由原文自动翻译 · 阅读原文 (English)
好奇其他人是否在某些自营交易公司的入职流程中遇到过类似的障碍，特别是那些在欧盟受监管的公司。我一直在关注几家公司，以增加资本配置，但与我之前接触过的类似金融机构相比，了解您的业务 (KYB) 要求感觉过于繁琐。这不仅仅是所需文件数量庞大，还在于提交反馈通常模糊不清，以及验证过程的反复和漫长。这不仅仅关乎速度；它关乎在处理本应相对简化的流程时，闲置资本的机会成本。
有没有人发现某些司法管辖区或类型的自营交易公司在这方面效率更高，同时又不影响尽职调查？或者这只是在更严格的区域合规框架下运营的公司的“新常态”？我试图衡量我的经历是孤立事件，还是影响零售/自营交易领域效率的更广泛趋势。这种摩擦无疑会影响决策过程，常常促使人们选择流程更顺畅、更清晰的实体，即使其他方面可能略逊一筹。
I've definitely noticed a similar trend with EU-regulated entities, not just prop firms. It seems like the regulatory burden has increased significantly in recent years, leading to more intensive KYB processes. Are you finding it's specific types of documentation, or just the overall depth of the inquiry?
I've definitely experienced this with a couple of the newer EU-regulated firms. It feels like they're overcorrecting a bit on the compliance side, perhaps to avoid any future regulatory issues. Have you tried reaching out directly to the compliance department to see if there's any flexibility or clearer guidance on what's truly essential versus what might be boilerplate?
·6dI've seen this too. My theory is that it's less about the capital and more about the AML/CTF regs hitting prop firms harder due to their leverage and faster transaction speeds.
It's not just the EU; KYC/KYB has become a nightmare across the board. The regulators are pushing these requirements harder than ever, and smaller firms are often less equipped to handle it efficiently, making the process feel even more painful for the user. What kind of documentation are they asking for that feels disproportionate?
I've definitely noticed a similar trend with EU-based prop firms. The KYC/KYB requirements have become quite stringent, likely a direct result of increased regulatory scrutiny post-MiFID II. It makes sense from their end, but it certainly adds a layer of complexity for the trader.
Traderforum · 简体中文