TABLE OF CONTENTS
     
     

    On 3 July 2016, the Market Abuse Regulation became applicable across the European Union. Ten years later, its central purpose—protecting market integrity and investor confidence—remains as important as ever. 

     

    Key Highlights

    • MAR reaches its tenth anniversary amid continued enforcement pressure. The regulation became applicable across the EU and UK on 3 July 2016, but thousands of suspicious transaction and order reports continue to be submitted each year.
    • EU MAR and UK MAR are two distinct regulatory regimes. UK MAR was created when the regulation was onshored at the end of 2020. The two frameworks retain common foundations, but firms operating across both jurisdictions must monitor both regimes.
    • Market abuse risk surveillance remains fragmented. The 2026 1LoD Surveillance Benchmarking Survey found that 48% of firms have not linked any surveillance controls, limiting their ability to assess related trades, communications and insider-risk indicators together.
    • Better surveillance depends on better data. With 71% of firms identifying fragmented, unstandardized or inconsistent data as their biggest surveillance obstacle, the priority for MAR’s second decade is to connect risk signals and strengthen foundational data.

    What Has a Decade of MAR Achieved?

    MAR created a common framework for addressing insider dealing, unlawful disclosure and market manipulation. It expanded the previous regime to cover more markets, instruments and trading strategies, while strengthening firms’ responsibilities for detecting and reporting suspicious activity.

     The regulation was onshored into UK law on 31 December 2020. As a result, EU MAR and UK MAR retain the same foundations, although firms must now monitor two distinct regimes.   Both UK MAR and EU MAR aim to protect investors and strengthen market integrity, as reflected in guidance from the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) and the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA). 

     Ten years of regulation have not, however, removed the threat. The FCA received 3,806 suspicious transaction and order reports in 2025, including 3,124 concerning suspected insider dealing. Across the European Economic Area (EEA), national competent authorities received 5,981 STORs in 2024. Of the 6,763 total market-abuse notifications received, 57% concerned alleged insider dealing. 

    Read more about MAR and the risk of market abuse in the UK, Europe and across the globe.

    How Are UK and EU MAR Diverging?

    The two regimes began from the same framework but are now being updated independently. For example, the EU Listing Act makes targeted changes to EU MAR, including provisions concerning disclosure, insider lists and managers’ transactions. In the UK, the FCA introduced new UK Listing Rules while continuing to remind issuers of their separate inside-information and disclosure obligations under UK MAR. 

    For cross-border firms, this creates a growing risk of applying the wrong requirements or assuming that one control satisfies both regimes. Compliance teams must track changes separately, assign jurisdiction-specific ownership and document how policies and controls apply in each market.

    Read more about insider risk and disclosure under the UK Listing Rules.

    Why Does an Integrated Approach to Surveillance Matter?

    Market abuse rarely presents as a single, self-contained event. A meaningful investigation may require firms to connect trading activity with communications, access to material non-public information, employee relationships and activity in related instruments.

    Many surveillance programs are not yet equipped to make those connections. The 1LoD 2026 Surveillance Benchmarking Survey & Report found that:

    • 48% of firms have not linked any of their surveillance controls.
    • 71% identify fragmented, unstandardized or inconsistent data as the biggest hindrance to surveillance effectiveness.
    • 82% describe their cross-product market-abuse surveillance as developing or basic.

    With siloed and separate surveillance, firms may miss broader patterns of risk. making potential market abuse harder to identify and investigate. 

    Read The Missing Link in Compliance: Tracking Insider Risk from Access to Trade

    What Should Firms Prioritize Next?

    For MAR’s second decade, three practical priorities are critical for compliance teams:

    • Connect risk signals across trades, communications, insider information and employee activity.
    • Strengthen data frameworks through consistent identifiers, complete feeds and clear ownership.
    • Consolidate technology so compliance teams can assess related alerts and risk signals within their full context. 

    MAR’s first decade established the framework. Its second will likely test how effectively firms connect the information needed to protect market integrity.

    How MCO Enables Firms to Manage Compliance Under EU MAR and UK MAR

    (MCO) MyComplianceOffice provides a single platform that helps firms manage disclosure obligations, insider risk, and regulatory compliance across market abuse, personal trading, and employee conduct.

    MCO helps firms manage MAR compliance and the risk of market abuse, including managing MNPI, maintaining insider lists and providing records that help demonstrate effective compliance.

    The MyComplianceOffice platform provides a connected, technology-enabled framework that ensures decisions are made consistently, documented clearly, and executed in line with EU MAR and UK MAR expectations, with capabilities including:

    Ready to learn more? Request a demo today to see how MCO can help your firm manage EU MAR, UK MAR, and other compliance obligations.

    This post was written by Keith Pyke, Director of Solutions at MCO.

     

    Related Resources

    Frequently Asked Questions

    The Market Abuse Regulation became applicable across the EU, including the UK, on 3 July 2016. It replaced the previous Market Abuse Directive with a directly applicable framework covering insider dealing, unlawful disclosure and market manipulation. 
    EU MAR continues to apply across EU member states. The regulation was onshored into UK law on 31 December 2020, creating UK MAR. The two regimes share the same foundations but are developing separately, so cross-border firms must monitor both. 

    Potential market abuse may involve related trades, communications, inside information, employee relationships and activity across multiple instruments or venues. Connected surveillance helps compliance teams assess these signals together instead of investigating them in isolated systems.

    By reducing reliance on prescribed processes and increasing reliance on internal judgment, the new regime increases the risk of inconsistent identification and handling of inside information, including delayed disclosure and selective information flow.  
    Firms must identify inside information earlier and more consistently, as fewer events automatically trigger formal disclosure workflows and more decisions depend on internal assessment.  

    MCO helps firms manage MAR compliance and market-abuse risk by supporting the control of MNPI, insider-list management and the records needed to demonstrate effective compliance. Learn more about managing MAR compliance with MCO. 

    Recent Posts