ഓഹരി വിപണിയിലെ അടിസ്ഥാന സൗകര്യ സ്ഥാപനങ്ങൾക്ക് (MIIs) മുൻകൂർ അനുമതിയില്ലാതെ അനുബന്ധ ബിസിനസുകളിൽ ഏർപ്പെടാൻ സെബി അവസരമൊരുക്കുന്നു. ഡാറ്റാ അനലിറ്റിക്സ്, സാങ്കേതിക സേവനങ്ങൾ എന്നിവയിൽ ശ്രദ്ധ കേന്ദ്രീകരിക്കാൻ ഇത് സഹായിക്കും. നിക്ഷേപ പരിധിയും കർശനമായ നിബന്ധനകളും പാലിച്ചുകൊണ്ട് വിപണിയിലെ പ്രവർത്തനങ്ങൾ വിപുലീകരിക്കാനാണ് പുതിയ നിർദ്ദേശം ലക്ഷ്യമിടുന്നത്.
Every trade on an Indian screen rests on a quiet layer of institutions that most investors never think about. Stock exchanges, depositories and clearing corporations, together called Market Infrastructure Institutions (MIIs), are the plumbing of our capital markets.
SEBI now wants to give the exchanges and depositories among them more room to grow. In a consultation paper issued on 22 October, the regulator proposed that they be allowed to undertake specified related activities without seeking its prior approval. Press reports describe these as businesses such as data analytics and technology services.
What SEBI has proposed?
At present, MIIs need SEBI’s permission for fund deployment and other activities, except treasury investments under a board approved policy. SEBI itself points out that a small investment in a technology platform supporting market operations faces the same approval as a large investment in an unrelated business. The new framework would open an automatic route for two kinds of activity.
The first covers work related or incidental to the core securities market role. The second covers activities similar to what an MII already does, carried out through a company regulated by another Indian financial regulator, provided SEBI has approved that activity before. Recognised clearing corporations are left out. Automatic does not mean unchecked. The money deployed in a year by an MII and its subsidiaries together cannot exceed the lower of five per cent of net worth on the previous 31 March and the regulatory minimum net worth.
Net worth after the investment must also stay at least one and a half times the prescribed minimum. Each new activity needs board approval, written procedures, ring fencing of shared resources, arm’s length use of logos and brands, and half yearly reports to SEBI. Comments are invited until 12 November 2026.
Why it matters?
Exchanges and depositories sit on some of the richest data in the country: trading patterns, settlement flows and investor holdings. They also employ deep technology talent. Much of that value is monetised narrowly today. Analytics, data products and technology services could open fresh revenue lines, reduce dependence on transaction income and help fund the upgrades that resilient markets need. Speed matters as well.
Global exchanges have long diversified into data and technology, and an approval process that treats every proposal alike makes Indian institutions slower than their peers. There is a regulatory efficiency gain too. SEBI has flagged duplication where activities run through entities already supervised by the RBI, IRDAI, IFSCA or PFRDA.
Removing that overlap frees the regulator to focus on genuine risk. For brokers, fintech firms and researchers, home grown data and technology offerings could also mean better access to quality market tools, though much will depend on pricing and terms.
The risks to watch
The difficulty is that an MII is also a first level regulator. An exchange that sells analytics is competing with private data vendors while controlling the raw data they depend on. If its own arm gets better access, faster feeds or softer scrutiny, the playing field tilts. Capital and management attention are another concern.
An institution that spreads itself across new ventures may under invest in the core systems that keep markets safe. Cyber risk grows with every new subsidiary. SEBI’s September paper already proposes extending the MII cyber security framework to subsidiaries that perform an MII activity, handle MII data or share its infrastructure.
The two proposals need to work together, because a new business line should never become a new back door. The five per cent cap offers some comfort. It keeps the scale of experimentation modest, so a failed venture should not threaten the institution’s financial health.
Way forward
SEBI should first define “related or incidental” with clear illustrations, so that boards are not left guessing and the automatic route is not stretched.
Second, the half yearly reports should be summarised publicly, so that competitors and investors can see what MIIs are doing and on what terms.
Third, any data used for commercial products must be offered to all vendors on equal and transparent terms, with strict separation between the regulatory and commercial arms.
Fourth, the cyber security rules for subsidiaries should be finalised alongside this framework. Finally, SEBI should keep the right to withdraw automatic status for any MII that breaches conditions and review the whole arrangement after two or three years of experience.
The proposal rests on a sensible idea: regulate by risk, not by paperwork. If safeguards are as firm as the freedoms, India’s market infrastructure could become more innovative and more self-reliant without compromising the trust on which every trade depends.
Saravanan is a Professor of Finance and Accounting at IIM Tiruchirappalli, and Williams is the Head of India at Sernova Financial