4.4 Confirmation

, ,
1

Imported from previous forum

2

[ original email was from Dean Kauffman - dean.kauffman@tradeweb.com ]
I’ve communicated this to the GTC some months back, but as firms convert to 4.4 the question comes up again and again. In the new Confirmation message there are two repeating groups marked "required’ in the spec in error: NoUnderlyings(711) and NoCapacities(862) are inappropriate or understood respectively in most vanilla trades and should be treated as “optional”.

3

I’ve communicated this to the GTC some months back, but as firms convert
to 4.4 the question comes up again and again. In the new Confirmation
message there are two repeating groups marked "required’ in the spec in
error: NoUnderlyings(711) and NoCapacities(862) are inappropriate or
understood respectively in most vanilla trades and should be treated as
“optional”.

I would like to rise this issue in light of best practices. NoUnderlyings (tag 711) and NoLegs (555) should be treated as optional. We have a choice of either specifying value zero to stay compliant or omit the field. The later means risking non compliance with FIX specs. Please comment.

4

I’ve communicated this to the GTC some months back, but as firms
convert to 4.4 the question comes up again and again. In the new
Confirmation message there are two repeating groups marked "required’
in the spec in error: NoUnderlyings(711) and NoCapacities(862) are
inappropriate or understood respectively in most vanilla trades and
should be treated as “optional”.

I would like to rise this issue in light of best practices.
NoUnderlyings (tag 711) and NoLegs (555) should be treated as optional.
We have a choice of either specifying value zero to stay compliant or
omit the field. The later means risking non compliance with FIX specs.
Please comment.

The GTC has recognized this error. It is an error in the specification for 4.4 and above. With the up coming 5.0 SP2 release this will be remedied. An errata of the Repository will be issued for earlier release after release of 5.0 SP2.

5

I’ve communicated this to the GTC some months back, but as firms
convert to 4.4 the question comes up again and again. In the new
Confirmation message there are two repeating groups marked
"required’ in the spec in error: NoUnderlyings(711) and
NoCapacities(862) are inappropriate or understood respectively in
most vanilla trades and should be treated as “optional”.

I would like to rise this issue in light of best practices.
NoUnderlyings (tag 711) and NoLegs (555) should be treated as
optional. We have a choice of either specifying value zero to stay
compliant or omit the field. The later means risking non compliance
with FIX specs. Please comment.

The GTC has recognized this error. It is an error in the specification
for 4.4 and above. With the up coming 5.0 SP2 release this will be
remedied. An errata of the Repository will be issued for earlier release
after release of 5.0 SP2.
Thank you Lisa:
Just to clarify, the two workarounds for confirm are non compliant with 4.4 specs for instruments that neither have underlyings nor legs:

  • Omitting tags NoUnderlyings, NoLegs - as these fields are required;
  • Specifying value zero in them - as type of these fields is “NumInGroup”, which requires positive value (greater than zero);
    The best approach seems to be omitting fields representing counters of repeated groups. This will also preserve consistency.