Former Keystone Asset Management directors and compliance committee members put hundreds of millions of dollars of Australians’ superannuation at risk by investing scheme funds in related entities and third parties without proper safeguards, ASIC alleges in new Federal Court proceedings. ASIC is suing Paul Chiodo, Ilya Frolov, and Mark Yorston, former directors of Keystone Asset Management Ltd (Receivers & Managers Appointed) (In Liquidation) (Keystone Asset Management) for allegedly breaching their director and officer duties, and Jeremy Danon and Mr Frolov, former compliance committee members for allegedly failing to meet their obligations. In total more than $530 million in retirement savings from around 5,800 investors flowed into the Shield Master Fund (Shield). Shield was operated and managed by Keystone Asset Management. ASIC alleges around $305 million of those funds were transferred to a related property development fund controlled by Keystone Asset Management, before being transferred to entities linked to Mr Chiodo and Mr Frolov. ASIC further alleges: the funds were transferred without basic safeguards including proper security, valuations, oversight, or management of conflicts investor money was used for unauthorised purposes without a sufficient connection to the intended property development projects, including payments to related parties and third parties without the required prior approval of scheme members, and failures to ensure compliance with the Shield Compliance Plan by failing to obtain valuations of the assets of Shield and manage conflicts of interest involving Mr Chiodo and Mr Frolov. ASIC Chair Sarah Court said the case reflects alleged failures in how hundreds of millions of dollars of Australians’ super savings were handled and protected. ‘Investors in managed investment schemes are entitled to expect that their investments will be carefully managed on their behalf but, in this case, ASIC alleges investors were exposed to conflicted arrangements and poor oversight. ‘We allege hundreds of millions of dollars of superannuation was transferred to related entities without basic safeguards, exposing thousands of Australians to significant financial risk. ‘These proceedings are about holding those we allege to be involved to account and sending a clear message that directors operating schemes of this kind must act in investors’ best interests,’ the Chair said. ASIC is seeking civil penalties, disqualification orders against the former directors and costs. ASIC’s investigations into the matters connected to Shield are continuing. Downloads Originating process Statement of claim Background Shield is a registered managed fund, which was registered in May 2021. In April 2025, the liquidators of Keystone Asset Management (Liquidators) determined it was in the best interests of investors for Shield to be terminated. In February 2024, ASIC halted new offers of investments in Shield. ASIC made interim stop orders on four product disclosure statements for Shield (24-018MR). In June 2024, ASIC took action to protect investor funds (24-137MR). As a result of ASIC’s action, shares in a share trading account were preserved for the benefit of investors. The Liquidators have subsequently sold those shares and deposited the proceeds of nearly $200m in interest-bearing accounts for the benefit of Shield unitholders. The Liquidators have made an application for an interim distribution to qualifying unitholders. The Liquidators have also commenced proceedings to recover assets for the benefit of investors, including taking action to preserve up to $158m of additional assets. Those proceedings are ongoing. Information about the liquidation process is available on A&M’s website. Approximately 3,000 investors have had $321m of their invested capital in Shield returned after Macquarie entered into a Court Enforceable Undertaking with ASIC (25-215MR). ASIC also has ongoing proceedings in the Federal Court against Equity Trustees Superannuation Limited seeking declarations, compensation orders and civil penalties in relation to Shield (25-176MR). Compliance committees play a critical gatekeeping role in ensuring a responsible entity’s compliance with its obligations: see RG 132 Funds management: Compliance and oversight. ASIC also recently published Review of managed fund compliance plans: ‘Failing to plan is planning to fail’. The adequacy of compliance plans is of fundamental importance to the regulatory framework governing registered managed investment schemes. Consumer information ASIC has issued a consumer alert warning amid increasing concerns that people are being enticed to invest their retirement savings into complex and risky schemes: 25-120MR Consumer alert – ASIC warns about pushy sales tactics urging people to make quick superannuation switches. Be super smart, visit ASIC’s Moneysmart campaign page. Stay Updated: ASIC will post important updates on its dedicated webpage: Shield Master Fund.

Comptroller of the Currency Jonathan V. Gould issued a statement today on his Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) votes concerning resolution planning, assessments, and the disclosure of confidential supervisory information. Excerpts from Comptroller Gould’s statement are below. His full statement can be found here. On resolution planning: I am voting for the proposal to revise resolution-related submissions for insured depository institutions over a certain asset size because I believe that it is a meaningful step in the right direction. It is a recognition that the FDIC should not attempt to outsource its resolution responsibilities to banks, narrows the scope of covered banks subject to the information collection requirements, and reduces certain of those same requirements. However, the proposal does not fully address my concerns. And I strongly encourage stakeholders to provide comment on what is right with the proposal and what more should be done, including whether specific information requirements – such as those targeting digital asset activities – are warranted and whether they might be used by a future Administration to chilling effect or otherwise be unnecessary. As I contemplate a final rule in this area, I will also seek changes in FDIC structure and staffing that reduce bureaucratic incentives to perpetuate or expand this exercise in the future. Board focus and FDIC resources are better spent rebuilding resolution execution capabilities than perpetuating the compliance exercise known as resolution planning. On assessments: I support the proposal to revise aspects of the deposit insurance assessments framework because I believe that the changes to the thresholds and resolution readiness adjustments are concepts worth investigating through notice and comment. The proposed optional downward resolution readiness adjustment is creative, and I expect the comment process to be helpful in assessing how well this new idea would work in practice. At a minimum, banks should be able to understand clearly the work required and the FDIC’s standards for applying the downward adjustments, and the FDIC should adjust the requirements so that banks find it worthwhile to develop and maintain these capabilities. On the disclosure of confidential supervisory information: I am voting for the proposal to revise the FDIC’s regulation governing the disclosure of confidential information by allowing banks to disclose this information without agency approval when necessary or appropriate for business purposes because it should allow banks to more effectively manage their operations. However, I believe that the final rule should go further, and I encourage commenters to address other ways in which the FDIC could reasonably expand access to confidential supervisory information, including by addressing the many specific questions in the preamble. The regulatory framework should facilitate the disclosure of confidential information not only in furtherance of an institution’s business purposes but also in the service of accountability and transparency. These objectives help to ensure that the public understands and has confidence in our supervision and are essential to the proper functioning of our financial system and good government. Related Link Comptroller Statement, FDIC Board Meeting (PDF)

The Commodity Futures Trading Commission today published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking seeking public comment on amendments to Part 15, Part 16, and Part 17 of the Commission’s regulations. The proposal sets forth an alternate framework for reporting of data for certain fully collateralized event contracts, which have been the subject of staff no-action letters since 2017. These revisions would require certain reporting markets, futures commission merchants, clearing members, and foreign brokers to report certain event contracts pursuant to the regulations in Parts 15 through 18 rather than the reporting regulations contained in certain sections of Parts 38, 39, 43 and 45.  “Under my leadership, the CFTC will no longer regulate market participants through a patchwork of no-action letters, which serve as band-aids for unworkable regulations. This proposal is an important step in future-proofing the regulatory framework for event contracts,” said Chairman Michael S. Selig.  “Our responsibility is to provide clear, workable regulations, and I’m committed to doing just that.” The proposal would add a new section 16.03, titled “Covered Event Contracts” to Part 16, concerning “Reports by Contract Markets and Swap Execution Facilities.” The Proposal would specifically provide for reporting pursuant to §16.00, §16.01, Part 17, and Part 18 of the Commission regulations. RELATED LINKS NPRM Data Reporting Requirements for Certain Event Contracts

At the end of the settlement date of June 15, 2026, short interest in 3,764 Nasdaq Global Market℠ securities totaled 17,903,270,409 shares compared with 17,273,936,410 shares in 3,749 Global Market issues reported for the prior settlement date of May 29, 2026. The mid-June short interest represents 2.79 days compared with 3.01 days for the prior reporting period. Short interest in 1,659 securities on The Nasdaq Capital Market℠ totaled 4,045,966,221 shares at the end of the settlement date of June 15, 2026, compared with 3,946,041,797 shares in 1,650 securities for the previous reporting period. This represents a 1 day average daily volume; the previous reporting period’s figure was 1. In summary, short interest in all 5,423 Nasdaq® securities totaled 21,949,236,630 shares at the June 15, 2026 settlement date, compared with 5,399 issues and 21,219,978,207 shares at the end of the previous reporting period. This is 2.06 days average daily volume, compared with an average of 2.15 days for the prior reporting period. The open short interest positions reported for each Nasdaq security reflect the total number of shares sold short by all broker/dealers regardless of their exchange affiliations. A short sale is generally understood to mean the sale of a security that the seller does not own or any sale that is consummated by the delivery of a security borrowed by or for the account of the seller. For more information on Nasdaq Short interest positions, including publication dates, visit https://www.nasdaq.com/market-activity/quotes/short-interest or http://www.nasdaqtrader.com/asp/short_interest.asp.

NYSE today reported short interest as of the close of business on the settlement date of June 15, 2026. SETTLEMENT DATE EXCHANGE TOTAL CURRENT SHORT INTEREST TOTAL PREVIOUS SHORT INTEREST (Revised) NUMBER of SECURITIES with a SHORT POSITION NUMBER of SECURITIES with a POSITION >= 5,000 SHARES 06/15/2026 NYSE 19,304,223,920 18,698,972,059 2,892 2,590 06/15/2026 NYSE ARCA 2,334,681,090 2,324,394,909 2,622 1,809 06/15/2026 NYSE AMERICAN 968,691,257 942,556,424 307 263 06/15/2026 NYSE GROUP 22,607,596,267 21,965,923,392 5,821 4,662 *NYSE Group includes NYSE, NYSE American and NYSE Arca           Reports will be archived here.

Release Dates  RSS DDP FRED The Senior Credit Officer Opinion Survey on Dealer Financing Terms (SCOOS) is a quarterly survey providing information about the availability and terms of credit in securities financing and over-the counter (OTC) derivatives markets. The SCOOS is modeled after the long-established Senior Loan Officer Opinion Survey on Bank Lending Practices, which provides qualitative information about changes in supply and demand for loans to households and businesses at commercial banks. The SCOOS collects qualitative information on credit terms and conditions in securities financing and OTC derivatives markets, which are important conduits for leverage in the financial system. The survey panel for the SCOOS began by including 20 dealers and over time has been expanded. These firms account for almost all of the dealer activity in dollar-denominated securities financing and OTC derivatives markets. The survey is directed to senior credit officers responsible for maintaining a consolidated perspective on the management of credit risks. The HTML links below include the full report; the PDF links include the summary only. 2026 June* HTML | PDF March HTML | PDF 2025 December HTML | PDF September HTML | PDF June HTML | PDF March HTML | PDF 2024 December HTML | PDF September HTML | PDF June HTML | PDF March HTML | PDF 2023 December HTML | PDF September HTML | PDF June HTML | PDF March HTML | PDF 2022 December HTML | PDF September HTML | PDF June HTML | PDF March HTML | PDF 2021 December HTML | PDF September HTML | PDF June HTML | PDF March HTML | PDF 2020 December HTML | PDF September HTML | PDF June HTML | PDF March HTML | PDF 2019 December HTML | PDF September HTML | PDF June HTML | PDF March HTML | PDF 2018 December HTML | PDF September HTML | PDF June HTML | PDF March HTML | PDF 2017 December HTML | PDF September HTML | PDF June HTML | PDF March HTML | PDF 2016 December HTML | PDF September HTML | PDF June HTML | PDF March HTML | PDF 2015 December HTML | PDF September HTML | PDF June HTML | PDF March HTML | PDF 2014 December HTML | PDF September HTML | PDF June HTML | PDF March HTML | PDF 2013 December HTML | PDF September HTML | PDF June HTML | PDF March HTML | PDF 2012 December HTML | PDF September HTML | PDF June HTML | PDF March HTML | PDF 2011 December HTML | PDF September HTML | PDF June HTML | PDF March HTML | PDF 2010 December HTML | PDF September HTML | PDF June HTML | PDF *Current Release

Following the successful launch of the Women in Clearing Network, in March 2024 the EACH’s Women in Clearing Series was inaugurated. This is an initiative with the objective of featuring a key female leader on a regular basis to inspire other professionals in the industry. Sandra Andersson is Head of Government Affairs, Belgium at Euronext since October 2025 where she covers European and Belgian policy matters. She specializes in post-trade topics, including CSD and CCP regulation, interoperability, and supervisory frameworks. Prior to joining Euronext, she spent four years at the European Securities Market Authority (ESMA) supporting ESMA’s institutional and policy engagements at EU level. Between 2015 -2021 she worked for the Federation of European Securities Exchanges, covering a variety of topics including equity market structure, primary markets and sustainable finance. She holds a Master’s degree in European Political and Administrative studies from the College of Europe and a Bachelor’s degree in Political Sciences from Uppsala University which included an exchange year at Sciences Po Paris. Sandra has volunteered to share with us her personal and professional journey by responding to these three questions: What was the aspect of yourself that you had to work on the most to get to where you are now? Understanding and accepting that finished is sometimes better than perfect. Most tasks can take a longer or a shorter time to complete and by spending more time on something the quality will usually improve, but that might not always be time well spent. Producing high-quality work is also about understanding what to prioritise and where to put your efforts. Sometimes doing something that’s just good enough is about balancing your resources and ensuring that you can put your real efforts where they matter. At an earlier stage of my career when responsibilities were more limited and focussed I had the opportunity to fully deep dive into topics, do a lot of readings and be well versed in the technical detail. As I moved into a more senior role, it was not always easy to let go of that instinct to want to know every aspect to feel fully on top of things. I had to understand that my value added would instead come from being able to give strategic direction and asking the right questions rather than being a technical expert. I also had to learn the importance of showcasing what you are doing, both to your peers and management and not waiting for other people to notice. People are busy and if you just keep your head down and work hard, unfortunately, it might go unnoticed. Ensuring that people are aware of your efforts and accomplishments is sometimes as important as actually doing the work. What key tip would you give for professionals to successfully develop in their careers? Say yes to opportunities that excite you and figure out the rest later. People often stress the need to have a vision of where you would like to be in five years etc. but, at least for me, growth opportunities have shown up when I’ve least expected it – and then it’s about being ready to say yes even if that means diving into something you had not necessarily planned for. Nobody grows in their comfort zone so don’t chicken out when you’re asked to do something you actually want to do just because it feels intimidating. How do you see the future of clearing in 10 years? As we live in very volatile times, the central role of clearing in managing risk and ensuring financial stability is likely to remain important. I would have liked to express a hope that the next ten years would be less disruptive but if we take a step back and consider what we have lived since 2016 in terms of crises and emergencies it seems unlikely that things will rapidly calm down.  Instead, the world of financial services with clearing at the centre is very likely to have a key role to play in making sure future risks can be handled and priced also in a very uncertain environment. The world of clearing will have to evolve based on technological innovation stemming from AI, DLT, tokenisation and other new technologies.  CCPs will need to find ways of managing more advanced cyber risks and resiliency threats. There is no shortage of challenges but I think they can be turned into opportunities where CCPs can be part of the solution by allowing an efficient risk management across the board. Ten years from now, we will also have had some time to experience the effect of the MISP package. Hopefully the end-result of negotiations on the package will have had a positive impact on market integration and the depth of European capital markets. By then, we will have some experience with the new supervisory set-up that should simplify processes and allow for synergies which should deliver benefits in terms of strengthening the competitiveness of European CCPs. You could read about Sandra on the attached document or by clicking on this link. A warm thank you to Sandra for her inspirational words! We look forward to continuing the EACH’s Women in Clearing Series by hosting many skilled women leaders to inspire other professionals in the clearing sector! The Women in Clearing network takes the form of a LinkedIn group that participants may use to connect with each other.

The Canadian Investment Regulatory Organization (CIRO) today announced that Andrew Kriegler, its inaugural President and Chief Executive Officer, has informed the Board of Directors that he will not be seeking a further term. After having completed the integration and major objectives of CIRO’s inaugural strategic plan, Mr. Kriegler asked the Board to commence a search for his successor as he intends to retire next year. The Board has commenced the formal search process for CIRO’s next President and CEO working with Russell Reynolds. Mr. Kriegler will continue as President and CEO throughout the Board’s search, ensuring organizational continuity and maintaining focus on its public interest mandate. The Board congratulates Mr. Kriegler for his exceptional leadership in guiding CIRO from inception, on January 1, 2023, through a period of significant growth, integration, and transformation. Mr. Kriegler is now in his 12th year as CEO, following the amalgamation of the Investment Industry Regulatory Organization of Canada (IIROC) and the Mutual Fund Dealers Association of Canada (MFDA). Prior to CIRO’s formation, he served as President and CEO of IIROC beginning in 2014. “On behalf of the Board, I thank Andrew for his integrity and commitment to public service, his dedication to Canadian investors and the investment industry, and the lasting foundation he has helped establish,” said CIRO Board Chair, Miranda Hubbs. “He will leave CIRO in a strong strategic and operational position. Under his leadership, CIRO has strengthened its regulatory credibility, enhanced collaboration with domestic and international partners, improved operational resilience, and built a high-performing organization positioned to respond to an increasingly complex and evolving capital markets environment.” CIRO was established to unify oversight of investment dealers, mutual fund dealers, and their trading activity under a single, modern self-regulatory framework. Mr. Kriegler oversaw the integration of the legacy organizations, established CIRO’s governance and operating model, strengthened regulatory effectiveness, and advanced a multi-year modernization agenda focused on data, technology, risk-based supervision, and investor protection. After subsequently consolidating responsibility for registration of all investment and mutual fund dealers and their approved persons via a series of delegation orders from each of the provincial and territorial securities authorities, and with the enforcement and other legal powers granted by those jurisdictions, CIRO is able to deliver harmonized, efficient and effective regulation to the investment industry across Canada. “It has been an honour to lead CIRO from its inception and to have served as CEO of IIROC before it,” said Andrew Kriegler, President and CEO, CIRO. “I am immensely proud of what our people have accomplished in building on the strengths of our predecessor organizations to establish a more efficient and effective regulator for Canadian investors and markets. CIRO has an important mandate, and I know the organization will continue to advance investor protection, support healthy capital markets, and serve Canadians while strengthening confidence in Canada’s regulatory system.” “The Board is committed to conducting a thorough and disciplined search for CIRO’s next President and CEO,” added Ms. Hubbs. “Andrew is providing ample notice of his retirement plans, for which we are grateful. His decision to place the long-term interests of the organization first is typical of his foresight and commitment to CIRO. We are focused on identifying a leader who will build on Andrew’s contributions and continue to advance CIRO’s mandate in a rapidly evolving financial marketplace.” Further information will be provided as appropriate.

The Canadian Securities Administrators (CSA) today published in final form amendments and changes to implement an access model for certain continuous disclosure documents of reporting issuers, other than investment funds (the Access Model). The Access Model aims to modernize the way annual financial statements, interim financial reports and related management’s discussion & analysis (collectively, CD documents) are made available to investors. The Access Model, which is not mandatory for issuers, provides alternative procedures whereby electronic access may be provided to CD documents instead of following the delivery requirements currently found in securities legislation. “This Access Model is consistent with the general evolution of our capital markets and recognizes that investors are increasingly accessing and consuming information electronically,” said Stan Magidson, CSA Chair and Chair and CEO of the Alberta Securities Commission. “Using technology to facilitate communication with investors is an important step for our markets.” Among the measures implemented to support this change, the CSA has developed SEDAR+ notification functionality that a person or company can use to subscribe to receive an email notification when the CD documents that they subscribed for have been filed by the issuer on SEDAR+. Under the Access Model, investors will continue to be able to request, or provide standing instructions to receive, the CD documents in electronic or paper form. Provided all necessary approvals are obtained, the amendments and changes will come into force on September 22, 2026. The CSA, the council of securities regulators of Canada’s provinces and territories, coordinates and harmonizes regulation for the Canadian capital markets.

Today marks a major milestone in the modernisation of the UK's payments landscape, with the Retail Payments Infrastructure Board (RPIB) launching a consultation on the future design of the UK's next-generation retail payments infrastructure. The new infrastructure will provide a secure foundation for innovation, greater choice and more seamless payments, while supporting existing and emerging forms of digital money.  This consultation will help inform the ‘blueprint’ for the future infrastructure, which will then be delivered by the new industry led ‘Delivery Company’.   The consultation focuses on the different types of payments the new infrastructure should support. Alongside existing functionality, it would enable new payment methods such as account-to-account payments at the point of sale (as an additional option to card payments) and enhanced cross-border payments, delivering greater choice for users and faster and smoother payment experiences.   As RPIB’s work develops, Pay.UK, the operator of the UK’s existing retail interbank payment systems, will continue to play a central role in maintaining their safe and resilient operation.   The next-generation infrastructure will support the National Payments Vision and the Payments Vision Delivery Committee’s strategy to modernise UK retail payments.   Victoria Cleland, Chair of the RPIB, said:   "Working together, we have a real opportunity to transform the UK’s retail payments infrastructure. Our vision is for an infrastructure that remains resilient and trusted, while providing a platform for innovation that responds to users’ needs as the payments landscape evolves. I very much look forward to hearing your views."   The consultation seeks views on the payment journeys, key design choices and priorities for the next-generation retail payments infrastructure. Feedback will help inform the high-level design to ensure it meets the needs of current and future users and will shape the next phase of work by the Delivery Company. The deadline for responses is 11 September 2026.   Background Retail Payment Infrastructure Board consultation on the design of the Future Retail Payments Infrastructure 25 June 2026. Payments Vision Delivery Committee (PVDC): a cross-authority body chaired by  HM Treasury, bringing together the Bank of England, the Financial Conduct Authority and the Payment Systems Regulator to deliver the National Payments Vision. Retail Payments Infrastructure Board (RPIB): a senior industry advisory board, chaired by the Bank of England, which brings together experts from across the payments ecosystem, including banks, building societies, payments service providers, fintechs, and merchants. RPIB will support the development of the design for the UK’s next‑generation retail payments infrastructure and play a role in overseeing the overall approach to its delivery by a new industry led Delivery Company.   Delivery Company: a new industry-led entity that will lead and own the delivery of the core infrastructure.   Pay.UK: Opens in a new window  operates the UK’s core retail interbank payment systems, including Faster Payments, Bacs and the Image Clearing System. These systems support everyday payments across the economy, from salary payments to bill payments and cheque clearing, and will continue to operate safely and resiliently as the next-generation infrastructure is developed.   The National Payments Vision sets out the Government’s ambition for a trusted, world-leading payments ecosystem delivered on next-generation technology, where consumers and businesses have a choice of payment methods to meet their needs.   No decision has been taken on whether or not to proceed with a digital pound. The Bank and HM Treasury are in the final stages of the design phase and will publish their conclusions later this year. 

The nature of payments is changing, requiring a forward-looking approach to support the development of an integrated, innovative and competitive European payments market. Click here for full details.

Following the official launch of its dual-listing venue, Nasdaq Texas today announced the formation of its inaugural Advisory Board. Composed of prominent business leaders, policy experts, entrepreneurs and community leaders in Texas, the board will help guide the exchange’s regional approach and help shape capital formation, governance, and economic growth in Texas. Building the Institutional Foundation for Texas' Next Chapter The Nasdaq Texas Advisory Board is convened to help elevate Nasdaq Texas’ ability to serve its clients in Texas with the full range of Nasdaq's capabilities and to shape how capital markets in Texas continue to develop. The board functions as a forum for candid, substantive dialogue on the forces shaping the Texas economy: how companies access capital, how governance standards evolve, how policy choices affect growth, and how Texas can sustain its leadership as the competitive landscape for talent, investment, and innovation continues to shift. Serving in an advisory capacity, members will work alongside recently appointed Nasdaq Texas President Rachel Racz and Board Chairman Ed Knight to bring perspective from across the Texas economy — from banking and energy to law, real estate, and public company operations — strengthening the exchange’s foundation as Texas continues to attract the world’s most consequential companies. "Texas has become a global hub for entrepreneurship, industrial scale, and innovation leadership — and the momentum we are seeing at Nasdaq Texas reflects that directly. The Advisory Board we are announcing today is how we ensure this exchange continues to rise to meet the moment. Each member was selected intentionally for their leadership and deep engagement in this state, and I’m excited to work alongside them. Together, we’ll shape our approach to capital formation, governance, and the long-term growth of Texas capital markets." — Rachel Racz, President, Nasdaq Texas. Nasdaq Texas Advisory Board Members The Advisory Board is chaired by Ed Knight, Executive Vice Chairman of Nasdaq. Ed Knight served as Nasdaq’s General Counsel from 2001 to 2019, where he championed proxy reform, corporate governance modernization, and passage of the JOBS Act. A Texas native, graduate of the University of Texas Undergraduate and Law Schools, and former General Counsel of the U.S. Department of the Treasury, he brings decades of experience in market structure, regulation, and public policy. Members of the inaugural advisory board include: Danny David, Managing Partner of Baker Botts, is a securities and shareholder litigation attorney advising companies, their directors and officers, and private equity on transactions and disputes, governance and activism, and strategy. Danny David is Managing Partner of Baker Botts L.L.P., a leading global law firm with more than 750 attorneys. Danny chairs the firm’s Executive Committee, developing and implementing the strategic direction and growth of the firm. In addition to leading the firm, Danny maintains an active practice, representing companies, their directors and officers in securities class actions, fiduciary duty lawsuits, M&A litigation, and special situations. Danny serves on the executive committee of the Greater Houston Partnership and the board of visitors of the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center and is a life member of the Council on Foreign Relations. Danny Wesson, Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer of Diamondback Energy, is a public company operator with significant experience in scaling businesses, executing capital markets strategy, and engaging with investors. Danny Wesson is Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer of Diamondback Energy, where he has led the company’s operations since February 2022. He joined Diamondback in 2012 and has held a range of leadership roles across operations, growing alongside the company as it scaled its development program. Danny is a graduate of Louisiana State University, where he earned a Bachelor of Science degree in Mechanical Engineering. He currently serves on several industry and nonprofit boards, including the API Upstream Committee and the Permian Strategic Partnership. Jay Brown, Chief Executive Officer of David Weekley Homes, is an executive officer with extensive experience in corporate strategy, governance, and large-scale organizational growth in public and private companies. Jay Brown leads one of the nation’s largest privately held homebuilders, known for its award-winning culture and commitment to charitable giving. He previously served as President and CEO of Crown Castle Inc. and earlier as its Chief Financial Officer. He serves on the Board of Regents for Baylor University. Jill Lampert, Chief Financial and Administrative Officer of NGP Energy Capital Management, is an experienced financial executive with deep expertise in energy investing, capital allocation, and public and private company governance. Jill Lampert is the Chief Financial and Administrative Officer of NGP, a premier energy private equity firm founded in 1988 with over $25 billion of cumulative equity commitments across natural resources and the energy transition. She serves on NGP's Executive and Investment Committees and chairs its Responsible Investment Committee, bringing deep experience in capital allocation, financial oversight, and governance in private capital. A Certified Public Accountant and graduate of The University of Texas at Austin, she is involved across the University — including the Kay Bailey Hutchison Energy Center Executive Council and the McCombs School of Business Dean's Advisory Council — and founded NGP Connects to advance women's leadership across the energy sector.  Pat Frost, Former President of Frost Bank, is a fifth-generation Texas banking leader with decades of experience supporting public and private company growth and capital access. Pat Frost is the former President of Frost Bank, where he played a key role in growing the bank’s assets to $54 billion, alongside four decades of leadership in financial services and a deep commitment to community service, having chaired more than 40 nonprofit boards. He holds a degree in Economics from Vanderbilt University and an MBA from the University of Texas, and currently serves as President of the San Antonio Rodeo and Chair of the Texas Cultural Trust. His civic contributions have earned him honors including induction into the San Antonio Sports Hall of Fame and the Alamo Heights ISD Hall of Fame. Executive Quotes "Texas has earned its place at the center of American capital markets — and the companies choosing this state deserve an exchange and an advisory structure that takes that seriously. I am proud to chair this board and to help Nasdaq Texas continue to build on the momentum this state has created." - Ed Knight, Chairman, Nasdaq Texas Advisory Board and Executive Vice Chairman, Nasdaq "Texas remains the place where the future of energy is being built, and the companies leading that work want to scale here. I'm glad to help Nasdaq Texas strengthen the capital-formation infrastructure and relationships that let them grow at home." - Jill Lampert, Chief Financial and Administrative Officer of NGP Energy Capital Management “Texas is one of the strongest environments in the country for long-term growth – built on leadership, resilience, and a deep commitment to community. Having built across Texas for decades, I’ve seen how this market continues to evolve and strengths over time. I’m excited to support Nasdaq Texas and the role it will play in helping more companies grow and scale across the state.” - Jay Brown, Chief Executive Officer of David Weekley Homes The announcement follows significant momentum for Nasdaq Texas, including most recently the dual listing of SpaceX, the largest IPO in history. As companies leading the future continue to choose Texas, Nasdaq Texas is investing in the leadership and expertise to strengthen the exchange’s ability to better service clients, unlock global investment pipelines, and enrich the business communities that call Texas home. More information about Nasdaq Texas here: https://www.nasdaq.com/nasdaq-texas

The periodic review for determining the eurobonds to be included in the BIST-KYD Corporate Eurobond Indices has been completed in accordance with the BIST-KYD Indices Methodology.  It has been decided to make the changes listed in the in the annex for the third quarter of 2026 (July 1, 2026 - September 30, 2026). Please click for the periodic changes in the BIST-KYD Corporate Eurobond Indices.

In this speech, David Chaplin, Head of Enforcement and Litigation, examines how behaviour in regulatory investigations is evolving. Drawing on recent PRA and Bank enforcement cases, he discusses a shift towards earlier engagement and candour, and considers how this can support faster, more efficient enforcement while maintaining appropriate and effective regulatory outcomes. Speech   It is a real pleasure to be in Leeds for the Fifth Conference on Financial Law and Regulation. Leeds is an important base for the Bank of England as we build a stronger national presence and deepen our engagement with institutions, practitioners and scholars across the UK. The Bank first opened a Leeds branch in 1827,footnote[1] and our growing presence here reflects a commitment: not only to operate from different locations, but to engage across the country with the professional and intellectual communities that shape our financial system. It is therefore particularly fitting to be here at the University of Leeds, contributing to a conference that brings together legal, regulatory and academic perspectives on some of the most challenging questions facing financial law and regulation today. Some of these questions arise in the context of investigations and enforcement. And that’s what I am going to talk about. Introduction For a long time, there was a relatively settled picture of what a regulatory enforcement investigation looks like: how it begins, how it proceeds, and when (where appropriate) responsibility for regulatory breaches is acknowledged and action taken. That model has served an important purpose, and in many cases, it continues to do so. What I want to discuss today though is how, in a growing number of PRA and Bank enforcement cases, that familiar pattern is changing. I’ll explore how that change has come about, what it entails, and why we think it matters. Recently, we have seen a clear and consistent shift in how the subjects of our investigations are engaging with us. This is a change we have championed and will continue to encourage because of the benefits it brings for all concerned. What is that trend? Put simply, it is that subjects of investigations are engaging with us earlier in the investigations and enforcement process and proactively identifying, acknowledging and remediating breaches. This is not something isolated to a small number of cases. It is not behaviour confined to exceptional or isolated circumstances. Rather, what we are seeing is a sustained change in approach, which we see as having the potential to become the new default: a shift in how responsibility and candour are being understood and acted upon in regulatory enforcement. We believe this represents a genuine sea change in how a growing number of enforcement cases are now being approached. The focus here is not on the launch of a new policy, but on how a policy we have already introduced is playing out in practice and the impact it is having on behaviour in live enforcement cases. Our remit As a reminder, the PRA is responsible for the supervision of approximately 1,300 banks, building societies, credit unions, insurers and major investment firms. In addition to this, the Bank of England has broader regulatory responsibilities, including the supervision of certain financial market infrastructures in the UK. In the enforcement space, we have powers to discipline firms, including through financial sanctions, public censures and the temporary suspension of permissions. We also continue to pursue individual accountability and to publish outcomes in appropriate cases, including, where necessary, prohibiting individuals who are not fit and proper in order to protect the wider regulated community. Before going further, it is worth stepping back and making a broader point about the character of PRA and Bank enforcement. The PRA is a supervision-led rather than an enforcement-led regulator. Our investigations and enforcement resource has always been precision-focused, and used in a targeted way to support supervisory aims. This reflects a need to look back and understand what has gone wrong, as well as a need to look forward and positively influence future behaviour, including in relation to matters where there may be shortcomings apparent, but (perhaps just by good fortune) crystallised harm has not yet arisen. While the enforcement division works closely with supervisors and supports their aims, we are functionally independent from supervision, which helps ensure that we approach matters objectively and with fresh eyes. Our enforcement activity stretches across the entire gamut of PRA-authorised firms: large and small deposit-takers, designated investment firms, insurers, reinsurers and credit unions. Enforcement action is brought to support specific supervisory objectives, strategies, and outcomes. In the PRA context, this is guided by its primary statutory objectives: to promote the safety and soundness of PRA‑authorised firms and to secure an appropriate degree of protection for policyholders. That approach has resulted in a steady number of public outcomes each year, and we expect that to continue. Our focus is on cases that deliver appropriate outcomes while sending clear deterrent signals to the wider community of PRA-authorised firms, individuals and Bank regulated entities. But what is changing, against that steady position, is how those cases are conducted and resolved, and how efficiently and constructively accountability is achieved. ‘Contentious regulatory work’ - the investigations and enforcement orthodoxy To understand why this matters, let’s briefly consider the orthodox model that has traditionally shaped regulatory enforcement cases. That model typically followed a familiar pattern: The regulator opens an investigation and gathers evidence, perhaps over a significant period. The evidence is analysed and tested. Once a settled regulatory view has formed, if the regulator considers that breaches have been identified and action is appropriate, a proposal for action is put to the subject. This may be treated as a case to answer and engagement often becomes, at least in the first instance, defensive: the subject, and their counsel, often adopt a defensive posture, with initial engagement focused on minimising exposure by challenging the regulator’s conclusions. Admissions may eventually come as part of a settlement, but often late on in the process. This approach has driven a set of familiar conventions, on the part of investigation subjects and those advising them, including caution about taking early positions; the labelling of learning and remediation as “enhancements” rather than corrections; careful avoidance of any acknowledgement of rule breaches until the regulator’s view is known; and a tendency to approach enforcement as “quasi‑litigation" rather than as a process of regulatory accountability. It is important to say that this approach may not be wrong or improper. In some cases (particularly where facts are contested or responsibility is genuinely unclear) it may be entirely appropriate. But it is not the only model, and it is not the best model for every situation. If it is treated as the only model, we risk losing the opportunity, in appropriate cases, to do something better — better not only for the regulator but also better, undoubtedly, for the subject of investigations and the wider regulated community. And it bears pausing here to note that, every (not the majority, but every) enforcement case where we have made findings of breaches of rules by a firm to date has been resolved by settlement (that’s 21 cases in total).footnote[2] To date, no firm cases have been contested at our Enforcement Decision Making Committee or the Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber). We do not open investigations unless the statutory thresholds for doing so are met and our investigation opening criteriafootnote[3] are engaged. But we do not think the fact that all our actions against firms have settled is a function of the PRA only pursuing cases where breaches are clear and obvious at the point of opening an investigation. Rather, it reflects the fact that firms, by the time we reach a settlement proposal, have understood the nature of the case against them and internally acknowledged the weaknesses and failings within their systems, controls and governance frameworks. Firms typically recognise the value in the certainty of a settlement and the opportunity to demonstrate contrition and move on from past wrongdoing or failures. This might be taken to suggest that the approach followed historically where an investigation may be treated as a contentious or adversarial endeavour may be misplaced and unnecessary in many cases. Not all investigations result in enforcement action. It remains the case, that some investigations are closed with no action taken, and that will inevitably continue. We do not open investigations lightly, but the fact that some investigations conclude without findings of breach reflects an important feature of how we approach enforcement. We do not open investigations with a predetermined outcome, nor do we focus only on the most straightforward or easily provable cases. This also demonstrates a central point that PRA and Bank investigations are conducted with an open mind; something that will not change. But I am talking about a different, yet substantial, category of investigations: cases where there is often a realistic and shared understanding at an early stage that a regulatory breach is very likely to have occurred. Such scenarios are not uncommon and often arise as a result of independent reports firms may have commissioned, section 166 “skilled person” reviews,footnote[4] root cause analysis exercises or post incident reports. Such work is often sufficient to enable a firm to understand what went wrong, why and how; and who is accountable for this. In cases such as these, the traditional orthodoxy can lead to unnecessarily slow, resource intensive, and expensive processes. The consequence, which we have seen many times, can be investigations that take much longer than they need to. This increases cost, uncertainty, and strain for firms, individuals, and, yes, for regulators alike. It can also introduce significant delay between the events which may have prompted an investigation and the publishing of a settled enforcement outcome. It needn’t be like this. Efficiency, speed and regulatory burden Efficiency and speed are not abstract virtues in enforcement. They matter because quick and efficient investigations reduce prolonged uncertainty for firms and individuals, as well as allowing regulatory resources to be deployed where they add most value and where they enable the regulator to be most effective. Quick and effective investigations also enable lessons from enforcement outcomes to reach the wider market more quickly, with the aim of improving understanding and therefore behaviours, to the benefit of firms, individuals and the regulator. This also connects to a broader discussion about efficiency and regulatory burden on firms. Some of that regulatory burden arises directly from the need to comply with rules. Regulators should, of course, keep their rules under review and look to reform them where appropriate to reduce burden in a way which is proportionate to risk. There are rightly many recent examples of regulators, including the PRA, seeking to do this. In an enforcement context, reducing regulatory burden does not, however, mean reducing enforcement activity such that the incentive to properly and fully comply with the letter and spirit of rules diminishes. But regulatory burden does not arise only from compliance with rules. It can also be driven by the conduct and behaviour of parties and unnecessary procedural friction. Where enforcement can be carried out in a way that uncovers the facts and delivers accountability more quickly, without compromising deterrence, and without unnecessary duplication of effort, that is a real and meaningful reduction in regulatory burden. From the Bank’s perspective, efficient enforcement is not about rushing. It is about doing the right work meticulously, in the right order, without unnecessary delay, to ensure an appropriate regulatory outcome is achieved. Over recent years, we have focused on how enforcement policy design can support that aim with clear architecture and incentives which promote efficiency and candour. Incentives A helpful analogy here is civil justice. In civil litigation, early engagement is not just encouraged; it is structurally incentivised. Under the Civil Procedure Rules, the overriding objective, costs rules, and judicial expectations all push parties towards narrowing issues, accepting responsibility where appropriate, and resolving disputes proportionately. Accordingly, a party that resists the obvious, or prolongs proceedings unnecessarily, does so at real risk. I referred earlier to a tendency to treat investigations and enforcement as “quasi litigation” – investigations and enforcement are not civil litigation, quasi or otherwise. This has been affirmed at the Court of Appeal: a regulator is not an “ordinary litigant” and the conduct of cases is not to be treated as “ordinary litigation”.footnote[5] But the underlying insight holds: behaviour follows incentives. And what we have sought to do in our enforcement policy is rebalance incentives, without compromising rigour or fairness. The Early Account Scheme as a signal That brings me to the Early Account Scheme — the “EAS”. The EAS was introduced as part of an enforcement policy update we made in 2024.footnote[6] It is available to subjects under investigation in appropriate cases, and it is best understood as a signal to subjects of PRA and Bank investigations about how we expect mature regulatory engagement to work in appropriate cases. It signals that: early, high quality internal investigation is valued; comprehensive and accurate factual accounts matter; early admissions of regulatory breaches made well in advance of settlement are meaningful; and proactive candour can materially affect the efficiency and outcome of an investigation. The EAS is available to both firms and individuals, and gives subjects a mechanism to adapt their approach to regulatory engagement, in effect an architecture for co-operation with appropriate checks and balances. Specifically, it gives a subject an opportunity to produce a candid Account (with an expectation that this will be done in six months or less) which is comprehensive, accurate and timely, supported with relevant material, and arrived at through an appropriately rigorous process. This is not a process that relies on the subject simply providing an account in isolation. It is a collaborative and iterative endeavour, with the PRA actively engaging, testing and, where necessary, challenging the content of the Account as it is developed. Our existing investigative tools remain fully available, including the use of compulsory powers where appropriate, and an Account produced under the EAS sits alongside the broader evidential picture, including documentation and information already held by Supervision. In addition, senior management accountability is built into the process, through attestation as to the accuracy and completeness of the Account. We also retain the ability to pursue any lines of enquiry that are not adequately reflected in an Account. Taken together, these features are designed to ensure that early candour is accompanied by rigour, not at the expense of it. Where a subject produces an Account in this way, and makes early admissions, providing they have ceased the behaviour giving rise to the breaches, and carried out necessary remediation, they may be entitled to an enhanced discount of up to 50% on any regulatory penalty. What do we mean by “early admissions”? This is an area where precision matters. ”Early admissions” do not mean general expressions of regret, tactical concessions made once settlement parameters are already clear, or pure factual acknowledgements distinguished from regulatory breaches. What we mean by early admissions in PRA and Bank cases is the acceptance of relevant facts and regulatory breaches which are made significantly in advance of any settlement proposal and at a stage where those admissions genuinely shape the scope, direction, and duration of the investigation. In other words, open and candid regulatory engagement in good faith. This mirrors what comprises one of our fundamental expectations as to firm engagements with the regulator more generally: to be open and co-operative.footnote[7] What the lived experience shows so far We recognise that this may demand an adjustment in mindset and requires an element of trust. That includes confidence that subjects who come forward early will be treated fairly, in line with the framework we have set out. But what has been striking is how these signals have already translated into real behavioural change. We welcome this change. Across a growing number of our enforcement investigations, we are now seeing earlier without prejudice engagement, investigation subjects volunteering structured factual accounts, and admissions being made months, and in some cases years, earlier than would previously have been typical. This is evident if you look at our cases since the EAS policy was published in early 2024 with admissions as to rule breaches now regularly being proactively made early on and, in one case, with a firm even making clear that it would, in light of the facts and matters, be appropriate for a financial sanction to be imposed (crucially, this was before any such proposal had been put before the firm). A number of these cases were already in progress when the EAS policy was published so were not formally on the “EAS track”. However, the way that these outcomes were arrived at represents a response to the policy signal the EAS policy sent upon publication. And in March this year we published our first outcome in a firm case in which the EAS policy was formally applied. This was action in respect of U K Insurance Limited, a subsidiary of Direct Line Insurance Group plc (now owned by Aviva).footnote[8] It proved to be a successful pilot case. We were impressed with how the subject engaged and the commitment the firm demonstrated to self-reflection and contrition which was completely in tune with what we are hoping to achieve with the scheme. The firm engaged proactively and candidly with our investigation team during the EAS process and provided a comprehensive, timely, accurate and fulsome Account. Shortly following production of the Account, and (critically) significantly in advance of any settlement proposal being put to the firm by the PRA, the firm made admissions, both as to relevant facts and regulatory rule breaches. This meant our investigation could proceed efficiently and quickly and we recognised this by giving the firm the maximum discount. Collectively these recent examples represent a break with our past actions. They represent a pattern of change in how subjects are choosing to engage with enforcement. It’s one we hope will continue and why we would describe what is happening as genuinely significant. It is grounded not just in policy language, but already in observable behaviour across our cases. For the PRA and the Bank, it means more focused and efficient investigations, better use of specialist resources, and outcomes delivered closer to the underlying events. For firms and individuals under investigation, it means shorter periods of uncertainty, reduced cost and disruption (an opportunity to acknowledge, reflect and move on from breaches) and stronger incentives for governance, escalation, and remediation. Bringing this together Enforcement works best when it is understood not as a contest, but as a disciplined process for accountability, learning and rebuilding trust, with responsibility recognised early enough for it to do its job properly. The approach I have described today is new and may take some getting used to. It will sit alongside more traditional approaches rather than replace them entirely. But the destination, an appropriate regulatory outcome, has not changed. What is changing, in many cases, is the route taken to get there and the pace at which we arrive. Together, these developments represent a sea change in how regulatory investigations and enforcement are conducted. They bring new optionality and scope for faster outcomes. They mark not just a change in form, but in substance, in how subjects of investigations engage with us and how accountability is achieved. I would like to thank Edward Aldred, Tara Connolly, Geoff Egerton and Ossie Fikret for their help in preparing this speech. And to colleagues across the Bank, including in particular Olie Dearie, Rob Price and Aaron Schroeder-Willis, for their helpful comments. p.128, Till Time’s Last Sand, A History of the Bank of England, David Kynaston. (https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/CalmView/Record.aspx?src=CalmView.Persons&id=DS%2FUK%2F700&pos=1). This is notwithstanding the statutory framework set out in the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 governing the process around investigations and enforcement which provides a mechanism for the Upper Tribunal to determine our cases. See the Bank of England / PRA Investigation Referral Criteria  for the considerations that inform the decision to open an investigation. See section 166, Financial Services and Markets Act 2000. 57 – 60, FCA v Seiler and Whitestone [2024] EWCA Civ 852 . The Bank of England’s approach to enforcement: statements of policy and procedure (January 2024, updated further in November 2024) See e.g. PRA Fundamental Rule 7: “A firm must deal with its regulators in an open and co-operative way, and must disclose to the PRA appropriately anything relating to the firm of which the PRA would reasonably expect notice.” https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/news/2026/march/pra-fines-uk-insurance-limited

Market capitalisation of €6.7 million 33rd listing on Euronext in 2026 Euronext today congratulates Eduform’Action, a reference entrepreneurial group in the training sector, on its transfer from Euronext Access to Euronext Growth in Paris (ticker code: ALEFA). Eduform'Action is a multi-specialist entrepreneurial group focused on initial training, continuing education and apprenticeships. The group has built a national training platform structured around four strategic verticals: healthcare, management & workplace safety, housing & energy renovation and digital & technology. It brings together an ecosystem of schools, apprenticeship training centres and training organisations united by a shared ambition: to develop talent and meet skills needs. Each year, Eduform'Action supports nearly 60,000 learners across mainland France and overseas territories, with the support of its 1,500 expert trainers. In a market shaped by evolving job roles, the group aims to build a leading player capable of supporting private companies and public sector organisations with their long-term skills and employability challenges. At market opening on Thursday 25 June 2026, the share price was €0.34, based on the closing price on Euronext Access Paris on 24 June 2026. This gave the company a market value of €6.7 million. Cécile Béziat, Chief Executive Officer of Eduform’Action, said: “The transfer of Eduform’Action to Euronext Growth is a sign of the Group’s maturity, four years after its launch and following 2025 results that fully validate our strategy. This move enhances our visibility with investors and marks a key milestone in the Group’s development, as we now aim to scale up our operations.” Caption: Cécile Béziat, Chief Executive Officer of Eduform’Action, and her team, rang the bell during a ceremony this morning to celebrate the transfer to Euronext Growth of Eduform’Action.

FTSE Russell, LSEG’s global index provider, today announces that it has reached agreement with China Construction Bank (CCB) to launch the FTSE CCB Dim Sum (Offshore CNY) Green Bond Index, developed in collaboration with the bank.  The new index offers a transparent, rules-based benchmark designed to measure the performance of offshore RMB-denominated (“Dim Sum”) green bonds, supporting investor access to a fast-growing segment of the global fixed income market. The FTSE CCB Dim Sum (Offshore CNY) Green Bond Index combines targeted exposure to the offshore RMB-denominated Dim Sum bond market with robust green bond eligibility criteria aligned with internationally recognised standards, including the Climate Bonds Initiative (CBI), within a framework designed to reflect the investable CNH green bond universe.  The new index enables investors to access offshore RMB-denominated green bond exposure through a clear, investable benchmark and to allocate capital more efficiently to China-related sustainable fixed income within global portfolios.  Stephanie Maier, Head of Sustainable at FTSE Russell, said:  “The development of a transparent benchmark for offshore RMB green bonds marks an important step in expanding access to China-related sustainable fixed income. As highlighted in the UK–China Economic and Financial Dialogue, deepening cross-border investment opportunities remains a key priority, and this index supports investors seeking diversification while contributing to the internationalisation of RMB.” Ying Yan, General Manager at China Construction Bank London Branch, commented: “We are pleased to collaborate with FTSE Russell and have reached agreement to launch the FTSE CCB Dim Sum (Offshore CNY) Green Bond Index, one of the first dedicated benchmarks for the offshore RMB green bond market. This initiative reflects our continued commitment to advancing green finance and supporting the development of the offshore RMB market. The index provides investors with a clear and structured framework to access this growing segment, facilitating capital allocation to sustainable projects and contributing to the broader development of China’s green bond market.”

Nasdaq (Nasdaq: NDAQ) announces that trading in Flat Capital AB (publ) (ticker: FLAT B) commences today on the Nasdaq Stockholm Main Market. Flat Capital is a Mid Cap company within the Financials sector and the 24th company to be admitted to trading on Nasdaq’s Nordic and Baltic markets* in 2026.  Flat Capital is a listed investment company with a clear and focused business model: to invest in assets that are expected to create long-term value in a cost-efficient manner. The company has a broad investment mandate across sectors, geographies, and asset classes, and invests in companies that challenge established industries. Notable investments include Klarna and Defensor Group. Founded in 2013, Flat Capital operates with a lean organization, supported by Sebastian Siemiatkowski’s experience and global network, enabling access to differentiated investment opportunities and efficient decision-making.  “A move to Nasdaq Stockholm's main market will give Flat the opportunity to broaden its investor base towards more institutional capital moving forward. This is also a natural next step in our ongoing work to professionalize how we run Flat, and it reflects where the company stands today. Over time, we expect it to support greater liquidity in the share, which benefits all our shareholders”, comments Rickard El Tarzi, CEO of Flat Capital.  “We are pleased to welcome Flat Capital to Nasdaq Stockholm’s Main Market. The transition from Nasdaq First North Growth Market to the Main Market marks an important milestone in the company’s development and reflects its progress in recent years. With its distinctive investment approach, Flat Capital is well positioned for this next phase. We look forward to supporting the company going forward,” says Adam Kostyál, Head of European Listings at Nasdaq and President of Nasdaq Stockholm.  *Main markets and Nasdaq First North at Nasdaq Copenhagen, Nasdaq Helsinki, Nasdaq Iceland and Nasdaq Stockholm as well as Nasdaq Baltic 

Connection facilitates investment opportunities for institutional investors in a growing market Clearstream is the only ICSD to offer access to Kenyan market Kenya is Clearstream’s 60th domestic market link Clearstream, Deutsche Börse Group’s post-trade business, opens a new domestic link to Kenya on June 29, 2026. The connection provides institutional investors with efficient access to the local market through a unique omnibus account structure, supporting Kenyan government bonds, infrastructure bonds and treasury bills. Standard Chartered Kenya will serve as Clearstream’s cash correspondent bank for Kenyan Shilling and local custodian with the Central Bank of Kenya. This expansion comes as Kenya solidifies its position as a leading economic hub in East Africa, showing consistent growth and attracting significant international investor interest. This momentum is further reinforced by Kenya’s expected inclusion in global market indices and underscores its rising prominence among international investors. The new link addresses this growing demand, enabling capital to flow more easily into one of the continent’s most promising markets. The connection to Kenya is Clearstream’s 60th domestic market link, making it the only ICSD to offer access to the country. This allows Clearstream's clients to easily settle and safekeep Kenyan Government debt securities, use Kenyan debt instruments in collateral management facilities, and perform foreign exchange services for the Kenyan Shilling, all through a single point of access without any local registration or account opening processes. Clearstream’s global market link network connects 60 domestic markets as well as the international market via one single access point, overcoming the challenges of cross-border investing and directing investment flows where they are needed. Jan Willems, Head of Global Markets at Clearstream, said: “The new link to Kenya is an important milestone as it follows Clearstream’s strategic aim to facilitate global investment and provide further access for our clients to attractive and growing markets. We are delighted to partner with Standard Chartered and the Central Bank of Kenya to connect the Kenyan market to our global network.” David Luusa, Director Financial Markets at the Central Bank of Kenya, added: “The Central Bank of Kenya welcomes the establishment of the Clearstream-Kenya Link which is expected to provide efficient access by international investors to Kenyan Government securities, supported by the Dhow Central Securities Depository (DhowCSD). This is a significant milestone in developing Kenya’s financial markets. The link is expected to deepen liquidity, broaden the investor base, and enhance resilience of the domestic debt market. This development underscores our commitment to strengthening and modernizing financial market infrastructure, fostering greater integration with the global financial system, and advancing Kenya’s position as one of the leading financial centers in Africa.” Birju Sanghrajka, Chief Executive Officer & Head of Coverage, Corporate & Investment Banking at Standard Chartered Kenya, commented: “Standard Chartered Kenya is pleased to collaborate with the Central Bank of Kenya and Clearstream to make Kenya, Clearstream’s 60th domestic market link globally and second in Africa after South Africa. This marks an important milestone in the development of Kenya’s financial markets. Increased foreign participation in local government securities is anticipated to bring capital into the economy, broaden the investor base, enhance market liquidity, and promote higher standards of transparency and efficiency.”

182 new firms licenced and registered in DIFC in 2025, a 16% increase on 2024 – and third consecutive year of double-digit registration growth.  Fund management sector remains core to DIFC’s ecosystem, expanding to 121 Authorised Firms, and 276 funds in total. Within the broader wealth and asset management sector, assets under management rose to US$ 176 billion up 4% year on year, and assets under advisory at US$ 220 billion up 22% year on year. Strong 15% growth in the insurance sector, particularly within reinsurance, reinforcing DIFC’s position as a regional hub. Combined balance sheets of banks operating in DIFC reached US$ 251 billion, representing a 19% year-on-year increase and a 195% increase from 2015. Over-the-counter (OTC) market saw over 100% growth in value and volume of transactions with US$ 13 trillion in Q4 2025. The Dubai Financial Services Authority (DFSA), the independent banking, financial services, and markets regulator of Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC), today published its 2025 Annual Report: Shaping the Financial Markets of the Future. 2025 marked a third consecutive year of double-digit growth across DIFC’s financial ecosystem: the DFSA licensed and registered 182 new firms – a 16% increase on 2024 – bringing the total number of regulated entities to 1,050, spanning banking, capital markets, wealth and asset management, insurance, and fintech. Since the close of the reporting period on 31 December 2025, Dubai has advanced to seventh place globally in the Global Financial Centres Index (39) published in March 2026 – its highest-ever ranking – reflecting the sustained international confidence in the Emirate’s economic strength, regulatory environment, and long-term strategy. The report comes amid continued momentum within DIFC and Dubai’s financial sector: building on DIFC’s position as the leading international financial centre across the Middle East, Africa, and South Asia (MEASA) region, Dubai continues to advance its ambition of becoming a global top four hub for finance, investment, and innovation by 2033 under the Dubai Economic Agenda (D33) and DIFC 2030 Strategy. Fadel Al Ali, Chairman, DFSA said: “The Dubai Financial Services Authority (DFSA) continues to support the rapid growth of Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC), in line with the Dubai Economic Agenda (D33) and DIFC 2030 strategies, which seek to position the Emirate as a global top four hub for finance, investment, and innovation by 2033. In 2025, we welcomed 182 regulated entities into our jurisdiction, bringing the total number to 1,050 – our third consecutive year of double-digit growth. Today, this dynamic and thriving ecosystem includes the vast majority of global systemically important banks (G-SIBs), as well as an extensive network of wealth and asset managers, capital markets firms, banks, insurers, auditors, and professional services firms. The recent Global Financial Centres Index placing Dubai seventh globally – its highest-ever position – reflects the strength of what we are building together. Our 2025 Annual Report: Shaping the Financial Markets of the Future, reflects our shared national vision of developing the United Arab Emirates, Dubai, and DIFC into the world’s centre of choice for financial services; a place that does not just help to lead the future of the industry, but actively shapes it.” Mark Steward, Chief Executive, DFSA stated: “As outlined within our Annual Report: Shaping the Financial Markets of the Future, 2025 saw a third consecutive year of double digit growth in Dubai’s International Financial Centre. This signals continued strong confidence in DIFC and Dubai, and a broadening and deepening of the ecosystem, underscored by the DFSA’s risk-based, international regulatory environment. This momentum has continued into 2026 against a backdrop of ongoing global uncertainty. In times of uncertainty, investors look for jurisdictions like DIFC with strong risk-based regulatory frameworks and approaches,  institutional depth, and long-term strategic credibility. The response over the last months, from my DFSA colleagues, as well as our stakeholders in both the government and from the banking, insurance, and financial sectors, has been outstanding as we continue to lay the groundwork for the future of financial markets.” Driving sustainable, scalable, and high-quality growth The report outlines strong performance across the financial services sector, with sustained growth in licensed firms, market participants, and financial activity throughout 2025. The DFSA continued to attract high-quality institutions and foster an environment that supports long-term, sustainable expansion across banking, insurance, capital markets, fintech, and wealth and asset management. Authorisation activity remained robust, with 182 new firms licenced and registered, bringing the total to 1,050 regulated entities – a 16% increase from 2024 – reflecting strong and sustained demand from international and regional firms seeking to establish operations in DIFC. The report also highlights continued diversification across the financial ecosystem and growing recognition of DIFC as a gateway to regional and global markets. Key sector highlights: Capital Markets: The DFSA continued its efforts to deepen and enhance Dubai’s capital markets ecosystem through regulatory improvements, infrastructure enhancements, and initiatives aimed at increasing market participation and investor confidence. During 2025, the total value of new debenture listings reached US$ 30.6 billion, bringing outstanding listings to US$ 147.4 billion. DIFC maintained its position as one of the world’s leading jurisdictions for sukuk, with US$ 107.9 billion in outstanding listings. OTC market saw unprecedented growth on value and volume of transactions with US$ 13 trillion in Q4 2025. Wealth and Asset Management: The sector continued to represent a core pillar of the DIFC ecosystem, both in scale and depth. The fund management sector expanded to 121 Authorised Firms, with USD$ 176 billion in assets under management – reflecting the UAE’s growing position as a jurisdiction of choice for fund structuring and management. More broadly, the sector comprises over 320 Authorised Firms with US$ 220 billion in assets under advisory. DIFC has become a top five global hub for hedge funds, with 87 registered in the Centre, including two of the world's largest. Banking: Driven by disciplined growth and client confidence, the consolidated balance sheet of DIFC banks reached US$ 251 billion as at Q4 2025, a 19% year-on-year increase and a 195% increase from year-end 2015. Private banking continued to expand, with assets under advisory reaching US$ 103.8 billion, representing 23% year-on-year growth, and a client base of over 14,000 – further reinforcing DIFC’s position as a leading centre for wealth activity. Insurance: The sector demonstrated continued strong growth, with a 15% increase in insurance-related entities, reinforcing DIFC’s position as a leading regional hub. As of 31 December 2025, the aggregate amount of gross written premium reached a record high of US$ 4.24 billion by reinsurers and reinsurance underwriters and US$ 3.38 billion by insurance brokers, reflecting increased capacity, product offerings, and market participation. Enforcement and Market Integrity: The DFSA maintained a proactive supervisory and enforcement approach throughout 2025, reinforcing accountability, transparency, and compliance across the financial sector.  The Enforcement team progressed 17 matters at the investigative stage – nine complex and eight standard – concluding seven by year-end. The DFSA received 322 complaints regarding firms or individuals within its jurisdiction, resolving 81% within 28 days, and issued 49 consumer alerts – a 69% increase on 2024 – reflecting heightened vigilance against scams and unauthorised activity targeting the DIFC market. Shaping policy through strategic collaboration A key theme of the 2025 Annual Report is the importance of collaboration in shaping the future regulatory environment. Throughout the year, the DFSA worked closely with government entities, international standard-setting bodies, financial institutions, and industry stakeholders to strengthen policy frameworks and support market development. The Authority expanded its international engagement through strategic partnerships, regulatory dialogues, and memoranda of understanding (MoUs) with peer regulators and global organisations, reinforcing DIFC’s role as an active contributor to the evolution of international financial regulation and best practice. By year-end 2025, the DFSA was a signatory to 120 MoUs, five multilateral MoUs, and eight innovation agreements – facilitating regulatory cooperation and collaboration across jurisdictions. Innovating responsibly and managing risk As innovation accelerates across global finance, the DFSA continued its efforts to balance technological advancement with effective risk management and regulatory oversight. During 2025, the Authority introduced and enhanced frameworks covering digital finance, digital assets, sustainable finance, and technology-enabled financial services, whilst strengthening supervisory capabilities designed to safeguard market integrity and investor confidence. The DFSA’s Tokenisation Regulatory Sandbox – launched in March 2025 – attracted 96 expressions of interest from firms across six jurisdictions, demonstrating strong global appetite for DIFC’s regulated innovation pathway. The DFSA’s annual artificial intelligence (AI) survey revealed that 52% of DIFC firms actively used AI in 2025, up from 33% in 2024, with generative AI adoption increasing 166% year-on-year – underlining the pace of technological change across the financial sector and the importance of proportionate, risk-based regulatory oversight. Driving operational excellence The DFSA’s commitment to operational excellence was reflected throughout 2025 in continued investment in regulatory efficiency, digital transformation, and organisational capability. With the launch of DFSA Connect – a next-generation online platform for authorisation and approvals processes – the DFSA saw a 25% increase in authorisation applications whilst maintaining service quality and regulatory rigour. As Dubai continues its rise toward being a top four global financial centre by 2033, the DFSA’s 2025 Annual Report reflects a more modern and forward-looking vision aligned with the evolving financial landscape, highlighting the Authority’s role in enabling sustainable, scalable, and high-quality growth across DIFC’s financial ecosystem while reinforcing market integrity, resilience, and innovation. The full DFSA Annual Report 2025: Shaping the Financial Markets of the Future is available at: DFSA Annual Report 2025 – English DFSA Annual Report 2025 – Arabic Fadel Al Ali, Chairman, DFSA (right) and Mark Steward, Chief Executive, DFSA (left)

New route optimizations on the Shanghai <> Tokyo and Shanghai <> Hong Kong network segments further improve connectivity between Shanghai Tonglian Data Center and major financial centers across APAC and North America. Supports China onshore/offshore trading, FTSE China A50 strategies, and cross-market commodities arbitrage as Chinese markets are increasingly integrated into global trading flows Avelacom, the ultra-low latency connectivity and infrastructure provider, has completed a series of network optimizations from Shanghai Tonglian Data Center (上海通联数据中心). The optimized network architecture enhances connectivity from Shanghai to Hong Kong, Tokyo, Singapore, and onward to Chicago, supporting a range of latency-sensitive trading strategies. Among the key use cases enabled by the new routes are China onshore/offshore trading, FTSE China A50 trading, and cross-market commodities trading between China and global derivatives markets. The new network segments deliver: Less than 16.5 ms RTD between Shanghai and Hong Kong Less than 50 ms RTD between Shanghai and Singapore Less than 24 ms RTD between Shanghai and Tokyo, supporting low-latency connectivity towards CME Group markets Shanghai plays a key role in Asian trading infrastructure. Demand for deterministic low-latency connectivity between China and international financial centers continues to grow as trading firms increasingly deploy cross-market and cross-region strategies. Aleksey Larichev, CEO of Avelacom, comments: “Chinese markets are increasingly integrated into global trading flows. Venues such as SHFE and CFFEX are traded alongside international markets including CME, SGX and HKEX. As a result, cross-market latency becomes a critical factor for trading firms operating across regions.”