Question 2.1.53 Extra Field in the schema

Question 2.1.53 Extra Field in the schema

An exchange offers to its clients the possibility to use trade types as Exchange for Physical (EFP) and Exchange for Swap (EFS), see below for more detail. Such trades are published on the screen with volume and price. The trade type flag identifies that a trade is a block-, an EFP- or an EFS trade, in order to allow the market to understand the differences in the trade types.

Exchange for Physical (EFP) – An EFP is a bilaterally negotiated transaction involving the simultaneous exchange of an Exchange futures position for a corresponding related cash or physical position. In such a transaction the buyer (seller) of the futures transaction is the seller (buyer) of a corresponding amount of the cash commodity, as appropriate, at a price mutually agreed upon.

Exchange for Swaps (EFS) – An EFS is a bilaterally negotiated transaction involving the simultaneous exchange of an Exchange futures position for a corresponding related OTC swap or other OTC derivative in the same or related product.

Potential issue: There is currently - by our understanding - no possibility to identify and make these trade types visible in the transaction report (these type of contracts are all bilaterally agreed trades) while the price of the exchange leg (e.g. a TTF Future) is based on a previously agreed contract price (a historical price) and therefore will not always be a current market price at the moment the EFP / EPS is submitted to the exchange for registration.

Could ACER provide guidance on how to flag such trades in the transaction reporting?

The exchange does not advise excluding EFP and EFS trade types from reporting to ACER, because the future leg of an EFP or EFS is a standard contract as defined under Regulation article

Answer: In the Agency’s view, the reporting parties should use the “Extra” field for trades in the schema REMITTable1_V2.xsd or REMITTable1_V3.xsd and report the codes “EFP” or “EFS”. The same might be adopted for trades referred to the central limit order book “CLOB”. The indications on how to populate such a field are provided in FAQ 2.1.52.

In general, given the type of trade ABC, the REMITTable1_V2.xsd schema field should be filled as:


The REMITTable1_V3.xsd schema field can also be filled as:


Since the extra field can be populated also for the reporting of different information (e.g. unit ID code for unit base bidding), it is worth noting that in order to provide more than one value, ‘;’ should be used to separate Key==Value pairs.

For example, in case information on both the unit base bidding and trade type have to be reported in the Extra field. Then such information should be reported as:


When reported using REMITTable1_V3.xsd, such information can also be reported as:


Please note that, schema Table 1_V3 allows the patterns of reporting for Schema Table 1_V2 but can also be used without having to report a second key==value pair.