简体中文
繁體中文
English
Pусский
日本語
ภาษาไทย
Tiếng Việt
Bahasa Indonesia
Español
हिन्दी
Filippiiniläinen
Français
Deutsch
Português
Türkçe
한국어
العربية
UBS Fined $2.5 Million By FINRA Due To Violations and Failures
Abstract:According to the US regulator, from 2009 to 2018, UBS failed to complete at least 5,300 failure to deliver positions and routed or executed more than 73,000 short sells in securities with an unmet close-out requirement without first borrowing or arranging to borrow the shares.

According to the US regulator, from 2009 to 2018, UBS failed to close out at least 5,300 failure to deliver positions and routed or executed more than 73,000 short sales in securities with an unfulfilled close-out requirement without first borrowing or arranging to borrow the shares.
“The short sale duties established by Reg SHO provide vital protection to the markets and investors,” Jessica Hopper, Executive Vice President and Head of FINRA's Department of Enforcement, stated.“ ”Effective supervision focuses on every step of a firm's Rule 204 compliance, including testing to ensure that systems and programming function as intended and without unintended effects.
Reg SHO prohibits “naked” short selling.
Reg SHO targets recurrent delivery problems as well as possibly abusive “naked” short selling (the sale of securities that an investor does not own or has not borrowed).
The regulation compels businesses to take deliberate action to close out “failure to deliver” positions arising from short sells of equity securities by borrowing or acquiring the securities before the start of normal trading hours the following day.
Close-out requirements are not met by limit orders or other delayed transactions. When a business fails to close out a failure to deliver, the regulation precludes the firm from taking new short sell orders in the security without first borrowing or arranging to borrow the security (often referred to as the “penalty box”).
Certain buy-in orders were routed as limit orders using UBS's VWAP algorithm.
According to FINRA, UBS violated Regulation SHO Rule 204 by:
Using revocable volume weighted average price (VWAP) transactions or restricting orders to address buy-in obligations that fail to be fulfilled
Consider shares freed from segregation as a result of client long sales that are available to close out a failure to deliver; and
Certain order management systems do not always block short sales in securities with an unfulfilled close-out requirement.
FINRA determined that UBS's supervisory systems were not adequately structured to achieve compliance with the standards of Reg SHO Rule 204 from 2009 to August 2022. The bank failed to recognize its unlawful handling of shares related to a customer-long sale.
UBS also ignored red warnings in its books and records showing that its VWAP algorithm routed some buy-in orders as limit orders. UBS also admitted to only fully enforcing Rule 204's “penalty box” following a technology breakdown.

About FINRA
Congress has given FINRA authority to safeguard American investors by ensuring that the broker-dealer sector performs fairly and honestly. We supervise over 624,000 brokers around the nation and evaluate billions of market occurrences every day.
We employ cutting-edge AI and machine learning technology to monitor the market and assist investors, regulators, policymakers, and other stakeholders.
WikiFX has been collaborating with FINRA for quite some time to address complaints made by allegedly FINRA-regulated scam brokers.
If you have any concerns about scams, please contact WikiFX Support using the information provided below.

More information on UBS may be found on WikiFX's dealer page at https://www.wikifx.com/en/dealer/5081972641.html.
Keep an eye out for more regulatory updates.
WikiFX may be downloaded via the App Store or Google Play.

Disclaimer:
The views in this article only represent the author's personal views, and do not constitute investment advice on this platform. This platform does not guarantee the accuracy, completeness and timeliness of the information in the article, and will not be liable for any loss caused by the use of or reliance on the information in the article.
Read more

Firsttrade Review: Traders Raise Ponzi-Style Scam Concerns, Withdrawal Denials & More Issues
Have you lost all your capital while trading via Firsttrade? Does the US-based forex broker disallow you from withdrawing funds? Do you have to pay massive fees when transferring funds? Does your trade get affected because of frequent malfunction in the trading app? These have been haunting many traders at Firsttrade. Consequently, many of them have raised complaints online. In this Firsttrade review, we have shared such complaints. Keep reading to know about them.

Defcofx Review: Spread Manipulation & Poor Customer Support Outrage Traders
Does the poor customer support service leave you stunned when trading via Defcofx? Do you receive blunt, negative responses from the support team on several trading queries? Does the Saint Lucia-based forex broker pile on the losses for you by manipulating forex spread charges? In this Defcofx review, we have shared some complaints made against the broker. This will further answer your question: Is Defcofx real or fake?

Beware the “Ghost Brokers” This Halloween — Trade Safely with WikiFX
Stay safe this Halloween! Spot and avoid ghost brokers in the forex world with WikiFX – your trusted tool for verifying broker legitimacy.

FP Markets Social Trading Expands Global Access
FP Markets Social Trading connects traders worldwide, offering copy trading, Forex strategies, and expert insights across global markets.
