Notice2025-15261

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Adopt Fees for New Logical Ports in Connection With a New Connectivity Offering on its Equity Options Platform

Primary source

Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.

Published
August 12, 2025

Issuing agencies

Securities and Exchange Commission

Full Text

<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 90 Issue 153 (Tuesday, August 12, 2025)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 153 (Tuesday, August 12, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38841-38849]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2025-15261]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-103661; File No. SR-CboeBZX-2025-107]


Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of 
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Adopt 
Fees for New Logical Ports in Connection With a New Connectivity 
Offering on its Equity Options Platform

August 7, 2025.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given 
that on July 31, 2025, Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or 
``BZX'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the 
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, 
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The 
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the 
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance 
of the Proposed Rule Change

    Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``BZX'') proposes to 
adopt fees for new logical ports in connection with a new connectivity 
offering on its equity options platform. The text of the proposed rule 
change is provided in Exhibit 5.
    The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the 
Exchange's website (<a href="https://www.cboe.com/us/options/regulation/rule_filings/bzx/">https://www.cboe.com/us/options/regulation/rule_filings/bzx/</a>) and at the Exchange's Office of the Secretary.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and 
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements 
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and 
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The 
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in 
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in 
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such 
statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and 
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend its fee schedule to adopt fees for 
Unitized Logical Ports, a new connectivity offering for its equity 
options platform (``BZX Options'') and adopt new Average Daily Quote 
and Average Daily Order fees.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Exchange initially submitted the proposed rule change on 
August 30, 2024 and was effective September 3, 2024 (SR-CboeBZX-
2024-082). On September 13, 2024, the Exchange withdrew that filing 
and submitted SR-CboeBZX-2024-088. On November 12, 2024, the 
Exchange withdrew that filing and submitted SR-CboeBZX-2024-113. On 
December 20, 2024, the Exchange withdrew that filing and submitted 
SR-CboeBZX-2024-131. On February 3, 2025, the Exchange withdrew that 
filing and submitted SR-CboeBZX-2025-016. On April 4, the Exchange 
withdrew that filing and submitted SR-Cboe-BZX-2025-052. On June 2, 
2025, the Exchange withdrew that filing and submitted SR-CboeBZX-
2025-075. On July 31, 2025, the Exchange withdrew that filing and 
submitted this filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Unitized Port Fees
    By way of background, Exchange Members may interface with the 
Exchange's Trading System \4\ by utilizing either the Financial 
Information Exchange (``FIX'') protocol or the Binary Order Entry 
(``BOE'') protocol. The Exchange further offers a variety of logical 
ports,\5\ which provide

[[Page 38842]]

users of these ports with the ability within the Exchange's System to 
accomplish a specific function through a connection, such as order 
entry, data receipt or access to information. For example, such ports 
include Logical Ports,\6\ Purge Ports,\7\ and Ports with Bulk Quoting 
Capabilities \8\ (``Bulk Ports''). By way of further background, each 
of these ports corresponds to a single running order handler. Each 
order handler processes the messages it receives from these ports from 
the connected Members. This processing includes determining whether the 
message contains the required information to enter the System, whether 
the message parameters satisfy port-level (i.e., pre-trade) risk 
controls, and where to send that message within the System (i.e., to 
which matching engine \9\). Once an order handler completes the 
processing of a message, it sends that message to the appropriate 
matching engine.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The terms ``Trading System'' and ``System'' mean the 
automated trading system used by BZX Options for the trading of 
options contracts. See Chapter XVI. General Provisions--BZX Options, 
Rule 16.1 Definitions.
    \5\ See Exchange Rule 21.1 (l)(2), definition of ``logical 
port.'' Logical ports include FIX and BOE ports (used for order 
entry), drop logical port (which grants users the ability to receive 
and/or send drop copies) and ports that are used for receipt of 
certain market data feeds.
    \6\ The term ``Logical Ports'' used herein shall refer to FIX 
and BOE ports (used for order entry). See Cboe BZX Options Fee 
Schedule, Options Logical Port Fees, ``Logical Ports'' (which 
exclude Purge Port, Multicast PITCH Spin Server Port or GRP Port).
    \7\ Purge Ports provide users the ability to cancel a subset (or 
all) of open orders across Executing Firm ID(s) (``EFID(s)''), 
Underlying symbol(s), or CustomGroupID(s), across multiple logical 
ports/sessions. See Securities Exchange Act Release 79956 (February 
3, 2017), 82 FR 10102 (February 9, 2017) (SR-BatsBZX-2017-05). See 
also <a href="https://cdn.cboe.com/resources/membership/US_Options_BOE_Specification.pdf">https://cdn.cboe.com/resources/membership/US_Options_BOE_Specification.pdf</a> and <a href="https://cdn.cboe.com/resources/membership/US_Options_FIX_Specification.pdf">https://cdn.cboe.com/resources/membership/US_Options_FIX_Specification.pdf</a>.
    \8\ See Exchange Rule 21.1 (l)(3), definition of ``bulk port.'' 
Bulk Ports provide users with the ability to submit and update 
multiple quote bids and offers in one message through logical ports 
enabled for bulk-quoting.
    \9\ A matching engine is a part of the Exchange's System that 
processes options quotes and trades on a symbol-by-symbol basis. 
Some matching engines will process option classes with multiple root 
symbols, and other matching engines will be dedicated to one single 
option root symbol (for example, options on SPY will be processed by 
one single matching engine that is dedicated only to SPY). A 
particular root symbol may only be assigned to a single designated 
matching engine. A particular root symbol may not be assigned to 
multiple matching engines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Historically, all order handlers connect to all matching engines. 
That is, under the BOEv2 and FIX protocols,\10\ Members were able to 
access all symbols from a single logical port since each port 
corresponds to a single order handler that conveniently connects to all 
matching engines (``convenience layer''). Although the Exchange 
configures the software and hardware for its order handlers in the same 
manner, there can be a natural variance in the amount of time it takes 
individual order handlers to process messages of the same type under 
this architecture. Factors that contribute to this differentiation in 
processing times include the availability of shared resources (such as 
memory), which is impacted by (among other things) then-current message 
rates, the number of active symbols (i.e., classes), and recent 
messages for a symbol. This natural differentiation in processing times 
inherently may cause some messages to be sent from an order handler to 
a matching engine ahead of other messages that the Exchange's System 
may have received earlier on a different order handler.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The Exchange notes for clarity that while BOEv2 has been 
decommissioned, Members can still access the convenience layer 
through BOEv3 protocol.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange recently implemented a new architecture and protocol 
which includes, among other things, a single gateway per matching 
engine (``unitized layer''), which renders the above-described natural 
variance of order handler processing irrelevant for Members that 
connect to the unitized order handler.\11\ More specifically, effective 
August 19, 2024, the Exchange implemented this new unitized access 
architecture and a new version of its Binary Order Entry (BOE) protocol 
\12\ (``BOEv3''), which also resulted in the adoption of new logical 
port types (``Unitized Logical Ports''), for which the Exchange is now 
seeking to establish fees.\13\ Under the new unitized BOEv3 
architecture, a single BOEv3 order handler corresponds to a single 
matching engine and all message traffic (including FIX and BOEV3 
convenience layer port traffic) \14\ pass through this unitized BOEv3 
order handler before reaching that order handler's corresponding 
matching engine.\15\ If a Member desires to access this unitized layer 
of the BOEv3 architecture, the Member would need to obtain a Unitized 
Logical Port for each corresponding matching engine(s) that process the 
symbol(s) that Member desires to trade.\16\ The three new port types 
that have been adopted are: (1) BOE Unitized Logical Ports,\17\ (2) 
Bulk Unitized Logical Ports,\18\ and (3) Purge Unitized Logical Ports 
\19\ (collectively, ``Unitized Logical Ports''). With the exception of 
Exchange Options Market Makers \20\ who may only quote via a Unitized 
Logical Port, use of the unitized architecture and purchase of a 
Unitized Logical Port is completely voluntary, and Member (non-Market 
Makers) are not required, or under any regulatory obligation, to 
utilize them.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Securities Exchange Act Release 100582 (July 23, 2024), 
89 FR 60958 (July 29, 2024) (SR-CboeBZX-2024-071).
    \12\ The BOE protocol is a proprietary order entry protocol used 
by Members to connect to the Exchange. The current version is BOEv3.
    \13\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 100582 (July 23, 
2024) 89 FR 60958 (July 29, 2024) (SR-CboeBZX-2024-071).
    \14\ The Exchange decommissioned BOEv2 in March 2025.
    \15\ The Exchange notes that this improved infrastructure 
improves the prior noted natural variance in the amount of time it 
takes individual order handlers to process messages of the same type 
for all Members due to the improved infrastructure, even if a 
participant chooses to not utilize Unitized Logical Ports.
    \16\ Members will be able to purchase Unitized Logical Ports 
individually or may purchase a ``set,'' which will provide the total 
number of ports needed to connect to each available matching engine.
    \17\ Similar to the Exchange's preexisting Logical Ports, the 
new Unitized Logical Ports allow Members to submit orders and 
quotes.
    \18\ Similar to the Exchange's preexisting Bulk Ports, the new 
Bulk Unitized Logical Ports allow Members to submit and update 
multiple quote bids and offers in one message and are particularly 
useful for Members that provide quotations in many different 
options.
    \19\ Similar to the Exchange's preexisting Purge Ports, the new 
Purge Unitized Logical Ports are dedicated logical ports that 
provide the ability to cancel/purge all open orders, or a subset 
thereof, across multiple logical ports through a single cancel/purge 
message. They also solely process purge messages and are designed to 
assist Members, including Market Makers, in the management of, and 
risk control over, their orders and quotes, particularly if the 
Member is dealing with a large number of options.
    \20\ The terms ``Options Market-Maker'' and ``Market-Maker'' 
mean an Options Member registered with the Exchange for the purpose 
of making markets in options contracts traded on the Exchange and 
that is vested with the rights and responsibilities specified in 
Chapter XXII of these Rules. See Chapter XVI. General Provisions--
BZX Options, Rule 16.1 Definitions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to establish fees for the new Unitized 
Logical Ports, which can be purchased on an individual basis (i.e., 
capable of accessing a specified matching engine (``Matching Unit'')) 
and/or as a set (``Unitized Logical Port Set'') (i.e., will include the 
total number of ports needed to connect to each available Matching 
Unit). The proposed fees for Unitized Logical Ports purchased 
individually and as sets are as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
BOE Unitized Logical Port..............  $350/port/month.
Bulk Unitized Logical Port.............  $550/port/month.
Purge Unitized Logical Port............  $400/port/month.

[[Page 38843]]

 
BOE Unitized Logical Port (Set)........  $2,500/month for 1st and 2nd
                                          port set.
                                         $3,000/month for 3rd-14th port
                                          set.
                                         $3,500/month for 15th-30th port
                                          set.
Bulk Unitized Logical Port (Set).......  $5,500/month for 1st and 2nd
                                          port set.
                                         $6,000/month for 3rd-14th port
                                          set.
                                         $6,500/month for 15th-30th port
                                          set.
Purge Unitized Logical Port (Set)......  $2,500/month for 1st and 2nd
                                          port set.
                                         $3,000/month for 3rd-14th port
                                          set.
                                         $3,500/month for 15th-30th port
                                          set.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed fees for Unitized Logical Port Sets are progressive. 
For example, if a User were to purchase 11 BOE Unitized Logical Port 
Sets, it will be charged a total of $32,000 per month ($2,500 * 2 + 
$3,000 * 9). As is the case today for existing logical ports, the 
monthly fees are assessed and applied in their entirety and are not 
prorated. The Exchange notes the current standard fees assessed for 
existing logical ports will remain applicable and unchanged,\21\ and 
Members are still able to purchase and utilize such ports if they 
choose to do so. The proposed fees for Unitized Logical Port Sets will 
be assessed per set, per Port Type. As an example, if a Member requests 
three BOE Unitized Logical Port Sets, one Bulk Unitized Logical Port 
Set, and one Purge Unitized Logical Port Set, the firm would be charged 
$8,000 ($2,500 + $2,500 + $3,000) for the three BOE Unitized Logical 
Port Sets, $5,500 for the one Bulk Unitized Logical Port Set, and 
$2,500 for the one Purge Unitized Logical Port Set.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ For example, the Exchange currently assesses a monthly per 
port fee of $750 for Logical Ports and Purge Ports. It also assesses 
$1,500 per port month for the 1st and 2nd Bulk Ports and $2,500 for 
the 3rd or more Bulk Ports. See Cboe BZX Options Fee Schedule, 
Options Logical Port Fees.
    \22\ The Exchange proposes to include this example in the Fee 
Schedule to provide further clarity as to the application of the 
proposed fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Since the Exchange has a finite amount of capacity, it also 
proposes to prescribe a maximum limit on the number of Unitized Logical 
Ports that may be purchased and used on a per Member, per Matching Unit 
basis. The purpose of establishing these limits is to manage the 
allotment of Unitized Logical Ports in a fair and reasonable manner 
while preventing the Exchange from being required to expend large 
amounts of resources in order to provide an unlimited capacity to its 
matching engines. The Exchange previously proposed to provide that the 
two structures (i.e., individual unitized ports or unitized port sets) 
can be combined for up to a maximum of 20 Unitized Logical Ports per 
Member, per Matching Unit, per port type.\23\ The Exchange noted at the 
time it adopted this maximum that it would continue monitoring interest 
by all Members and system capacity availability with the goal of 
increasing these limits to meet Members' needs if and when the demand 
is there and/or the Exchange is able to accommodate such demand.\24\ 
Since then, the Exchange has determined that it is able to accommodate 
an increased cap relative to current demand and available to the 
Exchange's matching engine and order handler capacity. As such, the 
Exchange proposes to increase the maximum to 30 Unitized Logical Ports 
per Member, per Matching Unit, per port type. As an example, a Member 
may request 12 BOE Unitized Logical Port Sets and 18 individual BOE 
Unitized Logical Ports for Matching Unit 1, providing a total max of 30 
BOE Unitized Logical Ports on Matching Unit 1 specifically. This would 
result in having 30 BOE Unitized Logical Ports on Matching Unit 1 and 
12 BOE Unitized Ports on all additional Matching Units as part of the 
12 BOE Unitized Logical Port Sets requested. Additionally, a firm may 
request 30 Bulk Unitized Logical Port Sets and 30 Purge Unitized 
Logical Port Sets as those would constitute different port types.\25\ 
The Exchange believes the proposed cap will be sufficient for the vast 
majority of Members, as the Exchange understands that at this time, no 
Member desires more than the current cap. The Exchange notes that it 
will continue to monitor interest in Unitized Logical Ports and system 
capacity availability with the goal of further increasing these limits 
to meet Members needs if and when the demand is there, and the Exchange 
is able to accommodate it. Additionally, Members will still be able to 
utilize the existing logical port connectivity offerings with no 
maximum limit in addition to their Unitized Logical Port allocation. As 
further discussed below, the Exchange's pricing for these new Unitized 
Logical Ports are less than or comparable to similar offerings from 
other exchanges.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See Securities Exchange Act Release 101212 (September 27, 
2024), 89 FR 80614 (October 3, 2024) (SR-CboeBZX-2024-088).
    \24\ Id.
    \25\ The Exchange proposes to include this example in its Fee 
Schedule to provide clarity as to how Unitized Logical Port fees 
will be assessed. The Exchange further notes that in its prior 
filing (SR-CboeBZX-2025-016), it increased the cap to 30 and noted 
as such in its fee schedule; however, the Exchange will now include 
a clarifying update in its fee schedule to update the max tier 
amount from 20 to 30 for consistency and clarity.
    \26\ See MIAX Express Interface for Quoting and Trading Options, 
MEI Interface Specification, Section 1.2 (MEI Architecture) 
available at: MIAX_Express_Interface_MEI_v2.10a.pdf (<a href="http://miaxglobal.com">miaxglobal.com</a>) 
which indicates firms can connect directly to one or more matching 
engines depending on which symbols they wish to trade and states 
``MIAX trading architecture is highly scalable and consists of 
multiple trade matching environments (clouds). Each cloud handles 
trading for all options for a set of underlying instruments'' and 
provides that ``Market Maker firms can connect to one or more pre-
assigned servers on each cloud. This will require the firm to 
connect to more than one cloud in order to quote in all underlying 
instruments they are approved to make markets in'' See also MIAX 
Emerald Options Order Management Using FIX Protocol, FIX Interface 
Specification, available at <a href="https://www.miaxglobal.com/sites/default/files/page-files/FIX_Order_Interface_FOI_v2.6c.pdf">https://www.miaxglobal.com/sites/default/files/page-files/FIX_Order_Interface_FOI_v2.6c.pdf</a>. MIAX 
describes its FIX Order Interface Gateway as ``a high-speed FIX 
Order Interface gateway [that] conveniently routes orders to our 
trading engines through a common entry point to our trading 
platform.'' See <a href="https://www.miaxglobal.com/markets/us-options/miax-options/interface-specifications">https://www.miaxglobal.com/markets/us-options/miax-options/interface-specifications</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Average Daily Quotes and Average Daily Order Fees
    The Exchange also proposes to adopt Average Daily Order (``ADO'') 
and Average Daily Quote (``ADQ'') fees. ``ADO'' represents the total 
number of orders for the month, divided by the number of trading days. 
``ADQ'' represents the total number of quotes for the month, divided by 
the number of trading days. When measuring a Member's ADO and ADQ, 
orders, quotes, cancel/replace modify orders, and quote updates which 
submit a bid or offer and do not include cancels, are included. Further 
ADO and ADQ will include orders and quotes submitted by a Member from 
all logical port types (i.e., non-unitized logical ports and Unitized 
Logical Ports). Each Member may submit up to 2,000,000 average daily 
orders or up to 250,000,000 average daily quotes per calendar month 
without incurring any ADO or ADQ fees. In the event that the average 
number of quotes per trading day during a calendar month submitted 
exceeds 250,000,000, each incremental usage of up to 20,000 average 
daily quotes will incur an additional fee as set forth in the

[[Page 38844]]

table below. Similarly, in the event that the average number of orders 
per trading day during a calendar month submitted exceeds 2,000,000, 
each incremental usage of up to 1,000 average daily orders will incur 
an additional ADO fee as set forth in the table below.\27\ A Member's 
ADO and ADQ will be aggregated together with any affiliated Member 
sharing at least 75% common ownership.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ The term ``quote'' refers to bids and offers submitted in 
bulk messages. A bulk message means a single electronic message a 
user submits with an M (Market-Maker) capacity to the Exchange in 
which the User may enter, modify, or cancel up to an Exchange-
specified number of bids and offers. A User may submit a bulk 
message through a bulk port as set forth in Exchange Rule 
21.1(j)(3). See Rule 16.1 (definition of bulk message).

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       Fee
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Tier 2 >           Tier 3             Tier 4             Tier 5
        Tier 1 < = 250,000,000             250,000,000      >500,000,000      >1,000,000,000     >3,500,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           ADQ Fee Rate per 20,000 ADQ
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
$0.00.................................            $0.05            $0.075              $0.10              $0.20
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           ADO Fee Rate per 1,000 ADO
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tier 1                                           Tier 2            Tier 3             Tier 4             Tier 5
< = 2,000,000                               > 2,000,000        >2,500,000         >3,000,000         >3,500,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
$0.00.................................            $1.00             $1.50              $2.00              $2.50
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As an example, a Member that has 510,000,000 ADQ would subsequently 
have 25,500 ``ADQ increments'' (510,000,000 ADQ/20,000 ADQ increments). 
While 12,500 of the 25,500 ADQ increments are free within Tier 1, 
12,500 of the ADQ increments would be fee liable at $0.050 within Tier 
2, while the remaining 500 ADQ increments would be fee liable at $.075 
within Tier 3, resulting in a total ADQ fee of $662.50 for that 
month.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ The Exchange proposes to include this example in the Fees 
Schedule to provide further clarity as to the application of the 
proposed fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange notes that market participants with incrementally 
higher ADO or ADQ are likely to require more of the Exchange's Trading 
System resources, bandwidth, and capacity. Higher ADO or ADQ may 
therefore, in turn, could create latency and potentially impact other 
Members' ability to receive timely executions. The proposed fee 
structure has multiple thresholds, and the proposed fees are 
incrementally greater at higher ADO and ADQ rates because the potential 
impact on exchange systems, bandwidth and capacity becomes greater with 
increased ADO and ADQ rates. As noted above, the proposal contemplates 
that a Member would have to exceed the high ADO rate of 2,000,000 and a 
Market Maker would have to exceed the high ADQ rate of 250,000,000 
before that market participant would be charged a fee under the 
proposed respective tiers. The Exchange believes that it is in the 
interests of all Members and market participants who access the 
Exchange to not allow other market participants to strain Trading 
System resources, but to encourage efficient usage of network capacity. 
The Exchange also believes this proposal (and in particular the 
proposed fee amounts associated with higher ADO and ADQ) will help to 
moderate excessive order/quote and trade activity from market 
participants and Members that may require the Exchange to otherwise 
increase its storage capacity and will encourage such activity to be 
submitted in good faith for legitimate purposes.
    The Exchange also represents that the proposed fees are not 
intended to raise revenue; rather, as noted above, it is intended to 
encourage efficient behavior so that market participants do not exhaust 
System resources. Moreover, the Exchange provides Members with daily 
reports, free of charge, which details their order and trade activity 
in order for those firms to be fully aware of all order and trade 
activity they (and their affiliates) are sending to the Exchange. This 
will allow Members to monitor their behavior and determine whether it 
is approaching any of the ADO or ADQ thresholds that trigger the 
proposed fees.
    The Exchange lastly notes that other exchanges have adopted various 
fee programs that assess incrementally higher fees to Members that have 
incrementally higher order and/or quoting trading activity for similar 
reasons.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release No. 60102 (June 
11, 2009), 74 FR 29251 (June 19, 2009) (SR-NYSEArca-2009-50) 
(adopting fees applicable to Members based on the number of orders 
entered compared to the number of executions received in a calendar 
month). It appears that Nasdaq similarly assesses a penalty charge 
to its members that exceed certain ``weighted order-to-trade 
ratios''. See Price List--Trading Connectivity, NASDAQ, available at 
<a href="https://www.nasdaqtrader.com/trader.aspx?id=pricelisttrading2">https://www.nasdaqtrader.com/trader.aspx?id=pricelisttrading2</a>. See 
also Securities Exchange Act Release No. 91406 (March 25, 2021), 86 
FR 16795 (March 31, 2023) (SR-EMERALD-2021-10) (adopting an 
``Excessive Quoting Fee'' to ensure that Market Makers do not over 
utilize the exchange's System by sending messages to the MIAX 
Emerald, to the detriment of all other Members of the exchange).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with 
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act'') and the rules and 
regulations thereunder applicable to the Exchange and, in particular, 
the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\30\ Specifically, the 
Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the 
Section 6(b)(5) \31\ requirements that the rules of an exchange be 
designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to 
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation 
and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing, 
settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating 
transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the 
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, 
in general, to protect investors and the public interest. Additionally, 
the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the 
Section 6(b)(5) \32\ requirement that the rules of an exchange not be 
designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, 
brokers, or dealers. The Exchange also believes the proposed rule 
change is consistent with Section 6(b)(4) \33\ of the Act, which 
requires that Exchange rules provide for the equitable allocation of 
reasonable

[[Page 38845]]

dues, fees, and other charges among its Members and other persons using 
its facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \31\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \32\ Id.
    \33\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes the proposed fees are reasonable because 
Unitized Logical Ports provide a valuable service in that the ports are 
intended to create a more consistent, and more deterministic experience 
for messages once received within the Exchange's Trading System under 
the recently adopted unitized BOEv3 architecture. As discussed above, 
the new architecture (and thereby the new Unitized Logical Ports) was 
designed to create a more consistent, and more deterministic experience 
for messages once received within the Exchange's Trading System, which 
the Exchange believes improves the overall access experience on the 
Exchange and will enable future system enhancements. As noted, the 
BOEv3 protocol and architecture, along with the three new corresponding 
Unitized Logical Ports, are intended to reduce the natural variance of 
order handler processing times for messages, and as a result reduce the 
potential resulting ``reordering'' of messages when they are sent from 
order handlers to matching engines. The adoption of the unitized BOEv3 
structure (including the corresponding new Unitized Ports) was a 
technical solution that is intended to reduce the potential of this 
reordering and increase determinism.\34\ The Exchange believes the 
proposed fees are also reasonable to offset costs incurred in order to 
build out an entirely new unitized architecture.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ See Securities Exchange Act Release 100582 (July 23, 2024), 
89 FR 60958 (July 29, 2024) (SR-CboeBZX-2024-071).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Furthermore, the Exchange also notes that it believes the proposed 
fees are similar to or less than fees assessed by other exchanges, for 
analogous connections as explained in further detail below.\35\ The 
Exchange notes that other exchanges that offer similar pricing for 
similar connections have a comparable, or even lower, market share as 
the Exchange, as also detailed further below. Indeed, the Exchange has 
reviewed the U.S. options market share for each of the eighteen options 
markets utilizing total options contracts traded year-to-date as of the 
end of June 2025, as set forth in the following graph: \36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ See e.g. MIAX Pearl Options Fee Schedule.
    \36\ Market share is the percentage of volume on a particular 
exchange relative to the total volume across all exchanges, and 
indicates the amount of order flow directed to that exchange. High 
levels of market share enhance the value of trading and ports. Total 
contracts include both multi-list options and proprietary options 
products. Proprietary options products are products with 
intellectual property rights that are not multi-listed. The Exchange 
does not currently list proprietary products.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN12AU25.021

    The Exchange (market share of 4.30%) notes that the proposed 
Unitized Purge Port fee of $400 to connect to a matching engine is 
lower than fees charged by at least two other exchanges with comparable 
(indeed, even lower) market share, particularly by MIAX Emerald (3.90% 
market share) and MIAX Pearl (2.7% market share). The Exchange does 
note that both MIAX Emerald and MIAX Pearl offer two purge ports for a 
matching engine connection at a cost of $600,\37\ while the Exchange 
offers the primary Unitized Purge Port as well as a secondary Unitized 
Purge Port for its redundant secondary data center ports for $400. The 
Exchange believes that the bulk of the value customers derive is not 
within the quantity of purge ports a Member purchases, but the ability 
to connect to the specific matching engine.\38\ For this reason, the 
Exchange still believes it is better priced than MIAX Emerald's and 
MIAX Pearl's comparable offerings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ See e.g., MIAX Emerald Options Fee Schedule.
    \38\ Due to the higher performance that offers higher throughput 
with more deterministic outcomes for participants, the revised 
architecture leads to a decreased demand in ports generally.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Furthermore, comparing the costs of purchasing Purge Ports to 
connect to all matching engines, the Exchange still assess a lower fee 
than MIAX Pearl or MIAX Emerald. Connecting to all matching engines on 
MIAX Emerald or MIAX Pearl would cost $7,200, while connecting to all 
matching engines on BZX Options costs $2,500.\39\ As noted above, while 
the Exchange believes the bulk of the value customers derive is the 
ability to connect to specific matching engines, and in this case, all 
matching

[[Page 38846]]

engines, if a customer did want to have two purge ports for all 
matching engines (in addition to the included secondary purge ports 
provided), it would cost the participant $5,000 ($2,500/set x 2)--still 
lower than the cost of $7,200 for two purge ports for all matching 
engines that MIAX Emerald and MIAX Pearl offer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ The pricing amounts for MIAX Pearl and MIAX Emerald are 
based off of $600 per Purge Port fee per matching engine with a 
total of 12 matching engines (see MIAX Pearl Options--Reminder of 
rebalancing of the symbol distribution across Trade Matching 
Environments (Clouds) effective for Trading on May 12, 2025 [verbar] 
MIAX and MIAX Emerald Options Rebalancing of the symbol distribution 
across Trade Matching Environments (Clouds) effective for Trading on 
April 14, 2025 [verbar] MIAX).). While the pricing for BZX Options 
is based on connecting to all Matching Engines by purchasing a set.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While not as closely comparable, MIAX Emerald and MIAX Pearl both 
offer Full Service MEI Ports (analogous to the Exchange's Bulk Port 
offering) and Limited Service MEI Ports (analogous to the Exchange's 
BOE Port offering) that are based on the lesser of a participant's per 
class basis or percentage of total national average daily volume 
measurement; for each matching engine a participant connects to (based 
on their activity), they receive two Full Service MEI Ports and four 
Limited Service MEI Ports.\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ See e.g., MIAX Pearl Options Fee Schedule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Notably, MIAX Emerald and MIAX Pearl offer their Full Service MEI 
Ports and Limited Service MEI Ports only to market makers on those 
respective exchanges, and non-market maker members are not permitted to 
purchase MEI connections. As such, when comparing the Unitized Logical 
Port fees assessed to Options Market Makers by the Exchange to the Full 
Service MEI and Limited Service MEI Ports assessed to market makers by 
MIAX Emerald and MIAX Pearl, the Exchange believes that its proposed 
fee for Unitized Logical Ports is reasonable and justified by the value 
derived from Options Market Makers purchasing these connections.
    Specifically, presuming a participant is quoting up to 10 classes 
for MIAX Pearl or 5 classes for MIAX Emerald (the lowest available tier 
for each exchange), they are connecting to fewer matching engines than 
another participant who may be quoting over 100 classes (the highest 
tier available for both MIAX Pearl and MIAX Emerald). In comparing the 
monthly cost using the pricing of the lowest tiers for MIAX Pearl and 
MIAX Emerald, the Exchange presumes an estimated comparable connection 
of connecting to 3 different matching engines at a cost of $550 per 
Bulk Port per matching engine and $350 per BOE Port per matching 
engine. This equates to $7,500 (($350 * 4 Ports * 3 matching engines) + 
($550 * 2 Ports * 3 matching engines) per month for BZX Options, and 
$5,000 per month for both MIAX Pearl and Emerald. For the highest tier, 
the Exchange presumes that if a participant was quoting over 100 
classes, they are likely connecting to all matching engines. In this 
case, it costs a participant $12,000 per month for MIAX Pearl, $20,500 
per month for MIAX Emerald, and $22,000 ($5,500 * 2 Bulk Sets) + 
($2,500 * 2 BOE Sets (Tier 1)) + ($3,000 * 2 BOE Sets (Tier 2)) per 
month for BZX Options to connect to all matching engines.
    While the Exchange is priced higher in these specific examples, it 
again believes the value comes from the ability to connect to 
additional matching engines as opposed to the quantity of ports itself 
and participants of the Exchange are able to determine their number of 
desired ports as opposed to having a set package based on their 
Exchange activity. For example, a participant of BZX Options can have 
similar matching engine connectivity to the lowest tier of MIAX Emerald 
or MIAX Pearl by connecting to three matching engines (using the same 
presumed number as above) by purchasing three Bulk Ports for a cost of 
$1,650 per month, substantially less than the fixed costs of $5,000 per 
month of MIAX Emerald and MIAX Pearl. Additionally, a participant on 
BZX Options is able to connect to all matching engines for a price of 
$5,500 per month by purchasing a Bulk Set as opposed to the fixed cost 
of MIAX Emerald and MIAX Pearl at $20,000 per month and $12,000 per 
month, respectively. Furthermore, MIAX Emerald does allow participants 
to purchase additional Limited Service ports at a price of $420 per 
month, higher than the Exchange's comparable offering of $350 per month 
for a BOE port. While it is challenging to compare the exact pricing on 
these products, the Exchange believes that it is priced competitively, 
if not lower than MIAX Pearl and MIAX Emerald.
    The Exchange acknowledges that the above comparability analysis 
does not take into account the fees assessed to non-Options Market 
Makers on the Exchange relative to non-market makers on MIAX Emerald or 
MIAX Pearl. This is due, however, to the fact that MIAX Emerald and 
MIAX Pearl do not permit non-market makers to purchase MEI ports (the 
closest comparable product to BZX's Unitized Logical Ports). 
Presumably, MIAX Emerald and MIAX Pearl limit such participants to use 
of only MIAX's FIX ports. Importantly, unlike MIAX Emerald and MIAX 
Pearl, the Exchange permits its non-Options Market Makers to purchase a 
Unitized Logical Port, should such Member deem the use of such 
connection to be beneficial to their trading strategy. Additionally, 
non-Options Market Makers may instead elect to purchase Exchange BOE 
convenience or FIX Ports, or a combination of Unitized Logical Ports, 
BOE convenience and FIX ports. Furthermore, non-Options Market Maker 
Members are free to choose to purchase Unitized Logical Ports in sets 
or by individual ports (dependent on the firms matching engine needs, 
which may be based on products it trades, strategies, or other business 
needs). As such, the Exchange's offering is both more widely available 
and provides Members with more flexibility and customization in 
contrast to MIAX's strict matching engine connectivity based on classes 
a Market Maker is quoting in and its rigid fee structure.
    As an additional point of comparison, the Exchange notes the FIX 
port fees it charges it non-Options Market Makers, relative to those 
charged by MIAX Emerald and MIAX Pearl for their non-market maker 
members. Specifically, the Exchange charges its non-Options Market 
Maker members $750 per month, per convenience port (which may be FIX or 
BOE). MIAX Emerald \41\ utilizes a progressive fee schedule for its FIX 
ports and charges its members a fee of $550 per month and per port, for 
the first FIX port; $350 per month, per port, for ports two through 
five; and $150 per month, per port, for each FIX port above five. MIAX 
Pearl \42\ also utilizes a progressive fee schedule for its FIX ports, 
and charges its members $275 per month, per port, for the first FIX 
port; $175 per month, per port, for FIX ports two through five; and $75 
per month, per port, for each sixth or more FIX port. While purchasing 
six FIX ports on the Exchange ($4500) \43\ would cost more than 
purchasing six FIX ports on MIAX Emerald ($3100) \44\ or MIAX Pearl 
($1225),\45\ the Exchange again notes that its non-Options Market 
Members are, unlike MIAX Emerald and MIAX Pearl members, permitted to 
purchase BOE ports, FIX ports, or Unitized Logical Ports, or a 
combination of the three, depending on their needs and strategy. 
Indeed, the cost of one Unitized Logical Port, per month, is less than 
that of a single Exchange FIX Port--i.e., $750 for one FIX port, per 
month vs. $350 for one BOE Unitized Logical Port. Therefore, while FIX 
ports on the Exchange are more expensive than those on MIAX Emerald and 
Pearl, the Exchange's port offerings provide non-Options Market Makers 
with more flexibility in how to manage their Exchange access and better 
configure their connectivity costs based on their needs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ Supra note 38.
    \42\ Supra note 36.
    \43\ $750 * 6 = $4,500.
    \44\ $750 + $550 + $550 + $550 + $550 + $550 + $150 = $3,100.
    \45\ $275 + $175 + $175 + $715 + $175 + $715 + $75 = $1,225.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also emphasizes that the use of the Unitized Logical 
Ports is

[[Page 38847]]

not necessary for trading on the Exchange and, as noted above, is 
entirely optional (other than Options Market Makers which must utilize 
a Unitized Logical Port for quoting). In fact, approximately 60% of 
Members still maintain at least one convenience layer port (FIX or 
BOEv3), either in addition to or in lieu of Unitized Ports. Moreover, 
while Exchange Market Makers must use a Unitized Logical Port for 
quoting, the Exchange notes that approximately 35% of the Exchanges 
Options Market Makers still utilize at least one convenience layer port 
(FIX or BOEv3). The Exchange believes the Market Maker's use of 
convenience ports for activity other than quoting demonstrates that 
Unitized Logical Ports and their associated fees are not mandatory per 
se, and that Members--Market Makers and non-Market Makers alike--are 
free to continue to utilize convenience ports for their message traffic 
as they best see fit. Users can also continue to access the Exchange 
through existing logical port offerings at existing rates. It is a 
Member's specific business needs that will drive its decision whether 
to use Unitized Logical Ports in lieu of, or in addition to, existing 
logical ports (or, as emphasized, not use them at all). If a User finds 
little benefit in having these ports based on its business model and 
trading strategies, or determines the Unitized Logical ports are not 
cost-efficient for its needs, or does not provide sufficient value to 
the firm, such User may continue connecting to the Exchange in the 
manner it does today, unchanged. Moreover, the Exchange believes that 
providing Members the option of purchasing Unitized Logical Ports 
individually or in sets provides Members further flexibility and an 
opportunity for cost savings for those Members that wish to only trade 
a subset of classes. The Exchange has seen firms take advantage of 
individually priced Unitized Logical Ports when their needs do not 
require connectivity to all matching engines--further allowing its 
Members to pay reduced fees relative to a Unitized Logical Port set.
    Furthermore, the Exchange notes that undertaking a technological 
innovation, such as offering a new connectivity option for Members (of 
which, 57% still utilize at least one FIX or BOEv3 Port through the 
convenience layer), requires costs and resource allocation. In fact, as 
the Exchange previously noted, such innovation has improved the 
infrastructure for all Members of the Exchange. Such innovation is a 
part of what allows the Exchange to continue to provide access to 
markets in times of heightened volatility with zero downtime. The new 
Chair of the Securities Exchange Commission, Paul Atkins, even recently 
heighted the importance of innovation by stating ``. . . we are getting 
back to our roots of promoting, rather than stifling, innovation. The 
markets innovate, and the SEC should not be in the business of telling 
them to stand still.'' \46\ In order for exchanges to continue to 
provide greater options through technological innovation and, in turn, 
work to improve the resiliency of markets, exchanges must have 
reasonable certainty around their ability to set fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \46\ See Chairman Atkins ``Prepared remarks before SEC Speaks,'' 
May 19, 2025, available at: <a href="https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/speeches-statements/atkins-prepared-remarks-sec-speaks-051925">https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/speeches-statements/atkins-prepared-remarks-sec-speaks-051925</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also believes that the proposed Unitized Logical Port 
fees are equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because they 
continue to be assessed uniformly to similarly situated users in that 
all Users who choose to purchase Unitized Logical Ports will be subject 
to the same proposed tiered fee schedule. Moreover, Members purchasing 
Unitized Logical Ports will only do so if they find a benefit and 
sufficient value in such ports as, all Members can otherwise continue 
to use the preexisting logical connectivity options. As such, Members 
can choose whether to purchase Unitized Logical Ports based on their 
respective business needs.
    The proposed ascending tier structure for Unitized Logical Port 
Sets is reasonable, equitable and not unfairly discriminatory as it's 
designed to encourage market participants to be efficient with their 
respective Unitized Logical Port usage. It also is designed so that 
Members that use a higher allotment of the Exchange's system resources 
pay higher rates, rather than placing that burden on market 
participants that have more modest needs. The Exchange believes the 
proposed ascending fee structure is therefore another appropriate 
means, in conjunction with an established Unitized Logical Port limit, 
to manage this finite resource (system capacity) and ensure its 
apportioned fairly. In contrast, MIAX's structure limits that offering 
to a specific subset of participants, Market Makers, and allocates its 
ports based on quoting. In contrast, the Exchange and its participants 
to utilize this product at their required level of consumption. 
Furthermore, the Exchange already assesses higher fees to those that 
consume more Exchange resources for the existing non-Unitized Bulk 
Ports.\47\ The proposed limit on Unitized Logical Ports is also 
reasonable, equitable and not unfairly discriminatory as the Exchange 
believes that it is in the interests of all Members and market 
participants who access the Exchange to not allow Members to exhaust 
System resources, but to encourage efficient usage of network capacity. 
The Exchange also notes that the new BOEv3 unitized architecture is 
subject to software limitations on the number of sessions that can be 
created on any one unitized process. Consideration was given to this 
limitation as well as to the amount of ports firms had indicated they 
would need prior to the implementation of Unitized Logical Ports.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \47\ See Cboe U.S. Options Fees Schedule, BZX Options, Options 
Logical Port Fees, Ports with Bulk Quoting Capabilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes the proposed ADO and ADQ fees are reasonable 
as Members that do not exceed the high thresholds of 2,000,000 ADO and 
250,000,000 ADQ will not be charged any fee under the proposed tiers. 
The Exchange notes that in establishing the proposed thresholds, it 
evaluated average ADO and ADQ rates over several months and the 
thresholds were designed to protect the Exchange's Matching Engines 
from being adversely impacted from sustained and excessive orders/
quotes throughout the course of a given month. Further, the Exchange 
considered the highest levels of ADO and ADQ rates amongst firms and 
from there, reviewed what would be considered an unreasonable threshold 
even at the highest levels. The ADQ thresholds are also designed to 
ensure Market Makers quoting activity, which acts as an important 
source of liquidity, is not impeded by the proposal.\48\ When setting 
these thresholds, the Exchange reviewed to ensure that these levels 
don't prohibit Market Makers from meetings its quoting obligations. The 
Exchange believes it's reasonable, equitable and not unfairly 
discriminatory to assess higher fees when a Member has higher ADO and 
ADQ rates because the potential impact on exchange systems, bandwidth 
and capacity becomes greater with increased ADO and ADQ rates. The 
Exchange believes the proposed fee amounts are reasonable as the 
Exchange believes them to be commensurate with the proposed thresholds. 
Particularly, the proposed fee amounts that correspond

[[Page 38848]]

to higher ADO and ADQ rates are designed to incentivize Members to 
reduce excessive order and quoting trade activity that the Exchange 
believes can be detrimental to all market participants at those levels 
and encourage such activity to be made in good faith and for legitimate 
purposes. As noted above, the Exchange believes that it is in the 
interests of all Members and market participants who access the 
Exchange to not allow Members to exhaust System resources, but to 
encourage efficient usage of network capacity. The Exchange therefore 
also believes that the proposed fees are one method of facilitating the 
Commission's goal of ensuring that critical market infrastructure has 
``levels of capacity, integrity, resiliency, availability, and security 
adequate to maintain their operational capability and promote the 
maintenance of fair and orderly markets.'' \49\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \48\ Since the implementation of the proposal on September 3, 
2024, the Exchange notes that it has not received any feedback from 
Market Maker participants that the proposal has impeded their 
ability to meet their quoting obligations.
    \49\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 73639 (November 19, 
2014), 79 FR 72251 (December 5, 2014) (File No. S7-01-13) 
(Regulation SCI Adopting Release).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes adopting the proposed ADO and ADQ fees are 
reasonable as unfettered usage of System capacity and network resource 
consumption can have a detrimental effect on all market participants 
who access and use the Exchange. As discussed above, high ADO and ADQ 
rates may adversely impact system resources, bandwidth, and capacity 
which may, in turn, create latency and impact other Members' ability to 
receive timely executions. The Exchange believes the proposed fees are 
therefore reasonable as they are designed to focus on activity that is 
truly disproportionate while fairly allocating costs.
    Further, the Exchange believes that the proposed ADO and ADQ fees 
are equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because they will be 
assessed uniformly to similarly situated users in that all Members that 
exceed the thresholds in connection with ADO and ADQ will be assessed 
the proposed ADO and ADQ rates. Regarding ADO an ADQ, no market 
participant is assessed any fees unless it exceeds the proposed 
thresholds. As noted above, the Exchange believes the proposed ADO and 
ADQ thresholds (i.e., 2,000,000 ADO and 250,000,000 ADQ) are 
appropriately high rates respectively, such that the Exchange expects 
the vast majority of Members to not exceed them. While the Exchange has 
no way of predicting with certainty how the proposed changes will 
impact Member activity, based on trading activity from the prior months 
the Exchange would expect that, absent any changes to Member behavior, 
all Members would fall within proposed ADO Tier 1 (and thus not be 
subject to any new fees) and approximately 74% of Members would fall 
within proposed ADQ Tier 1 (and thus also not be subject to any new 
fees). With respect to the remaining Members (approximately 26%) that 
would exceed the ADQ Tier 1 threshold based on current activity, the 
Exchange would anticipate, absent any change in behavior, approximately 
3 Members to fall within Tier 2, approximately 6 Members to fall within 
Tier 3, approximately 3 Members to fall within Tier and no Members to 
fall within Tier 5. Notwithstanding this impact, the Exchange believes 
that Market Makers are able to continue providing important liquidity 
to the Exchange and meet their quoting obligations as Market Maker 
obligations were a key consideration when determining these levels.
    The Exchange believes it's equitable and not unfairly 
discriminatory to assess incrementally higher fees to Members that have 
higher ADO and ADQ rates because the potential impact on exchange 
systems, bandwidth and capacity becomes greater with increased ADO and 
ADQ. The Exchange also believes it's equitable and not unfairly 
discriminatory to aggregate Members trading activity with any 
affiliated Member sharing at least 75% common ownership in order to 
prevent members from shifting their order flow or quoting activity to 
other affiliates in order to circumvent the ADO and ADQ thresholds.
    The Exchange lastly believes that its proposal is reasonable, 
equitably allocated and not unfairly discriminatory because it is not 
intended to raise revenue for the Exchange; rather, it is intended to 
encourage efficient behavior so that Members do not exhaust System 
resources. Moreover, as noted above, competing options exchanges 
similarly assess fees to deter Members from over utilizing the 
exchange's System by having excessive order and/or quoting trading 
activity.\50\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \50\ See supra note 29.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange finally notes that it operates in a highly competitive 
market in which market participants can readily direct order flow to 
competing venues if they deem fee levels at a particular venue to be 
excessive or incentives to be insufficient. The Exchange is only one of 
18 options exchanges which market participants may direct their order 
flow and/or participate on, and it represents a small percentage of the 
overall market.\51\ When determining reasonable prices, the Exchange 
must ensure these are competitive prices in order to maintain market 
share, as uncompetitive pricing, or prices that Members deem to be 
excessive, can lead Members to take their order flow to other 
exchanges.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \51\ See Cboe Global Markets, U.S. Options Market Volume 
Summary, Month-to-Date (August 27, 2024), available at <a href="https://www.cboe.com/us/options/market_statistics/">https://www.cboe.com/us/options/market_statistics/</a> which reflects the 
Exchange representing only 3.3% of total market share.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change to 
adopt fees for Unitized Logical Ports will impose any burden on 
intramarket competition that is not necessary in furtherance of the 
purposes of the Act because the proposed fees for will apply equally to 
all similarly situated Members. As discussed above, Unitized Logical 
Ports are optional and Members may choose to utilize Unitized Logical 
Ports, or not, based on their views of the additional benefits and 
added value provided by these ports. The Exchange believes the proposed 
fees will be assessed proportionately to the potential value or benefit 
received by Members with a greater number of Unitized Logical Ports and 
notes that Members may determine to cease using Unitized Logical Ports. 
As discussed, Members can also continue to access the Exchange through 
existing Logical Ports, which fees are not changing.
    Similarly, the Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule 
change to adopt ADO and ADQ fees will impose any burden on intramarket 
competition that is not necessary in furtherance of the purposes of the 
Act because such fees will apply equally to all similarly situated 
Members. Particularly, the proposed fees apply uniformly to all 
Members, in that any Member who exceeds the ADO and/or ADQ Tier 1 
thresholds will be subject to a fee under the proposed corresponding 
tiers. The Exchange believes that the proposed change neither favors 
nor penalizes one or more categories of market participants in a manner 
that would impose an undue burden on competition. Rather, the proposal 
seeks to benefit all market participants by encouraging the efficient 
utilization of the Exchange's network while taking into account the 
important liquidity provided by its Members. As discussed above 
potential impact on exchange systems, bandwidth and capacity becomes 
greater with increased ADO and ADQ rates. The Exchange also

[[Page 38849]]

anticipates that the vast majority of Members on the Exchange will not 
be subject to any fees under the proposed tiers. Accordingly, the 
Exchange believes that the proposed ADO and ADQ fees do not favor 
certain categories of market participants in a manner that would impose 
a burden on competition.
    Next, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change does not 
impose any burden on intermarket competition that is not necessary or 
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. As previously 
discussed, the Exchange operates in a highly competitive market, 
including competition for order flow. Market Participants have numerous 
alternative venues that they may participate on, including 17 other 
options exchanges (including 3 other non-Cboe options exchanges), as 
well as off-exchange venues, where competitive products are available 
for trading. Indeed, participants can readily choose to submit their 
order flow to other exchange and off-exchange venues if they deem fee 
levels at those other venues to be more favorable. Moreover, the 
Commission has repeatedly expressed its preference for competition over 
regulatory intervention in determining prices, products, and services 
in the securities markets. Specifically, in Regulation NMS, the 
Commission highlighted the importance of market forces in determining 
prices and SRO revenues and, also, recognized that current regulation 
of the market system ``has been remarkably successful in promoting 
market competition in its broader forms that are most important to 
investors and listed companies.'' The fact that this market is 
competitive has also long been recognized by the courts. In 
NetCoalition v. Securities and Exchange Commission, the D.C. Circuit 
stated as follows: ``[n]o one disputes that competition for order flow 
is `fierce.' . . . As the SEC explained, `[i]n the U.S. national market 
system, buyers and sellers of securities, and the broker-dealers that 
act as their order-routing agents, have a wide range of choices of 
where to route orders for execution'; [and] `no exchange can afford to 
take its market share percentages for granted' because `no exchange 
possesses a monopoly, regulatory or otherwise, in the execution of 
order flow from broker dealers'. . . .''. Accordingly, the Exchange 
does not believe its proposed change imposes any burden on competition 
that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of 
the Act.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed 
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the 
proposed rule change.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for 
Commission Action

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \52\ and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4 \53\ 
thereunder. At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed 
rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule 
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or 
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or 
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission 
takes such action, the Commission will institute proceedings to 
determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or 
disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \52\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \53\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and 
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule 
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of 
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

    <bullet> Use the Commission's internet comment form (<a href="https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml">https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml</a>); or
    <bullet> Send an email to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#4b393e272e66282426262e253f380b382e28652c243d"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="bbc9ced7de96d8d4d6d6ded5cfc8fbc8ded895dcd4cd">[email&#160;protected]</span></a>. Please include 
file number SR-CboeBZX-2025-107 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

    <bullet> Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities 
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to file number SR-CboeBZX-2025-107. This 
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To 
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, 
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on 
the Commission's internet website (<a href="https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml">https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml</a>). Copies of the filing will be available for inspection and 
copying at the principal office of the Exchange. Do not include 
personal identifiable information in submissions; you should submit 
only information that you wish to make available publicly. We may 
redact in part or withhold entirely from publication submitted material 
that is obscene or subject to copyright protection. All submissions 
should refer to file number SR-CboeBZX-2025-107 and should be submitted 
on or before September 2, 2025.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, 
pursuant to delegated authority.\54\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \54\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2025-15261 Filed 8-11-25; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Indexed from Federal Register on August 12, 2025.

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.