ESMA_QA_2777
Topic
EU-CCPs
16/02/2026
Subject Matter
AAR representativeness obligation
Question
When and how should a counterparty comply with the representativeness obligation and subsequent reporting when it reaches the EUR 6 billion threshold for the first time?
Level 1 Regulation
Regulation 648/2012 - OTC derivatives, central counterparties and trade repositories (EMIR) - CCPs
ESMA_QA_2776
Topic
EU-CCPs
16/02/2026
Subject Matter
AAR representativeness obligation
Question
Are counterparties immediately relieved from the representativeness obligation, including reporting, when they no longer meet the EUR 6 billion threshold set out under Article 7a(4) of EMIR?
Level 1 Regulation
Regulation 648/2012 - OTC derivatives, central counterparties and trade repositories (EMIR) - CCPs
ESMA_QA_2775
Topic
Alternative Performance Measures (APM)
16/02/2026
Subject Matter
Interaction of the APM Guidelines with IFRS 18 Presentation and Disclosure in Financial Statements; APM Guidelines and paragraphs 117 to 125 of IFRS 18
Question
How should an issuer present alternative performance measures in light of the IFRS 18 Presentation and Disclosures in Financial Statements? Which are the main differences between the scope and requirements of the APM Guidelines and IFRS 18?
Level 1 Regulation
Transparency Directive (TD) Directive 2004/109/EC
ESMA_QA_2770
Topic
Costs and fees
12/02/2026
Subject Matter
interpretation of the condition "... as long as this would be in the investor’s best interest (i.e. it would result in the investor paying less fees)."
Question
May I ask you for further clarification of your answer to ESMA_QA_774.

Q1 :
The example in your answer shows the very specific example of deducting the performance fee from excess
performance before calculating the performance fee. The example is not the the normal calculation described
in the first bullet point where the performance fee is not deducted from excess performance for calculating
the performance fee. Correct?

Q2:
The normal calculation described in the first bullet point where the performance fee is not deducted from
excess performance for calculating the performance fee means that also a possible performance fee accrued
until the day before (D-1) is not deducted from excess performance because otherwise the mathematical
incorrectness which I described in my question still exists for the current performance fee calculation period
(usually the fiscal year of the fund) with the false result just not including the false effect for the day of
calculation (D). Correct?

Q3
In your answer you formulated the example where the performance fee is deducted from excess performance
for the calculation of the performance fee as follows:
EXAMPLE: According to the prospectus, the Management Company will receive a performance fee, equivalent
to 9% of the positive net earnings of the fund.
However, as you showed in your mathematical expression the actual, resulting performance fee is not 9% but
8,26%. As I mentioned in my question normal business as well as legal understanding of "x% of something"
always means that the result of x% is not deducted from the something before calculating the "final" x%.
Wouldn't the a.m. wording of the example be the right description for the performance fee calculation
without deducting the performance fee from the earnings before calculating it; and the correct wording for
the mathematical expression you showed rather be for example the Management Company will receive a
performance fee, equivalent to 9% of the positive net earnings of the fund after that performance fee is
deducted from the net earnings so that the actual performance fee is 8,26%?
Level 1 Regulation
Undertakings for Collective Investment in Transferable Securities Directive (UCITS) Directive 2009/65/EC
ESMA_QA_2769
Topic
Market abuse in crypto-asset market
12/02/2026
Subject Matter
Personal scope of persons professionally arranging or executing transactions under MiCA
Question
What entities should be considered as Persons Professionally Arranging or Executing Transactions (PPAETs) for the obligation to prevent, detect and report market abuse or attempted market abuse under Article 92(1) of MiCA?
Level 1 Regulation
MiCA