Notice2026-02225

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Modify the NYSE Arca Options Fee Schedule To Modify Certain Fees and Rebates Applicable to Lead Market Makers and NYSE Arca Market Makers and Floor Brokers

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
February 4, 2026

Issuing agencies

Securities and Exchange Commission

Full Text

<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 23 (Wednesday, February 4, 2026)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 23 (Wednesday, February 4, 2026)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5138-5141]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2026-02225]


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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-104751; File No. SR-NYSEARCA-2026-07]


Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing 
and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Modify the 
NYSE Arca Options Fee Schedule To Modify Certain Fees and Rebates 
Applicable to Lead Market Makers and NYSE Arca Market Makers and Floor 
Brokers

January 30, 2026.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of 
1934 (``Act''),\2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby given 
that on January 28, 2026, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca'' or the 
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the 
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II 
below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory 
organization. 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\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to modify the NYSE Arca Options Fee Schedule 
(``Fee Schedule'') regarding fees and rebates applicable to Lead Market 
Makers and NYSE Arca Market Makers and Floor Brokers. The proposed rule 
change is available on the Exchange's website at <a href="http://www.nyse.com">www.nyse.com</a> and at 
the principal office of the Exchange.

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 self-regulatory organization 
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 those 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 parts of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of this filing is to amend the Fee Schedule to modify 
fees and rebates applicable to Lead Market Makers (``LMMs'') and NYSE 
Arca Market Makers (collectively, ``Market Makers'') and Floor Brokers. 
Specifically, the Exchange proposes to (1) extend a current surcharge 
that applies to certain complex orders to any Market Maker order on the 
Trading Floor that is a counterparty to a complex Manual trade executed 
by a Floor Broker, and (2) establish a rebate payable to Floor Brokers 
for such trades with a Market Maker order on the Trading Floor. The 
Exchange proposes the fee change to be effective January 28, 2026.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Exchange previously filed to amend the Fee Schedule on 
January 2, 2026 (SR-NYSEARCA-2026-02), then withdrew such filing and 
amended the Fee Schedule on January 16, 2026 (SR-NYSEARCA-2026-05), 
which latter filing the Exchange withdrew on January 28, 2026.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange currently charges a surcharge of $0.12 per contract 
that is applied to an electronic Non-Customer Complex Order that 
executes against a Customer Complex Order (the ``Non-Customer Complex 
Surcharge''). The Non-Customer Complex Surcharge is consistent with 
surcharges imposed by other options exchanges.\5\ The Non-Customer 
Complex Surcharge is denoted with an ``*'' in the transaction fee table 
in the Electronic Complex Order Executions section of the Fee Schedule. 
The Exchange proposes to extend the current surcharge of $0.12 per 
contract to any Market Maker order on the Trading Floor that is a 
counterparty to a complex \6\ Manual trade executed by a Floor Broker, 
and to establish a rebate of $0.20 per contract payable to the Floor 
Broker side of such trades. For Floor Brokers that participate in the 
FB Prepay Program, the proposed rebate would apply in lieu of any 
rebates earned through the Manual Billable Rebate Program as provided 
in the Fee Schedule. Although the proposed change would increase the 
fee for complex Manual transactions for Market Makers, the Exchange 
believes these participants will continue to quote actively to 
participate in transactions on the Trading Floor as they do today, 
thereby promoting trading opportunities and competition on the Trading 
Floor to the benefit of all market participants. The Exchange also 
believes that the proposed rebate would continue to incentivize Floor 
Brokers to participate on the Trading Floor, including when the 
counterparty to such trading is a Market Maker.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See, e.g., NYSE American Options Fee Schedule, Section I.A. 
(Rates for Options transactions), footnote 5 (assessing $0.12 per 
contract surcharge to any Electronic Non-Customer Complex Order that 
executes against a Customer Complex Order); MIAX Options Fee 
Schedule, Sections 1)a)i)-ii) (assessing a $0.12 per contract 
surcharge for trading against a Priority Customer Complex Order for 
Penny and Non-Penny classes).
    \6\ A complex order, for purposes of this proposed change, is 
any order other than an order to purchase or sell contracts in a 
single listed option series.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To reflect the changes proposed herein, the Exchange proposes to 
adopt a new endnote ``18'' that would be appended to Order Types LMM 
and NYSE Arca Market Maker in the section of the Fee Schedule titled 
``TRANSACTION FEE FOR MANUAL EXECUTIONS--PER CONTRACT''. The Exchange 
also proposes to replace the ``*'' that denotes the Non-Customer 
Complex Surcharge noted above with proposed new endnote ``18''. The 
Exchange also proposes to delete the text describing the Non-Customer 
Complex Surcharge in the ``*'' and move it to proposed new endnote 
``18''. Finally, the Exchange proposes a change to the heading of the 
pricing table titled ``Discount on Non-Customer Complex Surcharge'' by 
adding the words ``for Electronic Executions'' to clarify that such 
discounts would not apply to

[[Page 5139]]

Manual Complex Orders. The proposed changes with respect to the Non-
Customer Complex Surcharge are intended to clarify the application of 
the existing fee, rather than to make any substantive changes.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent 
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\7\ in general, and furthers the 
objectives of Sections 6(b)(4) and (5) of the Act,\8\ in particular, 
because it provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, 
fees, and other charges among its members, issuers and other persons 
using its facilities and does not unfairly discriminate between 
customers, issuers, brokers or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Proposed Rule Change Is Reasonable
    The Exchange operates in a highly competitive market. The 
Commission has repeatedly expressed its preference for competition over 
regulatory intervention in determining prices, products, and services 
in the securities markets. 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.'' \9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9, 
2005), 70 FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005) (S7-10-04) (``Reg NMS 
Adopting Release'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    There are currently 18 registered options exchanges competing for 
order flow. Based on publicly-available information, and excluding 
index-based options, no single exchange has more than 16% of the market 
share of executed volume of multiply-listed equity and ETF options 
trades.\10\ Therefore, currently no exchange possesses significant 
pricing power in the execution of multiply-listed equity and ETF 
options order flow. More specifically, in November 2025, the Exchange 
had 10.67% market share of executed volume of multiply-listed equity 
and ETF options trades.\11\ In such a low-concentrated and highly 
competitive market, no single options exchange possesses significant 
pricing power in the execution of options order flow. Within this 
environment, market participants can freely and often do shift their 
order flow among the Exchange and competing venues in response to 
changes in their respective pricing schedules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The OCC publishes options and futures volume in a variety 
of formats, including daily and monthly volume by exchange, 
available here: <a href="https://www.theocc.com/Market-Data/Market-Data-Reports/Volume-and-Open-Interest/Monthly-Weekly-Volume-Statistics">https://www.theocc.com/Market-Data/Market-Data-Reports/Volume-and-Open-Interest/Monthly-Weekly-Volume-Statistics</a>.
    \11\ Based on a compilation of OCC data for monthly volume of 
equity-based options and monthly volume of ETF-based options, see 
id., the Exchange's market share in multiply-listed equity and ETF 
options decreased from 13.22% in November 2024 to 10.67% for the 
month of November 2025.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the ever-shifting market share among the 
exchanges from month to month demonstrates that market participants can 
shift order flow or discontinue or reduce use of certain categories of 
products, in response to fee changes. Accordingly, competitive forces 
constrain options exchange transaction fees.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rebate would incentivize 
Floor Brokers to direct additional complex Manual orders to the 
Exchange, thereby creating more trading opportunities on the Trading 
Floor for all market participants, including Market Makers. The 
Exchange thus believes that, despite the proposed surcharge on Market 
Maker orders that are counterparty to such Floor Broker orders, Market 
Makers would not be discouraged from continuing to quote and trade 
actively on the Exchange.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed changes are reasonably 
designed to incent Floor Brokers (and other participants on the Trading 
Floor) to increase the number of Manual orders sent to the Exchange. 
Any increase in trading volume would create more trading opportunities 
for all market participants and would in turn attract additional order 
flow to the Exchange, further contributing to a deeper, more liquid 
market to the benefit of all market participants. The Exchange also 
notes that the proposed rebate is similar in structure to incentive 
programs for Floor Brokers offered by competing options exchanges.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See, e.g., BOX Exchange Fee Schedule, Section V. Manual 
Transaction Fees, available at <a href="https://boxexchange.com/assets/BOX-Fee-Schedule-as-of-January-22-2026.pdf">https://boxexchange.com/assets/BOX-Fee-Schedule-as-of-January-22-2026.pdf</a> (offering Floor Brokers that 
submit QOO and FOO Orders a $0.20 per contract enhanced rebate for 
executions that trade with a Floor Market Maker, in lieu of lesser 
per contract rebates also available to Floor Brokers); MIAX Sapphire 
Options Exchange, Section 1) c) Trading Floor Transactions, 
available at <a href="https://www.miaxglobal.com/sites/default/files/fee_schedule-files/MIAX_Sapphire_Fee_Schedule_01212026_b.pdf">https://www.miaxglobal.com/sites/default/files/fee_schedule-files/MIAX_Sapphire_Fee_Schedule_01212026_b.pdf</a> 
(providing for the ``Floor Broker Breakup Credit,'' a $0.20 credit 
applicable to Floor Brokers that submit a QFO or cQFO for executions 
that trade with a Floor Market Maker, instead of the $0.10 Floor 
Broker rebate otherwise available).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange further believes the surcharge is reasonable because 
it is designed to offset costs associated with the proposed rebate 
payable to Floor Brokers when they interact with Market Makers on the 
Trading Floor. To the extent this purpose is achieved, the Exchange 
believes that the proposed surcharge would not disincentivize Market 
Maker activity on the Trading Floor because increased order flow from 
Floor Brokers seeking to earn the proposed rebate would result in more 
opportunities to trade for all market participants.
    To the extent the proposed rule change continues to attract greater 
volume and liquidity by encouraging Floor Brokers to increase their 
options volume on the Exchange in an effort to earn the proposed 
rebate, the Exchange believes the proposed changes would improve the 
Exchange's overall competitiveness and strengthen its market quality 
for all market participants. Against the backdrop of the competitive 
environment in which the Exchange operates, the proposed rule change is 
a reasonable attempt by the Exchange to increase the depth of its 
market and improve its market share relative to its competitors.
The Proposed Rule Change Is an Equitable Allocation of Credits and Fees
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is an equitable 
allocation of its fees and credits because the proposed rebate is based 
on the amount and type of business transacted on the Exchange, and 
Floor Brokers can try to earn the proposed rebate, or not. The Exchange 
also believes that the proposed surcharge is equitable because it is 
designed to balance costs associated with encouraging increased 
execution opportunities on the Trading Floor, and an increase in such 
orders would in turn enhance trading opportunities for all market 
participants. The Exchange also believes that the proposed rebate to 
Floor Brokers is an equitable allocation of fees and credits because it 
is intended to support Floor Brokers' role in facilitating the 
execution of Manual orders, which function benefits all market 
participants on the Trading Floor.
    Moreover, the proposal is designed to incent participation on the 
Trading Floor in an effort to make the Exchange a primary execution 
venue and to attract more Manual transactions to the Exchange. To the 
extent that the proposed change attracts more Floor Broker orders to 
the Exchange, this increased order flow would continue to make the 
Exchange a more competitive venue for, among other things, order 
execution. Thus, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change would

[[Page 5140]]

improve market quality for all market participants on the Exchange and, 
as a consequence, attract more order flow to the Exchange thereby 
improving market-wide quality and price discovery.
The Proposed Rule Change Is Not Unfairly Discriminatory
    The Exchange believes it is not unfairly discriminatory to impose a 
surcharge on Market Maker orders on the Trading Floor that are a 
counterparty to a complex Manual trade executed by a Floor Broker 
because the proposed change would apply to all Market Maker orders 
equally, and as discussed above, the Exchange believes it is not 
unfairly discriminatory to incent order flow to the Exchange, which 
would enhance liquidity on the Exchange to the benefit of all market 
participants. The Exchange also believes that the proposed rebate 
payable to Floor Brokers for a complex Manual order that trades with a 
Floor Market Maker order is not unfairly discriminatory because it 
would be available to all similarly-situated market participants on an 
equal and non-discriminatory basis. The Exchange further believes that 
the proposed rebate available to Floor Brokers is not unfairly 
discriminatory to other market participants because it is intended to 
encourage the role performed by Floor Brokers in facilitating the 
execution of orders via open outcry, a function which the Exchange 
wishes to support for the benefit of all market participants. In 
addition, although the proposed change would apply a surcharge to 
Market Maker orders that trade with Floor Broker complex Manual orders, 
the Exchange believes that Market Makers would not be discouraged from 
continuing to participate actively on the Trading Floor and would 
benefit from increased Floor Broker order flow as a result of the 
proposed change. To the extent that this increased order flow attracts 
order flow from other market participants to the Trading Floor, the 
proposed rule change would improve market quality and promote 
additional trading opportunities for all market participants on the 
Exchange.
    Finally, the Exchange believes that it is subject to significant 
competitive forces, as described below in the Exchange's statement 
regarding the burden on competition.

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

    In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act, the Exchange does 
not believe that the proposed rule change would impose any burden on 
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the 
purposes of the Act. Instead, as discussed above, the Exchange believes 
that the proposed changes would encourage the submission of additional 
liquidity to a public exchange, thereby promoting market depth, price 
discovery and transparency and enhancing order execution opportunities 
for all market participants. As a result, the Exchange believes that 
the proposed change furthers the Commission's goal in adopting 
Regulation NMS of fostering integrated competition among orders, which 
promotes ``more efficient pricing of individual stocks for all types of 
orders, large and small.'' \13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Reg NMS Adopting Release, supra note 9, at 37499.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Intramarket Competition. The proposed change is designed to attract 
additional order flow to the Exchange. The Exchange believes that the 
proposed surcharge on Market Maker orders on the Trading Floor that are 
a counterparty to complex Manual trades executed by a Floor Broker, and 
the proposed rebate payable to the Floor Broker side of such trades 
would encourage Floor Broker complex Manual order flow and would not 
disincentivize Market Maker activity on the Trading Floor. Greater 
liquidity benefits all market participants on the Exchange and 
increased order flow would increase opportunities for execution of 
other trading interest. The proposed modifications would apply and be 
available to all similarly-situated market participants that execute 
Manual transactions on the Trading Floor, and, accordingly, the 
proposed changes would not impose a disparate burden on competition 
among market participants on the Exchange.
    Intermarket Competition. The Exchange operates in a highly 
competitive market in which market participants can readily favor one 
of the other 17 competing options exchanges if they deem the Exchange's 
fee levels to be excessive. In such an environment, the Exchange must 
continually adjust its fees to remain competitive with other exchanges 
and to attract order flow to the Exchange. Based on publicly-available 
information, and excluding index-based options, no single exchange has 
more than 16% of the market share of executed volume of multiply-listed 
equity and ETF options trades.\14\ Therefore, currently no exchange 
possesses significant pricing power in the execution of multiply-listed 
equity and ETF options order flow. More specifically, in November 2025, 
the Exchange had 10.67% market share of executed volume of multiply-
listed equity and ETF options trades.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ The OCC publishes options and futures volume in a variety 
of formats, including daily and monthly volume by exchange, 
available here: <a href="https://www.theocc.com/Market-Data/Market-Data-Reports/Volume-and-Open-Interest/Monthly-Weekly-Volume-Statistics">https://www.theocc.com/Market-Data/Market-Data-Reports/Volume-and-Open-Interest/Monthly-Weekly-Volume-Statistics</a>.
    \15\ Based on a compilation of OCC data for monthly volume of 
equity-based options and monthly volume of ETF-based options, see 
id., the Exchange's market share in multiply-listed equity and ETF 
options decreased from 13.22% in November 2024 to 10.67% for the 
month of November 2025.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change reflects this 
competitive environment because it modifies the Exchange's fees in a 
manner designed to continue to incent participants on the Trading Floor 
to direct trading interest to the Exchange, to provide liquidity and to 
attract additional order flow. To the extent that Floor Brokers are 
encouraged to utilize the Exchange as a primary trading venue for all 
transactions, all Exchange market participants stand to benefit from 
the improved market quality and increased opportunities for price 
improvement. The Exchange notes that it operates in a highly 
competitive market in which market participants can readily favor 
competing venues. In such an environment, the Exchange must continually 
review, and consider adjusting, its fees and credits to remain 
competitive with other exchanges. For the reasons described above, the 
Exchange believes that the proposed rule change reflects this 
competitive environment.

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

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the 
proposed rule change.

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

    The foregoing rule change is effective upon filing pursuant to 
Section 19(b)(3)(A) \16\ of the Act and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule 
19b-4 \17\ thereunder, because it establishes a due, fee, or other 
charge imposed by the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \17\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such 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

[[Page 5141]]

the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the 
Commission shall institute proceedings under Section 19(b)(2)(B) \18\ 
of the Act to determine whether the proposed rule change should be 
approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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#dfadaab3baf2bcb0b2b2bab1abac9facbabcf1b8b0a9"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="5c2e293039713f3331313932282f1c2f393f723b332a">[email&#160;protected]</span></a>. Please include 
file number SR-NYSEARCA-2026-07 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-NYSEARCA-2026-07. 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-NYSEARCA-2026-07 and should be submitted 
on or before February 25, 2026.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, 
pursuant to delegated authority.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2026-02225 Filed 2-3-26; 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 February 4, 2026.

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.