RTS · European Commission
Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2017/576 of 8 June 2016 supplementing Directive 2014/65/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to regulatory technical standards for the annual publication by investment firms of information on the identity of execution venues and on the quality of execution
RTS 28 requiring investment firms to publish annually, for each class of financial instruments, their top five execution venues by trading volume for client orders, with a summary of the execution quality obtained. Repealed by Delegated Regulation 2026/825; valid until 11 August 2028.
Details
| Reference | Delegated Regulation (EU) 2017/576 |
|---|---|
| Issuer | European Commission |
| Published | 31 Mar 2017 |
| CELEX | 32017R0576 |
| In force / applies from | 20 Apr 2017, 3 Jan 2018 |
| End of validity | 11 Aug 2028 |
Provisions it relates to
- Article 27 MiFID II · Obligation to execute orders on terms most favourable to the clientLegal basis
UK version: UK Delegated Regulation (EU) 2017/576.
Documents that refer to it
- Q&AAnsweredExplicit reference · 90%
AI summaryPortfolio managers and receivers and transmitters of orders must list the top five execution entities at the level of each individual firm, not aggregated to the group parent; where group entities dominate the list, ESMA suggests adding information on other third-party brokers regularly used.
- Q&AAnsweredExplicit reference · 90%
AI summaryRTS 28 reporting of orders executed on third-country venues covers all such venues, whether or not the Commission has found their market equivalent.
- Q&AAnsweredExplicit reference · 90%
AI summaryUnder RTS 28 Article 3(3), firms must give a separate summary of their execution-quality analysis for each class of financial instrument, though information common to several classes (close links, conflicts, payments and rebates from venues) may be given once on a consolidated basis.
- Q&AAnsweredExplicit reference · 90%
AI summaryRTS 27 and RTS 28 reports must be free, machine-readable (for example CSV or XML) and published in an easily found place on the website with no firewall, registration or password; RTS 28 reports should also be readable by retail clients or come with an alternative visualisation.
- Q&ARejectedExplicit reference
AI summaryAsked how firms should classify non-EU instruments that are absent from FIRDS and FITRS when preparing RTS 28 best-execution reports. ESMA rejected the question, so there is no answer.
- Q&AAnsweredExplicit reference · 90%
AI summaryA firm using a broker's direct electronic access to send orders to a chosen venue should list the DEA provider in its top-five report, treating the order as a specific instruction; the DEA provider includes those trades in its own RTS 28 report as directed orders, unlike a broker that keeps discretion over the venue.
- Q&AAnsweredExplicit reference · 90%
AI summaryPortfolio managers and receivers and transmitters of orders that send orders to a broker generally need not report the passive/aggressive split in their RTS 28-style report under Article 65(6) of the Delegated Regulation, unless they gave a specific passive or aggressive instruction; when they execute directly on a venue, the split must be reported.
- Q&AAnsweredExplicit reference · 90%
AI summaryTrades agreed through a venue's non-anonymous RFQ system are executed on that venue, but to make order routing transparent ESMA prefers firms' RTS 28 reports to identify the counterparty they selected and dealt with through the system.