logo
BSE Declines 13% Since SEBI's Jane Street Action; What's The Connection?

BSE Declines 13% Since SEBI's Jane Street Action; What's The Connection?

News1808-07-2025
Last Updated:
Shares of BSE Ltd tumbled over 4% as investors continued to offload their shares amid regulatory overhangs and valuation concerns
Why Is BSE Stock Falling? Shares of BSE Ltd tumbled nearly seven per cent in trade on Tuesday, July 8, as investors continued to offload their shares amid regulatory overhangs and valuation concerns. Further, capital market stocks also saw significant selling pressure, even as Dalal Street extended its sideways movement.
BSE shares have also taken a 13 percent tumble since the markets regulator, Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI), cracked down on proprietary trading firm Jane Street, alleging that the foreign portfolio investor used manipulative strategies to profit from the indices.
SEBI also restrained Jane Street Group from accessing the local securities market, dealing a severe hit to the US trading firm that generated more than $2.3 billion in net revenue from equity derivatives in the South Asian nation last year.
At 10.10 a.m., BSE's stock price was quoting Rs 2,536, lower by 3.8 per cent compared to the previous session's closing price. The capital markets pack was also lagging, with Angel One, CDSL, and 360 ONE WAM shares sinking up to 3.5 per cent.
ICICI Securities has raised caution over BSE shares, citing multiple headwinds including regulatory restrictions, the recent change in the derivatives expiry day, and elevated valuation multiples. The brokerage also pointed out that BSE's premium average daily turnover (ADTV) dropped 12.4% month-on-month to Rs 13,900 crore in June, following sharp increases in April and May.
'While we remain constructive on the company's long-term fundamentals, we believe the current valuations already reflect its medium-term growth prospects. At current price levels, BSE trades at over 45x FY27E core EPS, which appears stretched, especially in light of potential regulatory risks," the brokerage noted.
It added that the earnings impact on BSE is likely to be minimal, given that foreign portfolio investors (FPIs) contribute just 3–4% of derivatives turnover. The effect may be more pronounced for Nuvama, which was Jane Street's Indian trading partner.
According to Jefferies, there's no counterparty risk from Jane Street's open positions, as these are backed by clearing corporations and the firm has up to three months to wind down its trades. It also noted that hedge funds typically hold larger exposures in Single Stock Futures (SSFs), with a more limited presence in options.
The brokerage further explained that Jane Street operated both as an FPI and a trading member in Indian markets, meaning its volumes were counted under both FPI and proprietary categories. 'Since SEBI's investigation had been underway for some time, Jane Street's trading activity had already declined over the past few months," it added.
Citing exchange data, Jefferies highlighted that FPIs typically account for 3–8% of equity derivatives turnover, with proprietary traders contributing a dominant 60–65%. The rest comes from individual and other participants.
The key uncertainty now, Jefferies said, is whether this episode will have a broader impact on overall trading volumes. 'Next week's trend in derivatives volumes will be critical, especially with index derivatives expiries scheduled for Tuesday and Thursday," it said. On a positive note, index options premium turnover was slightly higher week-on-week on both exchanges last Friday, though still marginally below the two-month average.
Derivatives contribute nearly 58% of BSE's estimated revenues for FY26. Within this segment, FPIs drive just 3–4% of turnover, and Jane Street's share is estimated at only 1%.
'Hence, the earnings impact on BSE is likely to be limited. A 100 basis point hit to our FY26 premium estimates would reduce EPS by only 60–70 basis points," Jefferies concluded.
Disclaimer:Disclaimer: The views and investment tips by experts in this News18.com report are their own and not those of the website or its management. Users are advised to check with certified experts before taking any investment decisions.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

In 2019, Rs 50K was gold and now it can't pay rent: CA explains why most are struggling, not 'surviving' in urban cities
In 2019, Rs 50K was gold and now it can't pay rent: CA explains why most are struggling, not 'surviving' in urban cities

Economic Times

time15 minutes ago

  • Economic Times

In 2019, Rs 50K was gold and now it can't pay rent: CA explains why most are struggling, not 'surviving' in urban cities

Synopsis Chartered Accountant Nitin Kaushik has warned that in 2025, earning less than Rs 50,000 a month in metros like Bengaluru, Mumbai, or Pune means barely covering basic expenses. He says rent alone swallows 40-60% of income, with essentials and lifestyle costs doubling in three years. Bengaluru's prime-area rents have surged up to 100% since 2022. Kaushik estimates singles need Rs 20-30 lakh annually for comfort, families Rs 40-50 lakh. Even Rs 1 lakh earners struggle, prompting his call for upskilling, smart budgeting, and early investment. TIL Creatives Representative AI Image Living in India's largest cities has become a battle to stay afloat. Chartered Accountant Nitin Kaushik says that in 2025, a monthly income below Rs 50,000 in Bengaluru, Mumbai, or Pune means 'barely breaking even' rather than on X, he warned that rents alone consume 40-60% of many urban salaries. Add transport, food, and utilities, and there is little left over. 'Living in a metro today without a strong salary equals financial pressure 24x7,' Kaushik wrote. — Finance_Bareek (@Finance_Bareek) Bengaluru, long considered India's tech capital, has seen one of the sharpest rent hikes. Kaushik pointed out that in prime neighbourhoods, one-bedroom flats that cost around Rs 18,000 a month in early 2022 now exceed Rs 30,000. That is an increase of 70-100%.He linked the rise to several factors — the return to office after COVID, a wave of job relocations, and growing real estate demand from NRIs and investors. Kaushik also highlighted that the price of essentials such as food, energy, and transport has stayed high. Combined with lifestyle spending, this has made metro living nearly twice as expensive as it was just three years ago. For those hoping to live comfortably, Kaushik estimates that in 2025, a single person in Bengaluru would need a CTC of Rs 20-30 lakh a year. For a family with one child, that figure rises to Rs 40-50 lakh, which he says would cover good housing, schooling, leisure, and savings. Kaushik warned that even households earning Rs 1 lakh a month are often stuck living paycheck to paycheck due to lifestyle expenses. His advice is direct: upskill to increase income, manage rent and commuting costs, start investing early, and look beyond headline salaries to focus on take-home pay after adjusting for living summed up the shift bluntly: 'Your Rs 50K/month in 2019 was gold. In 2025, it barely pays rent.'

Supreme Court reserves verdict on JSW Steel's Rs 19,700 crore resolution plan for Bhushan Power
Supreme Court reserves verdict on JSW Steel's Rs 19,700 crore resolution plan for Bhushan Power

Economic Times

time15 minutes ago

  • Economic Times

Supreme Court reserves verdict on JSW Steel's Rs 19,700 crore resolution plan for Bhushan Power

Synopsis The Supreme Court has reserved its verdict on JSW Steel's resolution plan for Bhushan Power and Steel. Key issues include the allocation of earnings generated during the resolution period and JSW's compliance with the plan. Former promoters challenged JSW's actions, while the creditors seek additional funds. The Solicitor General criticized the former promoters, alleging significant financial misconduct. iStock The Supreme Court on Monday reserved its verdict on a batch of pleas related to JSW Steel's Rs 19,700-crore resolution plan for debt-ridden Bhushan Power and Steel Limited (BPSL). A special bench comprising Chief Justice B R Gavai and Justices Satish Chandra Sharma and K Vinod Chandran heard arguments from Solicitor General Tushar Mehta for the committee of creditors (CoC), senior advocate Neeraj Kishan Kaul for JSW Steel, and senior advocate Dhruv Mehta for the former promoters before reserving the verdict. As many as five pleas were heard afresh after the CJI-led bench, on July 31, recalled its May 2 verdict that had directed liquidation of BPSL and set aside JSW's resolution plan, criticising the conduct of the CoC, the resolution professional, and the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) for what it termed a "flagrant violation" of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). One of the key issues was whether earnings before interest, tax, depreciation, and amortisation (EBITDA) generated during the resolution period should go to the creditors or remain with the company. The CoC is seeking Rs 3,569 crore in EBITDA and Rs 2,500 crore in delay-related interest. Kaul, representing JSW, the successful resolution applicant, said neither the request for resolution plan (RFRP) nor the resolution plan itself mandated sharing EBITDA with creditors. He said JSW bid for BPSL on an "as is, where is" basis, accepting both its losses and profits, and that the delay in plan implementation was due to the ED's asset attachment, which was lifted only in December 2024. Dhruv Mehta, appearing for the former promoters, challenged JSW's compliance with the resolution plan and defended their right to participate in the proceedings, citing their role as personal guarantors. He alleged that JSW failed to inject the promised working capital and accused the company of benefitting from rising steel prices before implementing the plan. He also contended that the CoC's powers do not extend beyond plan approval by the NCLT and that disputes over non-compliance should be taken back to the tribunal. The solicitor general Mehta described the former promoters as having "brought the company to dust" and called this "one of the worst cases of siphoning" he had seen. He maintained that the CoC's claims over EBITDA and delay interest were justified and that the body remained a legal entity until the Supreme Court's final decision under Section 62 of the IBC. Earlier on August 8, the COC had opposed the plea by former promoters by questioning the maintainability. A bench headed by former top court judge Bela M Trivedi on May 2 ordered liquidation of BPSL while setting aside a resolution plan of JSW Steel Limited for the ailing firm. PTI

Export outreach widened to 50 countries to negate US tariff hit
Export outreach widened to 50 countries to negate US tariff hit

Time of India

time19 minutes ago

  • Time of India

Export outreach widened to 50 countries to negate US tariff hit

Live Events (You can now subscribe to our (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel India is expanding its export outreach to 50 countries including in West Asia and Africa to reduce reliance on any single market and mitigate the risks of trade disruptions amid the steep 50% tariffs imposed by the 50 countries account for about 90% of India's exports. The ministry of commerce and industry is working product by product to improve India's exports competitiveness, officials said."The idea is to tap top 50 countries and look at each product and the competitors. India must mitigate risks to improve manufacturing and export competitiveness," said an official. This exercise to explore alternative markets is being done with export promotion bodies and is crucial as India's merchandise exports in June were flat at $35.14 week, the US doubled the tariffs on its imports from India to 50% at par with Brazil and the highest on any country in a move marking an escalation of trade tensions between the two the initial 25% duty came into effect last week, the additional 25% is effective August 27. Sectors such as marine products, textiles, leather, gems and jewellery, are expected to be severely hit by the adds to the concern is that competing manufacturing hubs such as Turkey, Vietnam and Thailand face significantly lower tariffs of 15%, 20% and 19% respectively, making Indian products relatively less competitive in the US market."The Indian gem and jewellery sector, in particular, stands to be severely impacted. The US is our single largest market, accounting for over $10 billion in exports-nearly 30% of our industry's total global trade. A blanket tariff of this magnitude is severely devastating for the sector," said Kirit Bhansali, chairman, GJEPCThe government is also working on a strategy to safeguard India's exports from American tariffs. This includes offering tailor-made schemes under the proposed Export Promotion Mission for the affected sectors, diversion of goods to other geographies, and identifying products with less export orders that could be diverted to meet the domestic government was already focusing on 20 countries to increase exports but now 30 more have been included in the also said that the possibility of trade rerouting through low-tariff destinations such as Mexico, Canada, Turkey, UAE, or Oman-undermining the spirit of legitimate trade and impacting transparency, is another concern.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store