Ralf Elsas-Nicolle MAR Article 17 Analytics

Instant lookup

Am I subject to MAR?

Enter a firm name or LEI. The public answer reports the Article 17 classification: identified, review, out of scope, or excluded.

Start typing to check the current Article 17 classification for a firm.

Loading issuer scope index.

Selecting a matching firm opens the instrument access window. Classification is public; detailed issuer files require double opt-in.

EU Market Abuse Regulation · Article 17 scope

Research-grade issuer and instrument metadata for MAR scope analysis.

A research dashboard built from ESMA FIRDS and GLEIF reference data, designed for academic finance, legal tech, and market transparency work.

Snapshot run date: 2026-06-03 Exported: Jun 03, 2026, 09:42 AM UTC Double opt-in for detailed profiles Non-commercial research use

Global Scope Dashboard

Precomputed coverage metrics for strictly identified Article 17 issuers only. Non-strict identifier assessments remain available in the Article 17 filter view.

Identified Article 17 Issuers
11,205
Distinct LEIs passing active legal-entity, public-sector, and strict stock/bond Article 17 filters.

Stock Scope

Strict identified Article 17 issuers only; stocks are separated from equity-linked certificates and structured products.

Stock ISINs
6,684
Distinct active ordinary/preference stock ISINs (CFI ES/EP).
Stock Issuers
6,006
Distinct LEIs with at least one stock ISIN.
Stock Venues
176
Unique MIC venues for stocks.
Equity-Linked / Structured
174,197
68 issuers; separated from stocks.

Bond Scope

Strict identified Article 17 issuers only.

Bond ISINs
556,463
Distinct active bond ISINs in the Article 17 scope.
Bond Issuers
6,287
Distinct LEIs with at least one active bond ISIN.
Bond Venues
169
Unique MIC venues for active bond instruments.

Market Structure

Legal jurisdiction and instrument-type views use strictly identified Article 17 issuers. The Article 17 filter view keeps the broader identifier assessment visible.

Top OAM Jurisdictions

Top 10 strict identified Article 17 issuers by FIRDS relevant competent authority, split by active instrument mix.

Stock onlyBonds onlyStock and bonds

Article 17 Filters

Issuer-level hierarchy: public-sector exclusions first, then strict regulated-market stock/bond rows and clean EU/EEA MTF/OTF stock/bond consent, with unresolved or third-country consent cases held outside the strict count.

Strict identified738,134 active ISINs · 38.6% of issuers
11,205
Review: active venue evidence missing strict confirmation38,960 active ISINs · 48.9% of issuers
14,188
True review1,290 active ISINs · 1.3% of issuers
373
Review: SI-only signal237 active ISINs · 0.7% of issuers
200
Excluded52,207 active ISINs · 10.5% of issuers
3,050

Bond Type Breakdown

Strict identified Article 17 bond ISINs only, grouped by CFI debt-instrument type.

Structured debt without capital protection
62.9% of unique active bond ISINs
349,997
Medium-term notes
22.2% of unique active bond ISINs
123,479
Bonds
7.3% of unique active bond ISINs
40,414
Asset-backed securities
3.3% of unique active bond ISINs
18,411
Structured debt with capital protection
2.1% of unique active bond ISINs
11,940
Other debt instruments
1.1% of unique active bond ISINs
6,017
Mortgage-backed securities
0.5% of unique active bond ISINs
2,578
Money market instruments
0.4% of unique active bond ISINs
2,433

Registered Downloads

Confirmed users can download Excel workbooks for issuer and venue lists after double opt-in access. Venue downloads include ISO 10383 MIC metadata and ESMA venue-register fields where available. Downloads are provided for non-commercial private, academic, and research use.

Stocks

Bonds

Mixed and Structured

Background

Short notes on the legal setting, database coverage, data sources, and the boundary between reference metadata and inside information.

What is the Market Abuse Regulation? MAR is the EU framework for market integrity, insider information, and market abuse prevention.

Regulation (EU) No 596/2014 sets rules intended to protect market integrity across EU financial markets. Article 17 is especially relevant here because it concerns the public disclosure of inside information by issuers.

What does this database capture? It identifies current issuer-level MAR Article 17 scope signals from ESMA reference data.

The database uses ESMA FIRDS instrument and venue reference data to identify firms and issuers that currently appear to be subject to MAR Article 17 disclosure obligations. It turns instrument-level records into an issuer-level overview, separating strictly identified stock and bond issuers from review and excluded cases.

The result is a research-oriented map of current Article 17 issuer scope: who the issuer is, which stock or bond instruments support the classification, which OAM/competent-authority jurisdiction is indicated by ESMA, and which cases require further legal or source review. It is not a substitute for legal advice or a formal regulatory determination.

How to identify issuers subject to MAR? We use regulated-market stock/bond admission and clean EU/EEA MTF/OTF stock/bond consent as strict indicators.

The strict Article 17 identifier starts from active ESMA FIRDS instrument-venue rows and then applies the rule to stock and bond branches only. Stocks are ordinary and preference shares identified by CFI prefixes ES and EP; equity-linked certificates, structured products, and depositary receipts are kept separate. A non-exempt issuer is strictly identified when it has active regulated-market stock or bond evidence.

Clean EU/EEA MTF/OTF-only stock or bond cases can also enter the strict count when FIRDS shows issuer request or issuer approval evidence. In RTS 23 reference data this appears through fields such as IssrReq and the issuer approval date. Third-country MTF/OTF-only issuer-request cases are classified separately and excluded from the strict MAR-obligated set unless there is independent clean disclosure or OAM evidence.

Where do issuers have to publish disclosures? Disclosure jurisdiction is proxied by the FIRDS relevant competent authority, not by GLEIF legal domicile.

MAR disclosure routing is tied to the competent authority framework. For this website, the operational disclosure jurisdiction is therefore based on the ESMA FIRDS relevant competent authority field, RlvntCmptntAuthrty. This is the authority identifier used in the reference-data layer and is the public proxy used for OAM disclosure routing in the strict issuer views.

This is different from the GLEIF legal jurisdiction. GLEIF tells us where the legal entity is incorporated or registered; the competent-authority/OAM signal tells us where market disclosures are expected to be published. For review or excluded records, RlvntCmptntAuthrty is still an instrument reference-data signal rather than a definitive OAM assignment. The downloadable issuer files keep both fields so users can compare legal domicile with disclosure jurisdiction.

What are the sources for the data? The reference layer is based on ESMA FIRDS instrument data and GLEIF LEI issuer identity records.

ESMA FIRDS provides financial-instrument reference files used to identify active instruments and trading venues. GLEIF LEI records enrich issuer identity, legal name, jurisdiction, and registration status. The website presents derived scope analytics and does not expose raw regulatory files.

Issues with private/insider information disclosure Materiality thresholds are a central challenge in deciding when firm-specific information must be disclosed.

According to MAR, issuers of traded securities in the EU must disclose all private, firm-specific information that has the potential to materially affect the securities value when incorporated into the market price. Determining the threshold for materiality is one crucial challenge.

If you are interested in advice on how to determine this threshold based on a sound financial methodology, register and get in contact with us.