SEBI allows Jane Street to trade days after it transfers ₹4,843.6 crore to escrow account
'In terms of para 62.11 of interim order in the matter of index manipulation by Jane Street group dated July 3, 2025 [interim order], upon compliance with the directions in clause 62.1 (creation of escrow account with a lien marked in favour of SEBI, for an amount of ₹4,843,57,70,168/ the directions stipulated in clauses 62.2, 62.3, 62.4, 62.5, 62.7, 62.8 and 62.10 of the interim order shall cease to apply,' SEBI said in its statement.
Jane Street was banned from dealing in the securities market and debits in bank accounts frozen in addition to being ordered to transfer the penalty into an escrow account, after the capital markets regulator found it guilty of manipulating the stock and derivative markets. It had been pumping up Bank Nifty in the cash market while simultaneously building put option positions which was about seven times the size of the cash market position. The put options were later dumped on the second part of the day, pulling the index down, resulting in profit. In the interim order, SEBI clarified that investigation would be under way.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
2 hours ago
- Mint
Jane Street working on its defense against stock market manipulation allegations from Sebi, here's how
Jane Street Group LLC is expected to argue that its controversial Indian options trades were a response to outsized demand from retail investors, people familiar with the matter said. The trading giant has been working on its defense against market manipulation allegations from the Securities and Exchange Board of India. The regulator in early July alleged Jane Street had taken large positions that artificially influenced prices in the country's stock and futures markets, moving them in favor of its options bets on multiple days. Jane Street said on Monday it has sought an extension to respond to the interim order. Last week, SEBI lifted Jane Street's temporary trading ban after the firm deposited 48.4 billion rupees ($560 million) in alleged 'unlawful gains' into an escrow account. A 105-page order from SEBI detailing its preliminary findings devoted a long section to Jane Street's trading activity on Jan. 17, 2024, which was the firm's most profitable day over a roughly two-year period that the regulator scrutinized. The New York-based firm is expected to argue it was eager to facilitate options bets from the country's retail investors, knowing it would be largely unhedged, said the people familiar with the matter, who asked not to be identified discussing private information. The firm hedged less in India than in other markets and spread out its hedging activity over multiple hours on that day in January 2024 to reduce its market impact, the people said it is likely to explain. On that morning, the NSE Nifty Bank Index dropped 3.2% at the open and fell further during the day. SEBI alleged that Jane Street aggressively bought the index's constituent stocks in the cash and futures markets to manipulate the gauge's intraday levels, then reversed the trades in the afternoon to profit from a much larger bearish index options position. Jane Street is expected to say that high retail demand for options on that index was a key driver behind its trading in the morning, according to the people familiar with the matter. The firm will likely argue that individual traders bought about $4 billion worth of the gauge's stocks using options in the first half hour of trading, and that Jane Street — which was acting as a market maker — facilitated about $1 billion of that demand. Those numbers are based on net delta positions, which represent the value of cash equities the options positions are equivalent to when taking into account the derivatives' sensitivity to the underlying assets' price moves. SEBI's order said Jane Street's share purchases on that January 2024 morning represented between approximately 16% and 25% of the trading turnover for 10 of the 12 Nifty Bank Index stocks, making the firm by far the single largest net buyer. As Jane Street sold call options and bought puts, it amassed a bearish position that represented 7.3 times the size of its long cash and futures bets, according to the regulator. Jane Street is expected to argue that the high retail options demand created a gap between prices implied by the options and those reflected by the shares, and the firm sought to close it through a standard arbitrage trade, the people familiar said. The retail demand was so large that only 10% of it could have been hedged — partial hedging being a common practice among derivatives market makers internationally, the firm is expected to say. In the afternoon, Jane Street sold the stocks over more than three hours, spreading out its hedging to protect against settlement-price uncertainty as the options were about to expire, also a typical tactic globally, the people said it will argue. SEBI did not respond to a request for comment. Retail traders' enthusiasm for options has helped turn India into the world's biggest market for listed derivatives by contracts traded, with turnover of more than 300 times that of cash equities. Global trading firms have used their capital and technological edge to profit from that large imbalance, but local investors have cumulatively incurred billions of dollars in losses, leading the regulator to crack down on the trading frenzy. Critics of Jane Street say the sheer size of its positions built up over a short time would have given the firm market-moving power, even if the trades were within regulatory limits. Alexander Gerko, the billionaire founder of rival XTX Markets Ltd., has challenged Jane Street to show that its India trading strategy was 'legit' by proving it would work better after scaling it down by a factor of a 100. 'Any 'normal' strategy works worse as it scales up, due to market impact, unless your strategy IS market impact,' he wrote in a LinkedIn post earlier this month. The regulator's interim order presented serious allegations and a 'compelling narrative,' though it is not certain that Jane Street acted inappropriately based on the initial findings, said Abhiraj Arora, a Mumbai-based partner at law firm Saraf and Partners who once worked at SEBI's surveillance and investigations department. Arora, who isn't involved in the case, said too harsh a crackdown and excessive surveillance of market makers could lead to wider bid-ask spreads, poorer trade execution and increased price swings. The Jane Street case ultimately 'serves as a significant test for India's regulatory framework and its capacity to oversee increasingly complex global trading practices,' he said. Disclaimer: This story is for educational purposes only. The views and recommendations above are those of individual analysts or broking companies, not Mint. We advise investors to check with certified experts before making any investment decisions.
News18
2 hours ago
- News18
Jane Street Seeks Extension from Sebi To Respond To Interim Order
Last Updated: Jane Street has requested more time from Sebi to respond to an interim order issued on July 3. Jane Street Group: US-based trading firm Jane Street has requested additional time from the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi) to respond to the regulator's interim order issued on July 3, according a Moneycontrol report. 'We are engaging constructively with Sebi and have sought an extension to respond to the interim order issued on July 3," the firm said in a statement as quoted by Moneycontrol. The original order had given the firm 21 days to file a response. However, the extension appears to have been requested after the deadline expired. Jane Street did not specify the duration of the extension it has sought. The trading firm was allowed to resume its activities in the market after it deposited Rs 4,844 crore in an escrow account to comply with SEBI's order. SEBI has told the exchanges, BSE and NSE, to keep a strict surveillance on Jane Street Group's future dealings and positions to ensure that they won't indulge in any kind of manipulative activity till the completion of its investigation. 'Exchanges have confirmed that they will comply with this," Sebi said in a statement on Monday. SEBI also directed Jane Street group to not make any debits in respect of assets without the prior approval of SEBI. Moreover, the market regulator directed the banks where Jane Street affiliates are holding bank accounts to ensure no debits were made without permission of SEBI, according to ET report. view comments First Published: Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Economic Times
2 hours ago
- Economic Times
Jane Street to argue that retail demand drove its India trades
Jane Street Group LLC is expected to argue that its controversial Indian options trades were a response to outsized demand from retail investors, people familiar with the matter said. ADVERTISEMENT The trading giant has been working on its defense against market manipulation allegations from the Securities and Exchange Board of India. The regulator in early July alleged Jane Street had taken large positions that artificially influenced prices in the country's stock and futures markets, moving them in favor of its options bets on multiple days. Jane Street said on Monday it has sought an extension to respond to the interim order. Last week, SEBI lifted Jane Street's temporary trading ban after the firm deposited 48.4 billion rupees ($560 million) in alleged 'unlawful gains' into an escrow account. A 105-page order from SEBI detailing its preliminary findings devoted a long section to Jane Street's trading activity on Jan. 17, 2024, which was the firm's most profitable day over a roughly two-year period that the regulator New York-based firm is expected to argue it was eager to facilitate options bets from the country's retail investors, knowing it would be largely unhedged, said the people familiar with the matter, who asked not to be identified discussing private information. The firm hedged less in India than in other markets and spread out its hedging activity over multiple hours on that day in January 2024 to reduce its market impact, the people said it is likely to explain. On that morning, the NSE Nifty Bank Index dropped 3.2% at the open and fell further during the day. SEBI alleged that Jane Street aggressively bought the index's constituent stocks in the cash and futures markets to manipulate the gauge's intraday levels, then reversed the trades in the afternoon to profit from a much larger bearish index options position. ADVERTISEMENT Jane Street is expected to say that high retail demand for options on that index was a key driver behind its trading in the morning, according to the people familiar with the matter. The firm will likely argue that individual traders bought about $4 billion worth of the gauge's stocks using options in the first half hour of trading, and that Jane Street — which was acting as a market maker — facilitated about $1 billion of that demand. Those numbers are based on net delta positions, which represent the value of cash equities the options positions are equivalent to when taking into account the derivatives' sensitivity to the underlying assets' price moves. ADVERTISEMENT SEBI's order said Jane Street's share purchases on that January 2024 morning represented between approximately 16% and 25% of the trading turnover for 10 of the 12 Nifty Bank Index stocks, making the firm by far the single largest net buyer. As Jane Street sold call options and bought puts, it amassed a bearish position that represented 7.3 times the size of its long cash and futures bets, according to the regulator. Jane Street is expected to argue that the high retail options demand created a gap between prices implied by the options and those reflected by the shares, and the firm sought to close it through a standard arbitrage trade, the people familiar said. ADVERTISEMENT The retail demand was so large that only 10% of it could have been hedged — partial hedging being a common practice among derivatives market makers internationally, the firm is expected to say. In the afternoon, Jane Street sold the stocks over more than three hours, spreading out its hedging to protect against settlement-price uncertainty as the options were about to expire, also a typical tactic globally, the people said it will argue. ADVERTISEMENT SEBI did not respond to a request for traders' enthusiasm for options has helped turn India into the world's biggest market for listed derivatives by contracts traded, with turnover of more than 300 times that of cash equities. Global trading firms have used their capital and technological edge to profit from that large imbalance, but local investors have cumulatively incurred billions of dollars in losses, leading the regulator to crack down on the trading of Jane Street say the sheer size of its positions built up over a short time would have given the firm market-moving power, even if the trades were within regulatory limits. Alexander Gerko, the billionaire founder of rival XTX Markets Ltd., has challenged Jane Street to show that its India trading strategy was 'legit' by proving it would work better after scaling it down by a factor of a 100.'Any 'normal' strategy works worse as it scales up, due to market impact, unless your strategy IS market impact,' he wrote in a LinkedIn post earlier this regulator's interim order presented serious allegations and a 'compelling narrative,' though it is not certain that Jane Street acted inappropriately based on the initial findings, said Abhiraj Arora, a Mumbai-based partner at law firm Saraf and Partners who once worked at SEBI's surveillance and investigations department. Arora, who isn't involved in the case, said too harsh a crackdown and excessive surveillance of market makers could lead to wider bid-ask spreads, poorer trade execution and increased price swings. The Jane Street case ultimately 'serves as a significant test for India's regulatory framework and its capacity to oversee increasingly complex global trading practices,' he said. (You can now subscribe to our ETMarkets WhatsApp channel)
