When a group of trades such as spreads are executed, to break them as one trade but where the volume is then agreed to be different to the sum of the constituent parts.
Party A and B trade 4 times today the NCG/TTF spread for June – so Party A initiated 4 orders at of 30 MW, at 0.225 and party B aggressed them. The result is 4 x NGC/TTF Jun spreads at .225. These trades are not reportable as they are spread trades. It is then mutually agreed to adjust the total volume to for example either 115MW or 125MW, so the total can go either up or down from the sum of the parts.
As an example the following deals are created.
NCG leg (125MW)
TTF leg (125MW)
The open question would be then whether ACER wants the trades tagged as “voice” or some other tag to indicate that the trade does not match the sum of the orders.
Our view is that when a number of trades are bagged up into a single trade, that the reporting should be as below:
The single pair of 125MW trades (1 NCG and 1 TTF trade) would each reference the orders concerned
Order 1 NCG/TTF 30MW
Order 2 NCG/TTF 30MW
Order 3 NCG/TTF 30MW
Order 4 NCG/TTF 30MW
Trade 1 (initiate side) NCG leg (125MW) – Order 1, Order 2, Order 3, Order 4
Trade 1a (aggress side) NCG leg (125MW) – Click trade
Trade 1b (initiate side) TTF leg (125MW) – Order 1, Order 2, Order 3, Order 4
Trade 1c (aggress side) TTF leg (125M0W) – Click trade
Optionally these trades should also be tagged as “voice” or some other tag to indicate a verbal amendment to a screen trade, as these are not “voice” trades in the conventional sense and we think it likely that ACER would want to maintain the link between the screen orders and the resulting trades.
Each order must be matched by another order irrespective of whether the latter is a click and trade order/trade or not. Their amendment occurs outside the screen and it may be reported as amendment of one or all of the previously agreed trades or as a separate voice brokered trade (buy or sell trade according to the volume change) if this can be considered a separate transaction. Please see also the previous question and its answer.