Notice2026-02798

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend Exchange Rule 5.52 (Market-Maker Quotes) To Adopt Two-Sided Quote Bid/Ask Differentials

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 12, 2026

Issuing agencies

Securities and Exchange Commission

Full Text

<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 29 (Thursday, February 12, 2026)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 29 (Thursday, February 12, 2026)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6696-6699]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2026-02798]


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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-104782; File No. SR-CBOE-2026-013]


Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe Exchange, Inc.; Notice of 
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend 
Exchange Rule 5.52 (Market-Maker Quotes) To Adopt Two-Sided Quote Bid/
Ask Differentials

February 9, 2026.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that 
on January 29, 2026, Cboe Exchange, Inc. (``Exchange'' or ``Cboe 
Options'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission 
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and 
II 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 Exchange, Inc. (``Cboe'' or the ``Exchange'') is filing with 
the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'' or ``SEC'') a 
proposed rule change to amend Exchange Rule 5.52 (Market-Maker Quotes) 
to adopt two-sided quote bid/ask differentials.
    The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the 
Commission's website (<a href="https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml">https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml</a>), 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 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 Exchange included statements 
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and 
discussed any comments it received on the

[[Page 6697]]

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 Rule 5.52 to adopt two-sided quote 
bid/ask differentials, also referred to as spread parameters, which 
establish the maximum permissible width between a Market-Maker's bid 
and offer in a series in an appointed class. The proposal is 
substantively identical to Miami International Securities Exchange, LLC 
(``MIAX'') Rules 603(b)(4) and (5).
Background on Market-Maker Quoting Obligations
    Exchange Rule 5.51 sets forth Market-Maker Obligations on the 
Exchange. Rule 5.51(a)(1) requires that, ordinarily, a Market-Maker 
must during the trading day maintain a continuous two-sided market in 
each of its appointed classes, pursuant to Rule 5.52(d). Rule 5.52(d) 
requires a Market-Maker to enter continuous electronic bids and offers 
(in accordance with the requirements in Rules 5.51 and 5.52). Given 
this, a Market-Maker is generally obligated to comply with all 
requirements provided in Exchange Rules 5.51 and 5.52.
    Exchange Rule 5.52(c) provides for the requirements of two-sided 
quotes. Specifically, Rule 5.52(c) currently provides that a Market-
Maker that enters a bid (offer) on the Exchange in a series in an 
appointed class must enter an offer (bid). Currently, Market-Makers on 
the Exchange are not subject to bid/ask differentials, meaning that the 
requirement for a two-sided market can be set with a quote that is very 
wide. The Exchange now proposes to adopt new provisions under Rule 
5.52(c) to set forth the bid/ask differential requirements for such 
two-sided quotes.
Proposed Bid/Ask Differential Requirements
    The Exchange proposes to add to Exchange Rule 5.52(c) that the bid/
ask differential of a Market-Maker's electronic quotes may not exceed 
$5 regardless of the Market-Maker's bid. For purposes of measuring 
compliance with the bid/ask differential requirement, the Exchange will 
consider the aggregate of all quotes entered by a Market-Maker (i.e., 
at the Trading Permit Holder (``TPH'') firm level) across all Executing 
Firm IDs (``EFIDs'') used by that Market-Maker in a particular option 
series or class. For example, if a Market-Maker TPH quotes using 
multiple EFIDs in the same series, with EFID A quoting $0 bid at $10 
offer and EFID B quoting $5 bid at $15 offer, the Exchange would 
measure the bid/ask differential based on the firm's aggregate quote of 
$5 bid at $10 offer, resulting in a $5 width that satisfies the 
requirement.
    Additionally, the Exchange clarifies that a bid of zero or no bid 
is a valid bid for purposes of the two-sided market requirement and the 
bid/ask differential calculation. Using the example above, EFID A's 
quote of a $10 offer (and no bid) would result in a $10 width, as no 
bid is equivalent to a bid of $0. However, when aggregated with EFID 
B's quote of $5 bid at $15 offer, the Market-Maker firm's aggregate 
quote would be $5 bid at $10 offer, satisfying the $5 differential 
requirement.
Proposed Exceptions
    The Exchange also proposes to adopt certain exceptions to the bid/
ask differential requirements under proposed Rules 5.52(c)(1) and (2).
    Proposed Rule 5.52(c)(1) would provide that the Exchange may 
establish bid/ask differentials other than the foregoing for one or 
more series or classes of options. As proposed, the Exchange would have 
flexibility to establish bid/ask differential in excess of $5 where 
appropriate for a particular options series or class. The Exchange 
notes that MIAX has exercised similar discretion to establish wider 
bid/ask differentials tailored to specific market conditions.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ For example, MIAX has established bid/ask differentials for 
various options series or classes based on factors such as the price 
of the underlying security and market characteristics. See MIAX 
Options Exchange Regulatory Circular 2025-44 at 
MIAX_Options_RC_2025_44.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed Rule 5.52(c)(2) would provide that the bid/ask 
differentials shall not apply to in-the-money series where the national 
best bid and offer (``NBBO'') for the underlying security is wider than 
the differentials set forth above. For such series, the bid/ask 
differentials may be as wide as the spread between the NBBO in the 
underlying security.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with 
the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to the 
Exchange and, in particular, the requirements of Section 6(b) of the 
Act.\4\ Specifically, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is 
consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) \5\ 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) \6\ requirement that the rules of 
an exchange not be designed to permit unfair discrimination between 
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \6\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that establishing bid/ask differential 
requirements for Market-Maker quotes promotes just and equitable 
principles of trade and removes impediments to and perfects the 
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system. The 
Exchange believes the proposed bid/ask differentials will enhance the 
quality of markets on the Exchange by requiring that Market-Makers 
maintain reasonably tight markets when fulfilling their continuous 
quoting obligations. Currently, Market-Makers may satisfy their two-
sided quoting obligations with quotes that are excessively wide, which 
may not provide meaningful liquidity to market participants. By 
establishing a general maximum permissible width of $5 between a 
Market-Maker's bid and offer, the Exchange believes the proposal will 
cause Market-Makers to submit quotes that are more likely to facilitate 
price discovery and execution opportunities for investors.
    The Exchange believes the proposed $5 bid/ask differential as the 
general maximum is reasonable and appropriate. The differential is 
sufficiently wide to accommodate normal market conditions and 
volatility while preventing Market-Makers from entering quotes that are 
so wide as to provide no meaningful liquidity. The Exchange notes that 
the proposal is substantively identical to MIAX Rules 603(b)(4) and 
(5).
    The Exchange believes that measuring compliance with the bid/ask 
differential requirement at the TPH firm level (i.e., aggregating 
quotes across all EFIDs used

[[Page 6698]]

by a Market-Maker in a particular series) is consistent with the 
protection of investors and the public interest. This approach 
recognizes the operational reality that Market-Maker firms often 
utilize multiple EFIDs for legitimate business purposes, such as 
managing different trading strategies or order flow types. The Exchange 
believes measuring compliance with the bid/ask differential requirement 
at the firm level more accurately reflects the Market-Maker's overall 
market in a series, rather than evaluating each EFID in isolation. This 
aggregation approach appropriately assesses whether the Market-Maker is 
providing a meaningful two-sided market to investors, as the firm's 
combined quotes across all EFIDs represent the actual liquidity 
available from that Market-Maker. This approach is also consistent with 
how the Exchange measures compliance with other Market-Maker 
obligations, which are assessed at the firm level rather than by 
individual EFID.
    The Exchange believes that clarifying that a bid of zero or no bid 
satisfies the two-sided quotation requirement promotes regulatory 
clarity and removes impediments to and perfects the mechanism of a free 
and open market. The Exchange believes this clarification will provide 
Market-Makers with additional understanding of their obligations and 
thus their ability to comply with the rule in a straightforward manner 
without being penalized for quoting markets that accurately reflect 
economic reality. By permitting zero or no bids to be considered a bid 
for purposes of determining compliance with quoting obligations, the 
Exchange believes the proposed rule change imposes a meaningful bid/ask 
differential requirement (measured in the aggregate across all EFIDs 
used by a Market-Maker in a series), that requires Market-Makers 
provide two-sided markets while providing Market-Makers with 
flexibility to quote in a manner that reflects then-current market 
conditions, thereby facilitating fair and efficient price discovery.
    The Exchange believes that proposed Rule 5.52(c)(1), which provides 
the Exchange with the ability to establish bid/ask differentials other 
than $5 for one or more series or classes of options, is reasonable and 
promotes just and equitable principles of trade. This flexibility 
allows the Exchange to tailor bid/ask differential requirements to the 
specific characteristics of particular options series or classes, such 
as volatility levels, liquidity profiles, underlying security 
characteristics, or other relevant factors. For example, certain 
options classes may warrant narrower bid/ask differentials to enhance 
market quality, while wider differentials may be appropriate in others 
to account for unique risk or liquidity characteristics. This 
discretion enables the Exchange to respond to evolving market 
conditions and impose bid/ask differential requirements that are 
appropriate for different product types. The Exchange notes it will 
announce differentials, including any changes, to TPHs pursuant to Rule 
1.5, providing transparency and notice of the applicable requirements. 
This approach is substantively identical to the flexibility provided to 
MIAX under MIAX Rules 603(b)(4) and (5).
    The Exchange believes the exception under proposed Rule 5.52(c)(2) 
for in-the-money series where the underlying security market is wider 
than the applicable bid/ask differential is appropriate because it 
recognizes that options pricing is inherently tied to the pricing of 
the underlying security. When the NBBO in the underlying security is 
wider than the bid/ask differential required for the option, it would 
be unreasonable to require Market-Makers to maintain tighter markets in 
the option than exist in the underlying security itself. The Exchange 
believes this proposed exception is reasonable and appropriate to avoid 
not placing Market-Makers in the untenable position of being required 
to quote options more tightly than the securities on which those 
options are based, which could expose Market-Makers to undue risk and 
potentially discourage participation in market making. By allowing the 
bid/ask differential to be as wide as the NBBO in the underlying 
security for such series, the proposal appropriately balances the goal 
of maintaining tight markets with the practical realities of options 
pricing.
    The Exchange notes that the proposed exceptions are substantively 
identical to those in MIAX Rules 603(b)(4) and (5), further 
demonstrating that the proposal is consistent with the Act.
    For the foregoing reasons, the Exchange believes the proposal is 
consistent with the Act.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will 
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate 
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange does not 
believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on 
intramarket competition that is not necessary or appropriate in 
furtherance of the purposes of the Act because the proposed bid/ask 
differential requirements will apply uniformly to all Market-Makers on 
the Exchange. All Market-Makers will be subject to the same bid/ask 
differential requirements in all classes.
    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will 
impose any burden on intermarket competition that is not necessary or 
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as the proposal 
is substantively identical to MIAX Rules 603(b)(4) and (5). By adopting 
bid/ask differential requirements consistent with those of another 
options exchange, Market-Makers on the Exchange will be subject to the 
same bid/ask differential requirements as market-makers on another 
market.
    For the foregoing reasons, the Exchange does not believe the 
proposed rule change will impose 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 written comments on the 
proposed rule change.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i) 
significantly affect the protection of investors or the public 
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii) 
become operative prior to 30 days from the date on which it was filed, 
or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, if consistent 
with the protection of investors and the public interest, the proposed 
rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) 
of the Act \7\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \8\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6) 
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission 
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along 
with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at 
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed 
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. 
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \9\ normally 
does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the 
filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii),\10\ the Commission 
may designate a shorter

[[Page 6699]]

time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and 
the public interest. The Exchange has asked the Commission to waive the 
30-day operative delay so that the proposal may become operative 
immediately upon filing. According to the Exchange, waiver of the 
operative delay would allow the Exchange to enhance market quality 
without delay by imposing bid/ask differential requirements on Market-
Makers that will result in tighter markets. In addition, the proposed 
requirements are substantively identical to the rules of another 
exchange. For the foregoing reasons, the Commission believes that the 
proposed rule change presents no novel issues and that waiver of the 
30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors 
and the public interest. Accordingly, the Commission hereby waives the 
30-day operative delay and designates the proposal operative upon 
filing.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \10\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \11\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay, 
the Commission has also considered the proposed rule's impact on 
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 shall institute proceedings under 
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \12\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed 
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 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#0173746d642c626e6c6c646f7572417264622f666e77"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="4133342d246c222e2c2c242f3532013224226f262e37">[email&#160;protected]</span></a>. Please include 
file number SR-CBOE-2026-013 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-CBOE-2026-013. 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-CBOE-2026-013 and should be submitted on 
or before March 5, 2026.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, 
pursuant to delegated authority.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12) and (59).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2026-02798 Filed 2-11-26; 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 12, 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.