第4回 FIAジャパン オペレーション委員会 議事録（公開版）FIA Japan Operations Committee — 4th Meeting Minutes (Public Version)

Note (Chatham House Rule): This record has been prepared under the Chatham House Rule; statements that would identify individual speakers have been removed. With the exception of the Chair (Shun Yanagisawa), the Secretariat (Tony Crane), the chairs of other FIAJ committees, and the Webmaster (David Wilkinson), neither individual names nor organization names are recorded. No substantive content — what was discussed or decided — has been altered.

Note (Status of this public version): This public version is not a verbatim translation of the Secretariat's internal version. Wording has been deliberately altered to apply the Chatham House Rule. Substantive content — what was discussed and decided — matches the internal version, but word-for-word equivalence is not intended.

Note (Reference translation): The English text below is a reference translation prepared for the website. The Secretariat's official record for this meeting exists in Japanese only.

The original is titled "FIA Japan — Improving Futures Post-Trade: Minutes of the 4th Roundtable (September 19, Draft)". The "Draft" designation in the original has been preserved.

1. Meeting Overview

2. Summary

Because a committee member was unable to attend, the agenda item covering the reasons why treatment as miscellaneous gains/losses is not feasible, together with the related findings, was carried over to the next meeting. Each solution vendor presented its post-trade workflow. Members discussed the need to standardize matching/reconciliation fields, the importance of building consensus among the four parties involved (Investment Manager, Executing Brokers, Clearing Brokers, Exchange/CCP), and the handling of open/close instructions. The meeting also covered responses to the regulatory requirements of the FSA and the exchange, and the results of the hearings conducted with FIA Japan members.

3. Introduction of Post-Trade Workflow Solutions

Each solution vendor presented its post-trade workflow, and the meeting discussed industry challenges and the need for standardization.

• Broadridge: Explained the functionality of the NYFIX matching system (futures supported) and the method of integration with brokers (EMS/OMS -> Matching System (Post-Trade / Allocation) Give-up/Take-up). Open/Close instructions were cited as an example of a flow unique to Japan.
• FIS / OSTTRA: Provided an overview of the GMI system and the FIS CD solution. Regarding Triana, provided by OSTTRA (futures not supported; wider adoption of the FIX format required), it was explained that post-trade processing is carried out through a comprehensive network encompassing the four relationships of Investment Manager, Executing Brokers, Clearing Brokers, and Exchange/CCP.
• NRI: Explained the matching/reconciliation functionality of buy-side OMS and the matching fields used in futures transactions. NRI allocation instructions are sent via FIX (futures not supported). The open/close distinction is also among the instructed fields, and the settlement counterparty is designated at the time of order placement. A comparison between global matching fields and Japanese matching fields is needed.

4. Designation of the Settlement Counterparty as Logic Unique to Japan

The settlement counterparty is designated in the upstream process — but should this data be subject to matching? What is the purpose of designating the open/close distinction? At which stage should it be determined? At present it is determined in the EMS (at the time of order placement). Could it instead be determined at the post-trade stage?

5. Regulatory and Exchange Rules

FIEA (Financial Instruments and Exchange Act): The open / buy-back / offset distinction must be recorded at the order-slip stage. Should this be recorded based on the customer's instruction, or may the open / close / buy-back designation specified by the broker be used? Amending the law is expected to take approximately three years.

Osaka Exchange: Customers should specify the open / resale-buyback distinction when placing an order. It is desirable that the open versus resale-buyback determination be made based on rules established in advance. Where such rules already exist, recording may follow those rules (to be confirmed with OSE).

6. Results of the Hearings on the FIFO Method

It was reported that hearings with six FIA Japan member firms are in progress and that responses have been received from five firms. The FIFO agenda item was carried over to the next meeting.

7. Next Meeting

Reference: Attendee List

Individual names are withheld except for the Chair and Secretariat. Participating organizations, the annotations in the original (e.g., observer), and the row count (= the number of entries in the original listing) are preserved as in the source. The original is a single-line listing and states no total headcount.

Reference: FIA Japan Summer Party 2025 – Panel 1 on Post-Trade, Survey Results

The following survey results were included in the same Secretariat email as these minutes. They cover the committee's panel at the FIA Japan Summer Party held on September 17, 2025 (reproduced as in the original; all free-text comments are unattributed).

Panel Discussion 1

Question: Was the content on post-trade challenges in futures and industry standardization useful for your work or interests?

→ The large majority of respondents rated the session as highly useful for their work or interests.

Points That Left the Strongest Impression (Free Text)

• I was very grateful to learn that a broad range of stakeholders is working toward standardization of domestic futures post-trade — a long-standing issue that has become highly idiosyncratic to Japan. I have high expectations for this effort and would like to contribute in whatever small way I can.
• The topics for both panel discussions were relevant to my interests. For "Post-trade Challenges and Industry Standardization", the topic was fascinating and spot-on as Post Trade is the area which should be discussed, invested, and renovated with the consensus of industry leaders.

Topics Requested for Future Sessions

• Continued discussion of Post Trade, what we can do in specifics to move away from the culture of "目と手と根性". I would be keen to understand the background why there are various pairing methods in Japan.

Other Comments

• (Regarding Panel 1) My own experience with futures has been primarily overseas, so I was surprised to hear about the current situation in Japan.

These minutes are a record of the discussions held during the meeting. Please direct any corrections or amendments to the Secretariat (Tony Crane).