View source for Financial instrument

{{a|mifid2|{{image|Stradivarius|jpg|}}}}{{d|Financial instrument|/fɪˈnanʃ(ə)l ˈɪnstrʊm(ə)nt/|n|}}

Colloquially, a contract creating financial liabilities between two parties. It can, but need not, be [[negotiable]], but its main feature — its ''[[sine qua non]]'' — is that it cannot be [[Issuance|created]], [[paying agent|maintained]], [[investment manager|managed]], [[Custody|looked after]], [[Broker-dealer|transferred]], [[Securitisation|monetised]] or [[Redemption|redeemed]] — it cannot move or breathe, in other words — except through the [[Agency problem|agency]] of someone who will deduct a fee from the proceeds of your investment for the privilege. 
==MiFID==
A whole world of [[tedium]] under [[MiFID II]]. Defined, as “those instruments specified in Section C of Annex I” which are as follows —
{{quote|{{financial instruments}}}}
===“[[Derivatives]]”, “[[transferable securities]]”, “[[securitised derivatives]]”, “[[structured finance products]]”...===
Step this way for a one-way trip down an open manhole. The definitions aren’t “disjunctive”: something that is a [[transferable security]] can also be a [[money market instrument]], a unit in [[collective investment scheme]]. Alas, a “[[derivative]]”, in MiFID speak, is restricted to those countenanced in sections 4-10, but that may not be the end of the matter:

{{quote|{{derivativecontractdefinition}}}}

Details fiends will note a rather winsome circularity here, for each of the limbs (other than “financial [[Contract for differences|contracts for differences]]”) employs the expression  “[[derivative contract]]”, being the very one it purports to describe.  

Elsewhere — in Article 2(7) of [[EMIR]] — the Commission speaks of “[[OTC derivative]]s” or “[[OTC derivative contract]]s” — to distinguish them from “[[exchange-traded derivatives]]”, which it defines as:
{{quote|a [[derivative contract]] the execution of which does not take place on a [[regulated market]] as within the meaning of Article {{mifid2prov|4(1)}}(14) of [[MiFID]] or on a third-country market considered as equivalent to a [[regulated market]] in accordance with Article {{mifid2prov|19(6)}} of [[MiFID]]}}

The implication here is that those taking place on a [[trading venue]] (such as an [[OTF]] or [[MTF]]) which is not a [[regulated market]] nonetheless count as [[OTC derivative]]s. But in any weather, this leaves the question of [[Asset-backed security|asset-backed]] securities unaddressed. Could something that at first glance falls ''outside'' the scope of paras 4-10, but on closer inspection may also falls ''within'' it — say, a [[transferable security]] with an embedded derivative, like a [[credit-linked note]] or even a plain old [[Repackaging programme|repackaging]], for example — count as a “[[derivative contract]]”? [[European Commission]] draftspersons are sometimes cavalier with words you wish they’d been more careful about, and this is such a time. Unintended consequences hover over either interpretation. 

You may be minded, as the [[JC]] was, once, to wonder whether a these may qualify as a “[[Securitised derivative|''securitised'' derivative]]”, a “[[structured finance product]]” or a “[[Commodity derivatives|commodity derivative]]” — all legislative terms in the [[MiFID]]/[[MiFIR]]/[[EMIR]] memeplex. Proceed only if you are unusually tolerant to tension headaches, or have a lot of time to kill on a wet afternoon. For as best we can make out:

{{Quote|‘[[commodity derivatives]]’ means those [[financial instrument]]s defined in point (44)(c) of Article 4(1) of [[MiFID]]; which relate to a commodity or an underlying referred to in Section C(10) of Annex I<ref>“Options, futures, swaps, forward rate agreements and any other derivative contracts relating to climatic variables, freight rates or inflation rates or other official economic statistics that must be settled in cash or may be settled in cash at the option of one of the parties other than by reason of default or other termination event, as well as any other derivative contracts relating to assets, rights, obligations, indices and measures not otherwise mentioned in this Section, which have the characteristics of other derivative financial instruments, having regard to whether, inter alia, they are traded on a regulated market, OTF, or an MTF;”</ref> to [[MiFID]]; or in points (5), (6), (7) and (10) of Section C of Annex I thereto;}}

Which means securities, such as certificates, do qualify as ''commodity'' derivatives ''if they relate to a commodity'', but emissions (and non-commodity underliers) do not. We know this because even the [[BaFin|BaFIN]] thinks this.<ref>See the [https://www.bafin.de/EN/Aufsicht/BoersenMaerkte/Derivate/PositionslimitsWarenderivate/positionslimits_warenderivate_artikel_en.html BaFIN on position limits.]</ref>  Fair enough: non-commodities aren't commodities, but there appears to be no equivalent widening of non-commodity derivatives to include funded, asset-backed or securitised instruments.

===“...except for wholesale energy products traded on an OTF that must be physically settled”===
This curious exception to the physically-settled commodity derivatives class in point (6) is known elsewhere as the “[[REMIT carve-out]]”, and is dealt with in some depth [https://emissions-euets.com/internal-electricity-market-glossary/652-remit-carve-out here] by our friends at {{plainlink|https://emissions-euets.com|Emissions-EUETS.com}} — an excellent site you must explore if you haven’t already. REMIT is Regulation No 1227/2011 on the integrity and transparency of the wholesale energy markets.

In any case, but for that odd exception for wholesale gas and power traded on an OTF — which is a ''non''-non-discretionary venue not qualifying as a [[regulated market]] or an [[MTF]], so chapeau for the multi-dimensional negative there and note this is a very limited carve-out pertaining to wholesale participants in the gas and power industry — [[Exchange-traded products|exchange-traded]] commodity futures and options ''are'' in scope for MiFID, even where physically settled. Which we think makes sense: it would be arbitrary indeed to exclude a class of exchange-traded derivatives just because of their settlement method, when most of the “[[regulatey]]” things about them — the risk, the market infrastructure, the consumer protection requirements, the capital and solvency issues for clearers and settlers — are exactly the same.

===What ''isn’t'' a {{t|MiFID}} financial instrument===
A good place to look (if your interest level counts as “fiendish”) is the snappily titled ''Commission Delegated Regulation {{eureg|2017|565|EU}} of 25 April 2016 supplementing Directive {{eudirective|2014|65|EU}} of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards organisational requirements and operating conditions for investment firms and defined terms for the purposes of that Directive''.

'''[[Spot FX]]''' isn’t: At any rate, it makes clear, at Article 10, that [[Spot FX]] is not a financial instrument.
{{Bonds listed}}
{{sa}}
*[[Agency problem]]
*[[Best execution]]
*[[AIFMD]] and {{aifmdprov|financial instrument}} as used thereunder.
{{ref}}