Services & customers
Sections ↑TRAction collects, enriches and submits financial firms’ regulatory-reporting data and manages feedback. It is the delegated preparation/service layer, not the receiving trade repository or approved reporting mechanism. Those roles must remain distinct.[1]
Service scope by workflow
| Workflow | Published offering | Important boundary |
|---|---|---|
| Transaction and derivatives reporting | Services marketed for regimes including MiFIR, EMIR, SFTR, ASIC and MAS reporting. | The correct regime depends on the reporting entity, product and obligation; not every trade goes to every regime.Source 1Source 4 |
| Data preparation | Extraction, transformation, enrichment and submission validation. | A correctly formatted file may still contain an economically incorrect field.Source 1 |
| Control and review | Alerts, reconciliation-related checks and review of reporting output. | Acceptance by the destination is not equivalent to complete and accurate reporting.Source 3 |
| Best-execution analysis | A separately priced analytical service. | Reporting a trade and assessing its execution quality are different tasks.Source 4 |
Derivatives reporting can require lifecycle, valuation, identifier and collateral information as well as an opening trade. A daily trading blotter is therefore not necessarily a complete source.[1]
Platforms & integrations
Sections ↑Ways trading information reaches the reporting workflow
| Route | Published examples | Data responsibility |
|---|---|---|
| Trading-platform integrations | MT4, MT5, cTrader and DXtrade are among the named integrations. | The actual account, entity and instrument mapping must be configured.Source 2 |
| Liquidity and execution technology | oneZero, PrimeXM, Tools for Brokers and FlexTrade Spark are listed. | Connection to a platform does not identify which legal entity has the reporting obligation.Source 2 |
| Other system outputs | The provider describes processing outputs from systems including Enfusion, IRESS, Currenex and Aladdin. | An accepted file output is not necessarily the same as a direct native integration.Source 2 |
| File and interface delivery | APIs and secure file-delivery arrangements form part of the service model. | Data format, completeness and correction ownership must be agreed for the particular feed.Source 1 |
The integration material also describes unique-transaction-identifier sharing through supported counterparty arrangements. An identifier links the reports concerning the same transaction; it is not simply a convenient internal reference. A reconciliation can fail when each side describes a transaction differently even though both submissions pass their individual syntax checks.[2]
Pricing & commercial terms
Sections ↑Selected public price bases
| Service | Published charge basis | Scope and exclusions |
|---|---|---|
| MiFIR | From £720 per month plus £0.03 per message. | Delegated-entity charges and other terms are separate; not an all-in price for every configuration.Source 4 |
| EMIR Basic | £720 per month plus £0.012 per message; three-month commitment. | Published sterling schedule excludes VAT.Source 5 |
| EMIR Premium | £1,200 per month; first 1,000 messages included, then £0.012 each; six-month commitment. | Additional entities and optional work can change the invoice.Source 5 |
| EMIR Assured | £2,400 per month; first 1,000 messages included, then £0.012 each; twelve-month commitment. | Includes a different review/support scope, not merely a higher message allowance.Source 5 |
| SFTR | From £600 per month plus £0.036 per transaction/collateral upload. | The billable unit differs from a simple count of trades.Source 4 |
| Best execution | £360 per month plus £0.012 per transaction/position and £2.40 per RIC per month. | Instrument identifiers and transaction volume both affect the charge.Source 4 |
Illustration using the published EMIR schedules: at 10,000 chargeable messages in a month, Basic is £840, Premium £1,308 and Assured £2,508 before VAT and extras. Basic is £720 plus 10,000 × £0.012; the other two charge only 9,000 messages after the included allowance. This compares a fixed message count, not a fixed trade count, and it does not imply that the service scopes are equivalent.[5]
Additional legal entities introduce per-LEI charges. The detailed EMIR schedule differentiates tier and counterparty category; message charges alone are not the complete cost for a multi-entity broker.[4][5]
Implementation & delivery
Sections ↑Implementation maps reporting entities, obligations, source data and submission routes. Moving to TRAction does not remove outstanding-position continuity or earlier errors; the economic record continues through a different processing arrangement.[1][6]
Operational checks provided around the reporting process
| Control | Published function | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|
| Notional checks | Alerts based on notional measures and currency. | Incorrect scale or units can create a large reporting error without an obvious file-format error.Source 3 |
| Instrument review | Weekly symbol and lot-multiplier information. | A symbol name alone is not sufficient to establish a contract’s economic size.Source 3 |
| Output feedback | Submission and correction information is returned through the reporting workflow. | The client needs visibility into what was accepted, changed or rejected.Source 3 |
| Accuracy and reconciliation services | The EMIR tiers include different frequencies and scopes of review. | More expensive tiers buy additional assurance work, not an exemption from client responsibility.Source 5 |
Support & contacts
Sections ↑Published regional contacts
The Assured EMIR schedule specifies a three-hour response on a 24/5 basis. That is not a universal Basic-tier entitlement or a promise of resolution within three hours.[5]
Permissions & service scope
Sections ↑Delegation changes who performs reporting work; it does not automatically transfer the client’s regulatory accountability. The service materials expressly distinguish TRAction from the receiving repositories and reporting mechanisms. A broker still needs to determine which of its entities and transactions are in scope and to supply information that cannot be inferred from a trading platform alone. No claim is made that purchasing a reporting package constitutes regulator approval.[1][4]
Operator & evidence
Sections ↑The privacy policy names TRAction Fintech Pty Ltd and TRAction Fintech Ltd. The regional office directory covers the UK, Australia, Singapore and Cyprus. Those disclosures support the operating identity and contact network; they do not establish that each office is a separate authorised reporting destination. Contracting entity, applicable service and data-processing role should remain explicit in a customer engagement.[7][8]
TRAction’s company overview presents it as a specialist in regulatory reporting and related operational support. The useful distinction is between delegated preparation, acceptance feedback, reconciliation and independent judgement about a legal obligation. The provider can support the first three without becoming the regulator that determines the fourth.[9]
- Operator
- TRAction Fintech Pty Ltd and TRAction Fintech Ltd; engagement-specific contracting entity
- Service scope
- TRAction prepares and manages regulatory-reporting workflows for financial firms. This profile covers platform integrations, public EMIR and other price bases, control tools, regional contacts and the boundary between delegation and regulatory responsibility.
- Customer types
- Brokers; Investment firms; Derivatives counterparties; Financial institutions
- Delivery
- Managed service; API
- Pricing publication
- Public pricing
- Platforms
- TRAction Control
- Implementation
- Reporting scope, entity identifiers, source-data delivery, transformation and exception management are configured for the engagement.
- Support
- Regional contact routes are published. Response commitments and review frequency depend on the selected service tier.
- Permissions and regulatory scope
- Delegated reporting agent, not the receiving trade repository or approved reporting mechanism. Client obligations are not automatically transferred by outsourcing.
Provider metadata checked 20 Oct 2026Source 1Source 4Source 8Source 7
Additional Information
Sections ↑Budget from reportable events, not an assumed one-message-per-trade rule. Amendments, corrections and other lifecycle submissions can change the workload even when trade counts are unchanged.[1][4]
The practical test of a reporting arrangement is whether the client can reconstruct the submitted economic record and explain a discrepancy. Format validation is necessary, but it is not the end of the control process. TRAction Control’s notional, multiplier and feedback functions are relevant precisely because a record can look technically valid while representing the wrong exposure.[3]
Sources & further reading
- Delegated reporting services and processing workflow TRAction · Accessed 20 Oct 2026
- Trading-platform and data integrations TRAction · Accessed 20 Oct 2026
- TRAction Control monitoring and review tools TRAction · Accessed 20 Oct 2026
- Published reporting and best-execution prices TRAction · Accessed 20 Oct 2026
- EMIR derivatives reporting pricing schedule TRAction · Accessed 20 Oct 2026
- Transitioning a reporting arrangement to TRAction TRAction · Accessed 20 Oct 2026
- TRAction privacy policy and entities TRAction · Accessed 20 Oct 2026
- TRAction offices and regional contact numbers TRAction · Accessed 20 Oct 2026
- TRAction company and service overview TRAction · Accessed 20 Oct 2026
This profile reports dated public information, including provider-published services and terms. It does not independently test or guarantee service delivery, integrations or performance. Inclusion is not an endorsement. Permissions and protections apply only to the named legal entity, service and client category; check the current official records and your contract.