Annual Best Execution Disclosure 2017

CZ Capital LLP
The “Firm” or “CZ”

April 2018

Information on the Top Five Execution Venues: Trading Volumes and Quality Obtained

CZ Capital LLP or ‘the Firm’ is an investment manager providing portfolio management services, and reception and transmission services, for its clients. Under MIFID II, the Firm is required to adhere to a best execution policy, and in support of that policy, publish on its website the top five execution trading venues by trading volume on an annual basis. Trading venues include regulated markets, Multilateral Trading Facilities (MTFs), Organised Trading Facilities (OTFs), Systematic Internalisers (SI), market makers or other liquidity providers or entities that perform a similar function in a third country.

CZ will determine the strategy for placing orders for execution in the market, taking into account a number of execution factors. These may include price, speed of execution, likelihood of execution, size of order as well as other considerations. In determining the relative importance of such factors, CZ will consider each client’s objectives, the specific financial instrument to which the order relates, the execution venues and counterparties available and the prevailing market conditions. These may vary for each order, but below we have set out their typical relative importance for each asset class.

CZ places orders to be executed with approved counterparties. The list of approved counterparties is reviewed regularly and changes over time. A list of our liquidity providers is included within our Best Execution Policy. Amendments to the approved broker list will be made taking into account a number of factors including: credit worthiness of the counterparty and execution performance of the counterparty. CZ does not receive any payments, discounts, rebates or other benefits in its trading arrangements.

Below you will find a breakdown of the execution venues utilised for each class of asset traded by CZ Capital over the period.

Class of Instrument

Equities

Notification if <1 average trade per business day in the previous year

Y

Top five execution venues ranked in terms of trading volumes (descending order)

Proportion of volume traded as a percentage of total in that class

Proportion of orders executed as percentage of total in that class

Percentage of passive orders

Percentage of aggressive orders

Percentage of directed orders

JPMorgan Chase & Co
(8I5DZWZKVSZI1NUHU748)
 22.3% 6.1% N/A N/A 0.0%

UBS Limited
(REYPIEJN7XZHSUI0N355)

18.5% 12.1% N/A N/A 0.0%
Davy (J&E)
(63540061DPCBNMCGRY22)
 15.1% 9.1% N/A N/A 0.0%
Jefferies International Limited
(S5THZMDUJCTQZBTRVI98)
 10.6% 6.1% N/A N/A 0.0%
Cenkos Securities PLC
(213800ALVRC52VN3I821)
 9.5% 27.3% N/A N/A 0.0%

Class of Instrument

Contracts for difference

Notification if <1 average trade per business day in the previous year

N

Top five execution venues ranked in terms of trading volumes (descending order)

Proportion of volume traded as a percentage of total in that class

Proportion of orders executed as percentage of total in that class

Percentage of passive orders

Percentage of aggressive orders

Percentage of directed orders

JPMorgan Chase & Co
(8I5DZWZKVSZI1NUHU748)
 54.6% 57.2% N/A N/A 0.0%

UBS Limited
(REYPIEJN7XZHSUI0N355)

45.0% 41.7% N/A N/A 0.0%
Numis Securities Limited
(213800P3F4RT97WDSX47)
 0.1% 0.1% N/A N/A 0.0%
Cenkos Securities PLC
(213800ALVRC52VN3I821)
 0.1% 0.2% N/A N/A 0.0%
RBC Europe Limited
(TXDSU46SXBWIGJ8G8E98)
 0.1% 0.1% N/A N/A 0.0%

Equities and Contracts for Difference (“CFD’s”) – Execution Factors:

‘Liquid’ Equities and CFD’s – Price and cost will usually be the determining factors but other factors such as certainty of completion may take priority.

‘Illiquid’ Equities and CFD’s – Price, order size and cost will usually be the determining factors but other factors such as certainty of completion may take priority.

Class of Instrument

Contracts for difference

Notification if <1 average trade per business day in the previous year

Y

Top five execution venues ranked in terms of trading volumes (descending order)

Proportion of volume traded as a percentage of total in that class

Proportion of orders executed as percentage of total in that class

Percentage of passive orders

Percentage of aggressive orders

Percentage of directed orders

Morgan Stanley & Co. International PLC
(4PQUHN3JPFGFNF3BB653)
 77.7% 74.4% N/A N/A 0.0%

UBS Limited
(REYPIEJN7XZHSUI0N355)

22.3% 25.6% N/A N/A 0.0%

Bonds – Execution Factors:

Size of order and cost will usually be the determining factors but other factors such as execution speed or lack of venues/counterparties may take priority.

Class of Instrument

currency derivatives

Notification if <1 average trade per business day in the previous year

Y

Top five execution venues ranked in terms of trading volumes (descending order)

Proportion of volume traded as a percentage of total in that class

Proportion of orders executed as percentage of total in that class

Percentage of passive orders

Percentage of aggressive orders

Percentage of directed orders

Morgan Stanley & Co. International PLC
(4PQUHN3JPFGFNF3BB653)
 87.2% 61.4% N/A N/A 0.0%

Goldman Sachs UK Limited
(549300X7HHEXBMHJYJ80)

10.3% 15.8% N/A N/A 0.0%
UBS Limited
(REYPIEJN7XZHSUI0N355)
2.5%  22.8% N/A N/A 0.0%

Currency derivatives – Execution Factors:

Cost will usually be the determining factors but other factors such as execution speed may take priority.

Class of Instrument

currency derivatives

Notification if <1 average trade per business day in the previous year

Y

Top five execution venues ranked in terms of trading volumes (descending order)

Proportion of volume traded as a percentage of total in that class

Proportion of orders executed as percentage of total in that class

Percentage of passive orders

Percentage of aggressive orders

Percentage of directed orders

Blackrock Investment Management (UK) Limited
(549300QXP30FD81KVQ43)
 100.0% 100.0% N/A N/A 0.0%

Debt Instruments (Money Market Funds) – Execution Factors:

Cost will usually be the determining factors but other factors such as fund availability may take priority. (Analysis above includes all CZ’s MiFID, AIF and UCITS business)

Analysis of Execution

For the year ending 2017 we confirm that there were no material close links, common ownership or conflicts of interest between us and the execution venues / brokers used by the Firm. Execution venues / brokers are paid on a pre-agreed cost per transaction. In this period no changes were made to the execution venues/brokers used. We do not receive any discount, rebates or non-monetary benefits on these services. We may on occasion receive short term market colour from our execution providers. All our clients are categorised as professional clients under Article 4(1)(10) of Directive 2014/65.

The Firm may use broker Transaction Cost Analysis (TCA) reports and internal analysis to monitor the quality of execution against our best execution criteria. We conduct regular reviews of our chosen execution venues / brokers against our Order Execution Policy, and may at our discretion, remove those which we believe are no longer offering us best execution.

During the period under review, ‘price’ and ‘costs’ were the chief execution factors used in determining whether the best possible result was obtained for each transaction. However on occasion the firm may select another execution factor(s) with a view to achieving the best possible result.