|Not applicable, as there were no such CTPs available in Europe during the period to which this disclosure relates.
|A summary of the analysis and conclusions the firm draws from its detailed monitoring of the quality of execution obtained on the execution venues where it executed all client orders in the previous year
||Equities - Shares & Depositary Receipts
As part of Arabesque Asset Management Limited (“Arabesque”) analysis of best execution in relation to equities, the Firm analysed the trades during the relevant period to determine whether any of the trades were greater than 5% from the VWAP.
|An explanation of the relative importance the firm gave to the execution factors of price, costs, speed, likelihood of execution or any other consideration including qualitative factors when assessing the quality of execution
||Arabesque’s delivery of best execution is a key element in its commitment to act in the best interests of its clients, as well as being a regulatory requirement. The Firm prioritises ensuring that all sufficient steps are taken to obtain the best possible result for its clients when it executes, places or transmits orders on their behalf. This means taking into account the ‘execution factors’ such as price, costs, speed, likelihood of execution and settlement, size, nature or any other consideration relevant to the execution of the order.
The relative importance of the execution factors is judged on an order-by-order basis in line with the Firm’s industry experience and prevailing market conditions. In addition, common key factors for relevant asset classes have been identified as follows:
For small direct orders over a short period of time, the key factors are generally price, quantity based on market availability, and likelihood of execution. For larger orders executed across a period of time, the Firm additionally takes into account confidentiality, minimising the impact on the market, and slippage historically achieved on each venue.
Where transactions are executed indirectly, relevant factors are overall costs including broker fee schedules, impact and observed slippage.
The impact of implicit costs is taken into account when considering the execution strategy of orders to ensure that they are managed and do not result in an undue impact to total costs.
|A description of any close links, conflicts of interests, and common ownerships with respect to any execution venues used to execute orders
||The Firm does not have any close links, conflicts of interests or common ownerships with respect to the execution venues it uses to execute orders.
|A description of any specific arrangements with any execution venues regarding payments made or received, discounts, rebates or non-monetary benefits received
||Arabesque has not entered into any arrangements with its execution venues regarding payments made or received, discounts or non-monetary benefits that would compromise its ability to meet its obligations in regards to best execution, conflicts of interest or inducements.
The Firm has determined that it will pay for research from its own P&L and if necessary would put in place arrangements to remunerate certain firms for the receipt of such research. Additionally Arabesque may on occasion receive or provide minor non-monetary benefits from execution venues. They must be received/provided in accordance with the Firm’s Inducements policy.
|An explanation of the factors that led to a change in the list of execution venues listed in the firm’s execution policy, if such a change occurred
||The list of execution venues contained within the Best Execution policy did not change during the period under review.
|An explanation of how order execution differs according to client categorisation, where the firm treats categories of clients differently and where it may affect the order execution arrangements
||While Arabesque does take the characteristics of its clients into account when judging the relative importance of the execution factors, the Firm’s clients are exclusively professional clients and so are treated with a consistent approach.
|An explanation of whether other criteria were given precedence over immediate price and cost when executing retail client orders and how these other criteria were instrumental in delivering the best possible result in terms of the total consideration to the client
||The Firm does not execute retail client orders.
|An explanation of how the Firm has used any data or tools relating to the quality of execution, including any data published under Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2017/575
||Arabesque does not currently use data or tools relating to the quality of execution, but will utilise such data and tools as are made available in due course, particularly data published by trading venues under ‘RTS 27’.
|Where applicable, an explanation of how the investment firm has used output of a consolidated tape provider established under Article 65 of Directive 2014/65/EU.
||This is not currently applicable.