eTrade 2007 Annual Report Download - page 193
Download and view the complete annual report
Please find page 193 of the 2007 eTrade annual report below. You can navigate through the pages in the report by either clicking on the pages listed below, or by using the keyword search tool below to find specific information within the annual report.-
1 -
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
-
6
-
7
-
8
-
9
-
10
-
11
-
12
-
13
-
14
-
15
-
16
-
17
-
18
-
19
-
20
-
21
-
22
-
23
-
24
-
25
-
26
-
27
-
28
-
29
-
30
-
31
-
32
-
33
-
34
-
35
-
36
-
37
-
38
-
39
-
40
-
41
-
42
-
43
-
44
-
45
-
46
-
47
-
48
-
49
-
50
-
51
-
52
-
53
-
54
-
55
-
56
-
57
-
58
-
59
-
60
-
61
-
62
-
63
-
64
-
65
-
66
-
67
-
68
-
69
-
70
-
71
-
72
-
73
-
74
-
75
-
76
-
77
-
78
-
79
-
80
-
81
-
82
-
83
-
84
-
85
-
86
-
87
-
88
-
89
-
90
-
91
-
92
-
93
-
94
-
95
-
96
-
97
-
98
-
99
-
100
-
101
-
102
-
103
-
104
-
105
-
106
-
107
-
108
-
109
-
110
-
111
-
112
-
113
-
114
-
115
-
116
-
117
-
118
-
119
-
120
-
121
-
122
-
123
-
124
-
125
-
126
-
127
-
128
-
129
-
130
-
131
-
132
-
133
-
134
-
135
-
136
-
137
-
138
-
139
-
140
-
141
-
142
-
143
-
144
-
145
-
146
-
147
-
148
-
149
-
150
-
151
-
152
-
153
-
154
-
155
-
156
-
157
-
158
-
159
-
160
-
161
-
162
-
163
-
164
-
165
-
166
-
167
-
168
-
169
-
170
-
171
-
172
-
173
-
174
-
175
-
176
-
177
-
178
-
179
-
180
-
181
-
182
-
183 -
184 -
185 -
186 -
187 -
188 -
189 -
190 -
191 -
192 -
193 -
194 -
195 -
196 -
197 -
198 -
199 -
200 -
201 -
202 -
203 -
204
-
205
-
206
-
207
-
208
-
209
-
210
 |
 |
example, the Comparable Market Standard for September 2007 would be based upon the volume-weighted
aggregated Execution Score of the Comparable Market Centers for June, July, and August 2007. The Execution
Scores for the Comparable Market Centers shall be determined by data provided to the SEC pursuant to
Regulation NMS and as defined by a common transaction analysis vendor mutually agreed upon by the Parties,
such as Transaction Auditing Group (TAG), Thomson Transaction Analytics (TTA), or Quantum 5 Analytics.
b. Execution Performance Standard for Options. The “Execution Performance Standard for Options” shall mean
that the Company shall exercise reasonable diligence to obtain the best market available under the circumstances
consistent with industry practice.
c. In this Schedule A, “Evaluation Criterion” shall mean:
i. Effective/Quoted Spread (%) Ratio — The ratio of the share-weighted average between the execution
price and the midpoint of the National Best Bid or Offer (“NBBO”) (“Effective Spread”) to the difference
between the national best bid and the national best offer (“Quoted Spread”) at the time of order receipt
(lower is better).
ii. Average Order Execution Speed — The average elapsed time between market order receipt and execution
(lower is better).
iii. At or Better — The percentage of market order trades executed at or inside the NBBO (higher is better).
iv. Price Improvement — The percentage of trades executed at a price better than the prevailing NBBO
(higher is better).
d. In this Schedule A, “Execution Scores” shall mean the volume-weighted performance statistics for the
Comparable Market Centers in respect of each Evaluation Criterion.
e. In this Schedule A, “Comparable Market Centers” shall mean all market centers that trade NMS Stocks and are
required to publish execution quality statistics pursuant to Rule 605 of the Securities Exchange Act.
f. In this Schedule A, “Evaluation Period” shall mean the Evaluation Period for each Performance Period
representing that calendar month plus the prior two months. For example, the Evaluation Period for the
Performance Period of September 2007 will include the Company’s
A-2