroy the investment return in a given year. That is simply an insane expense just for the fact I collect the data via script instead of by hand (which should not be an expectation in modern day). Just look at the pricing matrix here for Livevol: https://datashop.cboe.com/ A vendor like Livevol Inc already charges >$3000 per month for options data access. You then owe an additional $4000 to NYSE, $2000 to AMEX, $3500 to UTP, and $2000 to OPRA just for the fact you process the data with a computer script instead of by hand. It completely prevents fair access to the markets to nonprofessional traders and even professional traders if they cannot stomach $15000/month as a fixed recurring expense. It seems like a mistake, and I have tried to get clarity from UTPPlan, NYSE, CBOE Livevol, and others on what specifically incurs the non-display usage. However, the responses are always non-answers, referring to the same documentation and vague language to which I am trying to get clarity on. None of them would explain the reasoning for the fees. They would not even tell you what the exact fees will be before you subscribe, leaving you to guess whether your expense will be a few hundred at year end or nearly $200,000. I ask that the SEC reconsider the impact these fees are having in unfairly restricting markets only to large financial firms and unfairly penalizing small businesses and investors. My suggestion would be to scale the fees more gradually based on number of employees or assets under management. Or, given the language seems to indicate this, be more specific that the fees are for heavy users of data and not infrequent traders like myself or Mr. Jenkins. If the fees are already set up in such a way that they are not meant for users like myself, please do clarify as well. I am happy to discuss further at any time. Sincerely, William Mok