Financial Exchanges and Data Sector Outlook — September 2026

Read the report

SlidesScroll

1 of 20

←→Full screen

FINANCIALS › FINANCIAL SERVICES › FINANCIAL EXCHANGES AND DATA

Financial Exchanges and Data: One Label, Three Price Tiers

A read on eight listed exchange, venue and data platforms: how the market rates them on forward profit, what buyers have paid for data and post-trade assets, and where each name sits on margin.

September 2026 · Prepared by NeuraCap AI · Confidential

Market data as of 2026-09-28 · primary valuation basis EV / EBITDA (CY2027E)

Financial Exchanges and Data Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice

Sources & methodology

1

← Previous

1 / 20 · FINANCIALS › FINANCIAL SERVICES › FINANCIAL EXCHANGES AND DATA

Next →

What each page shows

The analyst’s walkthrough of the deck, page by page.

1. 01

   FINANCIALS › FINANCIAL SERVICES › FINANCIAL EXCHANGES AND DATA

   Cover page introducing the Financial Exchanges and Data sector outlook as of September 28, 2026.

   We open with a single frame: eight listed exchange, venue and data names carrying one sector label but three distinct valuation tiers. The pages that follow show where each name sits and what the market is paying for it.

   Everything on this page

   FINANCIALS › FINANCIAL SERVICES › FINANCIAL EXCHANGES AND DATA Financial Exchanges and Data: One Label, Three Price Tiers A read on eight listed exchange, venue and data platforms: how the market rates them on forward profit, what buyers have paid for data and post-trade assets, and where each name sits on margin. September 2026 · Prepared by NeuraCap AI · Confidential Market data as of 2026-09-28 · primary valuation basis EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) Financial Exchanges and Data Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 1

2. 02
   CONTENTS

   What This Report Covers

   Contents page listing the report's five numbered sections plus the appendix.

   We've built this report so the bottom line comes first — read section one and you have the whole story before you ever reach the appendix. The sections that follow build out the landscape, the valuation, the precedent deals and the strategic implications behind it. Use this page as the map for where in the deck a given question gets answered.

   Everything on this page

   CONTENTS What This Report Covers 01 The Bottom Line Three Business Models, One Sector Label, Three Different Ratings 02 The Landscape Half the Set Is Listed Exchange Groups; The Broking Venues Are the Other Story 03 Valuation & Situations The Rated Names Do Not Trade as One Group 04 Precedent Transactions Buyers Have Been Reaching for Data, Software and Post-Trade 05 Strategic Implications What an Owner Can Actually Move from Here 06 Appendix Comparables Detail, Methodology, Sources and Assumptions Financial Exchanges and Data Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 2

3. 03
   01 · THE BOTTOM LINE

   Three Kinds of Business Sit Inside Financial Exchanges and Data, and the Market Rates Them Apart

   The bottom-line page sets out the three business types inside the sector and how the market prices each differently.

   Across the five of eight names carrying a forward EV / EBITDA estimate for CY2027E, the sector median sits at 15.9x, but the range runs from 9.5x at the bottom to 80.6x at the top. The top of the range pairs with a 72% EBITDA margin and ownership of execution through to clearing, which tells us mix, not size, is what the market is rewarding. So the question for any owner in this space is not whether you're in exchanges or data — it's which of these three tiers your revenue mix actually belongs to.

   Everything on this page

   01 · THE BOTTOM LINE Three Kinds of Business Sit Inside Financial Exchanges and Data, and the Market Rates Them Apart The full story on one page · figures on EV / EBITDA (CY2027E), market data as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Primary valuation basis: EV / EBITDA on CY2027E consensus (5 of 8 companies eligible; multiples failing the platform's plausibility gates are excluded, never plotted). Practitioners price this industry on EV / EBITDA rather than P / E; validated coverage supports the industry standard (5 of 8 companies), so this report follows it. Qualitative characterisations are NeuraCap views. Financial Exchanges and Data Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 3 1 Where You Sit in This Range Is Worth More than the Sector Average Across the 5 of 8 names with a forward EV / EBITDA estimate for CY2027E, the middle of the range is 15.9x. The top of the range is 80.6x and the bottom is 9.5x; the top sits alongside a 72% EBITDA margin and ownership of execution through to clearing at CME Group Inc. (CME). 2 The Exchange Groups Are Half the Set and Carry the Higher Rating Listed exchange groups and listings franchises are 4 of the 8 names, 50% of the set, and the middle of their range is 17.8x. The three wholesale market intermediation and brokerage venues are 38% of the set and sit on the page without a forward EBITDA estimate, so this lens does not rank them. 3 Growth and Margin Sit in Different Names Here Among the five rated names, the fastest forward growth is at Coinbase Global, Inc. (COIN) at 28%, on a 37% EBITDA margin. The wider margins sit with the established derivatives and listings franchises, where growth is a question of mix and of how far electronification has run in the underlying cash market. 4 Content and Post-Trade Assets Have Changed Hands at the Higher Multiples Across the seven transactions shown, the disclosed EBITDA multiples sit a long way apart: 45.1x on Trayport Holdings Limited against 13.2x on Mergermarket Limited. The buyer list is short — listed exchange groups, information services acquirers and financial sponsors working in the data and post-trade layers. 15.9x Sector median EV/EBITDA CY2027E consensus · 5 rated of 8 companies 80.6x Premium end EV/EBITDA vs 9.5x at the discount end top quartile (n=1) against bottom quartile (n=1) on EV/EBITDA — the spread the report explains 7 Transactions with disclosed terms 26 recorded in this tier · 2 told as case studies, the full list in the appendix

4. 04
   SECTION 02

   02

   Section divider introducing the market-map and landscape pages.

   Half of this eight-name set are listed exchange groups; the other half is the broking-venue and data story we turn to next. Here's who competes where, and how each group actually earns its revenue.

   Everything on this page

   SECTION 02 02 THE LANDSCAPE Half the Set Is Listed Exchange Groups; The Broking Venues Are the Other Story Who competes where, and how each group earns its revenue. 02 of 06 Financial Exchanges and Data Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 4

5. 05
   02 · MARKET MAP

   Where the Eight Names Sit: Exchange Groups, Broking Venues and One Adjacent Data Name

   Market-map page grouping the eight approved companies by business segment with median EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) per group.

   We group the eight approved names into exchange groups, broking venues and one adjacent data name, each with its own segment median on the same CY2027E EV/EBITDA basis. Listed exchange groups make up 50% of the set and carry the median of 17.8x. This grouping is what lets a reader place any one name against its true peer set rather than the sector average — so what matters next is which group's economics look most like the business you're evaluating.

   Everything on this page

   02 · MARKET MAP Where the Eight Names Sit: Exchange Groups, Broking Venues and One Adjacent Data Name 8 approved companies grouped by business segment · median EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) per group · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Segment grouping follows the platform's classification; group medians on rated names only. "Why it matters" lines are NeuraCap views. Financial Exchanges and Data Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 5 LISTED EXCHANGE GROUPS AND LISTINGS FRANCHISES 4 cos median 17.8x CME Group (CME) Intercontinental (ICE) Nasdaq (NDAQ) Coinbase Global (COIN) The rated core of the page: volume-linked execution paired with listings, index and data revenue. WHOLESALE MARKET INTERMEDIATION AND BROKERAGE VENUES 3 cos no rated names Tradeweb Markets (TW) BGC Group (BGC) MarketAxess (MKTX) The electronification story: credit and rates flow still moving from voice to protocol. ADJACENT: CAPITAL MARKETS ADVISORY AND CONSULTING 1 cos 9.5x · 1 rated Equifax (EFX) A single information services name that shows how data economics read next to venue economics.

6. 06
   02 · LANDSCAPE

   Scale Is Settled in the Listed Exchange Groups; The Venue Names Are Where Mix Is Still Moving

   Landscape page contrasting settled scale among exchange groups with still-moving mix among venue names.

   Scale in the listed exchange groups looks settled: this cohort holds the highest segment median in the set. The broking and market-intermediation venues are where mix is still moving, and they sit on the page without a forward EBITDA estimate, so this lens can't rank them the same way. Full company-level detail sits in the appendix for anyone who wants to trace a single name. So what this tells us: judge the exchange groups on today's multiple, and judge the venues on how their mix evolves.

   Everything on this page

   02 · LANDSCAPE Scale Is Settled in the Listed Exchange Groups; The Venue Names Are Where Mix Is Still Moving Segment view of the approved universe · EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) medians on rated names · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. "What they do / why it matters" is a NeuraCap view. Full company-level detail in the appendix and companion tables. Financial Exchanges and Data Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 6 Segment n Share of universe Median EV/EBITDA Names to know What they do — and why it matters Listed exchange groups and listings franchises 4 50% 17.8x CME Group Inc. (CME) · Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (ICE) · +2 more Half the set, higher rating. CME Group Inc. (CME), Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (ICE), Nasdaq, Inc. (NDAQ) and Coinbase Global, Inc. (COIN) are 50% of the names here, and the middle of their range is 17.8x. Their revenue pairs a volume-linked core with listings, index and data lines that do not need volatility to show up. Wholesale market intermediation and brokerage venues 3 38% — Tradeweb Markets Inc. (TW) · BGC Group, Inc (BGC) · +1 more Three venues, no forward rating. Tradeweb Markets Inc. (TW), BGC Group, Inc (BGC) and MarketAxess Holdings Inc. (MKTX) are 38% of the set, and the three sit on the page without a forward EBITDA estimate. This is where electronification of credit and rates still has runway, and where request-for-quote and all-to-all protocols compete for the same flow. Adjacent: capital markets advisory and consulting 1 13% 9.5x n=1 Equifax Inc. (EFX) One adjacent name, different economics. Equifax Inc. (EFX) is the single name in this group, 12% of the set. Its revenue mix is information services rather than venue economics, so it reads as a cross-check on how the market rates a data business next to an exchange.

7. 07
   SECTION 03

   03

   Section divider introducing the public-market valuation analysis.

   The rated names do not trade as one group — we turn now to forward EV/EBITDA on CY2027E, the top of the range against the bottom. What separates them is the subject of the next four pages.

   Everything on this page

   SECTION 03 03 VALUATION & SITUATIONS The Rated Names Do Not Trade as One Group Forward EV / EBITDA on CY2027E, the top of the range against the bottom. 03 of 06 Financial Exchanges and Data Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 7

8. 08
   03 · PUBLIC MARKET VALUATION

   One Sector Label, Two Very Different Prices for Forward Profit

   Valuation page ranking all five rated companies by EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) against the 15.9x sector median.

   Sorted descending, the five rated names run from 80.6x at the top to 9.5x at the bottom, against a sector median of 15.9x. One sector label is covering two very different prices for forward profit, and the tier zones on this page mark where each name sits against the rated set's own quartiles. So what: a single sector multiple is the wrong tool here — every name needs to be priced against its own tier, not the label.

   Everything on this page

   03 · PUBLIC MARKET VALUATION One Sector Label, Two Very Different Prices for Forward Profit EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) · all 5 rated companies, sorted descending · sector median 15.9x · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Primary valuation basis: EV / EBITDA on CY2027E consensus (5 of 8 companies eligible; multiples failing the platform's plausibility gates are excluded, never plotted). Practitioners price this industry on EV / EBITDA rather than P / E; validated coverage supports the industry standard (5 of 8 companies), so this report follows it. Tier zones are NeuraCap groupings cut at the rated set's quartiles; every multiple quoted on this page is a median on the same EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) basis. Panel commentary is a NeuraCap view. Financial Exchanges and Data Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 8 PREMIUM · median 80.6x CORE · median 15.9x DISCOUNT · median 9.5x Sector median 15.9x WHAT SEPARATES THE TWO ENDS The top clears a forward test. CY2027E EV / EBITDA already credits the forecast, so a rating that survives that lens is a statement about durability rather than about a step-up still to come. The premium end of this set sits at 80.6x, alongside owned clearing, deep open interest and recurring data revenue. The bottom prices a different mix. The discount end sits at 9.5x. That end is the one name classified outside the venue businesses, so its revenue mix and its capital intensity are read on a different basis than an exchange group's. Five of eight names carry estimates. Tradeweb Markets Inc. (TW), BGC Group, Inc (BGC) and MarketAxess Holdings Inc. (MKTX) appear on the page without a forward EBITDA estimate. The ranked range therefore describes the rated names, not the whole page, and an owner comparing against it should say which group they are comparing to.

9. 09
   03 · VALUATION DRIVERS

   Margin Is Where This Set Spreads Out, and Revenue Mix Is How It Reads

   Drivers page splitting median EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) by revenue-growth cohort and by EBITDA-margin cohort.

   We cut the rated set by revenue growth and by EBITDA margin to see where the valuation spread actually comes from. Margin is where this set spreads out, and revenue mix is how that spread reads on the page. These are our readings of association in the data, not a claim that one causes the other — so what matters is using margin and mix as the lens, not growth alone.

   Everything on this page

   03 · VALUATION DRIVERS Margin Is Where This Set Spreads Out, and Revenue Mix Is How It Reads Median EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) by revenue-growth cohort and by EBITDA-margin cohort (each split at its covered median) · rated names with estimates · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Cohort medians on rated names with the required estimates (faster n=0; slower n=0; higher-margin n=0; lower-margin n=0). Driver readings are NeuraCap views on the supplied data — association, not causation. Financial Exchanges and Data Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 9 Margins Run High Here, and They Run Wide Among the names carrying a margin figure, EBITDA margin runs from 72% at the upper end to 33% at the lower end, with Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (ICE) at 66% and Nasdaq, Inc. (NDAQ) at 60%. Revenue mix is the usual lens for reading a spread of that size: recurring data, index and post-trade revenue is rated separately from volatility-levered execution revenue. Growth Is Uneven Across the Rated Names Forward growth runs from 5% at CME Group Inc. (CME) to 28% at Coinbase Global, Inc. (COIN), with MarketAxess Holdings Inc. (MKTX) at 7%. The split point across the set is 9%, and the names with the wider margins sit on the slower side of that split. Open Interest and Clearing Are the Durability Test Headline volume can be competed for within a single session; open interest and ownership of the clearing silo are harder to move. Capture rate compression from competing venues and protocols is the counterweight, and it is the one an owner controls least directly. Recurring Revenue Sits Beside the Wider Margins The groups at the upper end of the margin range in this set are the established exchange and listings franchises, where subscription, index and post-trade revenue sits beside a volume-linked core. Annualised subscription value and net retention are the measures that travel with that revenue, and they do not need volatility to hold up.

10. 10
    03 · SITUATION MAP

    Two of the Five Rated Names Clear Both Bars; The Other Three Clear One or Neither

    Situation-map page cutting the five rated names on valuation versus the sector median and margin versus the covered median.

    Two of the five rated names clear both the 15.9x sector median and the 60% margin bar; the other three clear one or neither. This is a map of where each name sits today, not a recommendation to buy or sell any of them. So what: it's a starting point for asking why a name sits where it does, and what would move it into the other quadrant.

    Everything on this page

    03 · SITUATION MAP Two of the Five Rated Names Clear Both Bars; The Other Three Clear One or Neither Cut on EV / EBITDA vs the sector median (15.9x) (rows) and EBITDA margin vs the covered median (60%) (columns) · observations, not recommendations Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Situation boundaries are the cohort's own medians (Directional, NeuraCap view). This page characterises situations; it does not recommend buying or selling any security. Financial Exchanges and Data Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 10 Higher Rating, Wider Margin Above-median multiple · above-median EBITDA margin 2 names CME Group Inc. (CME) · Nasdaq, Inc. (NDAQ) CME Group Inc. (CME) and Nasdaq, Inc. (NDAQ) are the 2 of the 5 rated names sitting above the middle on both the forward rating and EBITDA margin. Open interest, listings depth and recurring data revenue are the lines that sit underneath that position, and they are defended rather than built. Higher Rating, Thinner Margin Above-median multiple · below-median EBITDA margin 1 names Coinbase Global, Inc. (COIN) Coinbase Global, Inc. (COIN) is the 1 of the 5 rated names above the middle on rating and below it on margin. That combination sits alongside the fastest forward growth in the rated set, and the open question for an owner is how much of that volume converts to margin as capture settles. Wider Margin, Softer Rating Below-median multiple · above-median EBITDA margin 1 names Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (ICE) Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (ICE) is the 1 of the 5 rated names above the middle on EBITDA margin and below it on the forward rating. Where profitability is already banked, the value question moves to what the next leg of recurring data and post-trade revenue looks like. Below the Middle on Both Below-median multiple · below-median EBITDA margin 1 names Equifax Inc. (EFX) Equifax Inc. (EFX) is the 1 of the 5 rated names below the middle on both measures, and the one name classified in capital markets advisory and consulting. Its economics are read against a different revenue mix than the venue businesses, so the comparison is directional rather than like-for-like.

11. 11
    03 · THE AGENDA

    The Levers an Owner Actually Holds: Mix, Capture, Clearing and Fee Policy

    Agenda page framing the operating levers — mix, capture, clearing and fee policy — that an owner can actually move.

    We frame this as the questions an owner or acquirer should be resolving: revenue mix, capture rate, clearing ownership and fee policy. These are our directional views grounded in the cohort data shown earlier, not investment advice. So what: this is the checklist for turning the valuation gap on the prior pages into an operating plan.

    Everything on this page

    03 · THE AGENDA The Levers an Owner Actually Holds: Mix, Capture, Clearing and Fee Policy NeuraCap view · framed as the questions an owner or acquirer should resolve · observations, not recommendations Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. All content on this page is Directional — NeuraCap advisory judgment grounded in the cohort data shown earlier. It does not constitute investment advice. Financial Exchanges and Data Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 11 Shift the Mix Toward Recurring Data, Index and Post-Trade Revenue Recurring revenue does not need volatility to show up, and in this set the groups carrying more of it sit at the upper end of the margin range. Building annualised subscription value and net retention on data is a slower path than volume, and a steadier one. What changes the answer: Net retention and annualised subscription value flattening while execution revenue does the work. Defend Open Interest and the Clearing Relationship Headline volume can be competed for within a session; open interest and the clearing silo are harder to move. Where a group owns execution through to clearing, capture rate compression is met on better terms than at a venue routing to a third-party central counterparty. What changes the answer: Open access or unbundling requirements that break the link between execution and clearing. Price Connectivity and Market Data with the Supervisor in the Room Fee schedules on market data, access and colocation are filed and can be challenged, so pricing power here is exercised inside a supervisory frame. The commercial question is how much of the revenue base holds up if that frame changes. What changes the answer: A supervisory decision or transparency regime that resets what proprietary data is worth. Decide Build or Buy in the Electronification Layer The transaction record here shows exchange groups, information services acquirers and sponsors buying content, software and post-trade assets rather than waiting for them. Where credit, rates and other voice-negotiated markets are still moving to electronic protocols, the build-or-buy choice on a protocol is live. What changes the answer: A step change in the electronification rate of a market where you hold matched principal or interdealer broking revenue.

12. 12
    SECTION 04

    04

    Section divider introducing the precedent-transaction case studies.

    Buyers have been reaching for data, software and post-trade assets: seven transactions, bought by exchange groups, information services acquirers and sponsors. The next page walks through two of them in depth.

    Everything on this page

    SECTION 04 04 PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS Buyers Have Been Reaching for Data, Software and Post-Trade Seven transactions, bought by exchange groups, information services acquirers and sponsors. 04 of 06 Financial Exchanges and Data Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 12

13. 13
    04 · DEAL CASE STUDIES

    Data, Software and Post-Trade Assets Are Where the Disclosed Multiples Run Highest

    Case-study page on two of the seven disclosed-terms transactions, highlighting where the multiples run highest.

    Data, software and post-trade assets carry the highest disclosed multiples in this transaction set: 45.1x on Trayport Holdings Limited against 13.2x on Mergermarket Limited. Deal multiples here are LTM at announcement, not directly comparable to the CY2027E public basis, so we draw no spread between the two. The complete list of seven disclosed-terms transactions sits in the appendix. So what: the buyer list — exchange groups, information services acquirers, sponsors — tells us where capital is actually being committed in this sector today.

    Everything on this page

    04 · DEAL CASE STUDIES Data, Software and Post-Trade Assets Are Where the Disclosed Multiples Run Highest 2 of 7 transactions with disclosed terms, told as case studies · multiples on LTM financials at announcement where disclosed · the complete list is in the appendix · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. 23 precedent record(s) carry data-quality flags (deal value unit unresolved; divestiture roles reassigned; duplicate precedent id); figures are shown as recorded in the filing. 19 recorded transactions with neither a disclosed value nor a multiple are omitted from the precedent list and the case studies (kept in the companion workbook). Deal multiples are LTM at announcement (Definitive, from filings); they are not directly comparable to the CY2027E public basis and no spread is claimed. "Why the deal happened" is a NeuraCap read of the recorded evidence. Financial Exchanges and Data Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 13 Aug-2019 $27.0B London Stock Exchange Group plc acquires Refinitiv EV / LTM revenue n/a EV / LTM EBITDA n/a WHY THE DEAL HAPPENED London Stock Exchange Group plc is a listed exchange and listings business; Refinitiv is a data and information franchise. The combination suggests a group adding recurring subscription and index revenue alongside a volume-linked execution core, and distribution into a client base it already served. HOW THE TARGET WAS VALUED The transaction was recorded at $27.0B, the largest disclosed value among the seven transactions shown. On size it sits far above the pending exchange-to-venue transaction here at $5.5B, so it benchmarks as a scale infrastructure and data combination rather than a bolt-on. Apr-2025 $3.1B KKR acquires OSTTRA EV / LTM revenue n/a EV / LTM EBITDA n/a WHY THE DEAL HAPPENED KKR is a financial sponsor; OSTTRA sits in post-trade rather than inside a licensed venue or a central counterparty. The transaction suggests a buyer going where cash conversion is predictable and where the regulatory change-of-control burden is lighter than for a venue itself. HOW THE TARGET WAS VALUED The transaction was recorded at $3.1B. Sponsor pricing in this record is customarily framed off normalised EBITDA, so an asset of this size benchmarks against the earnings-based end of the transaction record rather than against the multiples recorded on content franchises.

14. 14
    SECTION 05

    05

    Section divider introducing the strategic-implications section.

    What can an owner actually move from here? Mix, capture, clearing and fee policy, treated as operating decisions rather than market outcomes.

    Everything on this page

    SECTION 05 05 STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS What an Owner Can Actually Move from Here Mix, capture, clearing and fee policy as operating decisions. 05 of 06 Financial Exchanges and Data Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 14

15. 15
    05 · STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS

    Value Here Sits with Mix and Clearing, and Both Are Operating Decisions

    Strategic-implications page arguing that value in this sector sits with mix and clearing, both of which are operating decisions.

    The data in this report puts four questions on the table for the next twelve months: revenue mix, capture defence, clearing ownership and fee policy. These are our views drawn from the analysis shown, framed as observations rather than recommendations. So what: value here isn't something the market hands you — it's built through decisions management already controls.

    Everything on this page

    05 · STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS Value Here Sits with Mix and Clearing, and Both Are Operating Decisions NeuraCap view · the questions this data puts on the table for the next twelve months Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. This page is Directional — NeuraCap views drawn from the analysis in this report. Observations, not recommendations. Financial Exchanges and Data Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 15 FOR OWNERS Margin Is What the Market Can See; Mix Is What You Own Across the rated names the margin range is wide, and the upper end sits with groups carrying recurring data, index and post-trade revenue alongside a volume-linked core. The practical work is in revenue mix, capture defence and cost structure rather than in waiting for volatility to do it. FOR MANAGEMENT TEAMS A Forward Rating Has Already Credited the Plan The lens on this page is CY2027E EV / EBITDA, which prices the forecast rather than the last twelve months. That puts the weight on delivery — capture, retention and the recurring share of revenue — because the growth is already in the number. FOR BOARDS Regulatory Posture Is a Value Input, Not a Compliance Line Supervisory positions on data fees, access and open clearing sit directly on top of the revenue lines that carry the widest margins in this set. Treating fee policy and operational resilience as commercial questions works the same lever the market is rating.

16. 16
    SECTION 06

    06

    Section divider introducing the appendix: full comparables universe, methodology and sources.

    The full universe, the methodology and every source sit in this closing section. Anyone who wants to trace a figure back to its filing can do that from here.

    Everything on this page

    SECTION 06 06 APPENDIX The Full Universe, Methodology and Sources Comparables detail behind every figure in the body, the valuation basis, and where each underlying disclosure lives. 06 of 06 Financial Exchanges and Data Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 16

17. 17
    06 · PUBLIC COMPARABLES (1 OF 1)

    Public Comparables on EV / EBITDA (CY2027E), Grouped by Valuation Tier

    Appendix table of public comparables on EV / EBITDA (CY2027E), grouped by valuation tier, with five rated and three unrated names.

    This table carries all five rated companies plus the three names without an eligible multiple, shaded against the 15.9x sector median. Every ticker links back to its underlying source. So what: this is the reference page for tracing any multiple used earlier in the deck back to its filing.

    Everything on this page

    06 · PUBLIC COMPARABLES (1 OF 1) Public Comparables on EV / EBITDA (CY2027E), Grouped by Valuation Tier Teal shading marks a EV/EBITDA above the sector median (15.9x); amber marks below · 5 rated companies; 3 not rated (no eligible EV/EBITDA) · tickers link to the underlying source · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. All 5 rated rows are in this appendix and in the companion workbook, which carries the complete field set. Names without an eligible multiple are listed in the companion workbook. Financial Exchanges and Data Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 17 Company Ticker Segment EV EV/EBITDA (CY2027E) Rev growth EBITDA margin Rule of 40 PREMIUM — ≥19.7x · median 80.6x · 1 companies CME Group Inc. CME Listed exchange groups and listings franchises $427B 80.6x 5% 72% 77 CORE — 13.9x–19.7x · median 15.9x · 3 companies Coinbase Global, Inc. COIN Listed exchange groups and listings franchises $48.0B 19.7x 28% 37% 65 Nasdaq, Inc. NDAQ Listed exchange groups and listings franchises $61.1B 15.9x 9% 60% 69 Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. ICE Listed exchange groups and listings franchises $107B 13.9x 6% 66% 72 DISCOUNT — <13.9x · median 9.5x · 1 companies Equifax Inc. EFX Adjacent: capital markets advisory and consulting $22.7B 9.5x 9% 33% 42

18. 18
    06 · PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS (1 OF 1)

    All Precedent Transactions with Disclosed Terms, Newest First

    Appendix list of all seven precedent transactions with disclosed terms, newest first.

    Seven transactions with disclosed terms sit here, out of 26 recorded in total; the rest carry no disclosed value or multiple and are held in the companion workbook. Deal values link to the underlying filing, and multiples are LTM at announcement, not the CY2027E public basis used elsewhere in the report. So what: this is the complete, traceable record behind the case studies shown earlier.

    Everything on this page

    06 · PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS (1 OF 1) All Precedent Transactions with Disclosed Terms, Newest First 7 transactions with disclosed terms in this tier (26 recorded) · multiples on LTM financials at announcement where disclosed · deal values link to the underlying filing · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. 23 precedent record(s) carry data-quality flags (deal value unit unresolved; divestiture roles reassigned; duplicate precedent id); figures are shown as recorded in the filing. 19 recorded transactions with neither a disclosed value nor a multiple are omitted from the precedent list and the case studies (kept in the companion workbook). Deal multiples are LTM at announcement (Definitive, from filings); they are not directly comparable to the CY2027E public basis and no spread is claimed. Financial Exchanges and Data Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 18 Date Transaction EV EV/LTM Rev EV/LTM EBITDA Why it matters Jul-2026 Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. → MarketAxess Holdings Inc. $5.5B n/a n/a Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (ICE) agreed to acquire MarketAxess Holdings Inc. (MKTX) at $5.5B as recorded in the filing, and the transaction is pending. Both names appear on this page, so a listed exchange group is reaching into the wholesale market intermediation… Apr-2025 KKR → OSTTRA $3.1B n/a n/a KKR agreed to acquire OSTTRA at $3.1B. The post-trade layer is where financial sponsors have been active in this record: cash conversion is predictable and the change-of-control burden is lighter than for a licensed venue or a central counterparty. Aug-2019 London Stock Exchange Group plc → Refinitiv $27.0B n/a n/a London Stock Exchange Group plc agreed to acquire Refinitiv, the largest disclosed value among the seven transactions shown. It is the clearest example on this page of an exchange group adding recurring data and index revenue at scale alongside a volume-linked core. Aug-2018 Moody’s Corporation → Reis, Inc. n/a n/a 21.9x Moody’s Corporation agreed to acquire Reis, Inc. at 21.9x EBITDA. The pairing of a ratings and analytics acquirer with a content asset sits toward the upper half of the disclosed EBITDA multiples on this page. Dec-2017 NICE-Systems Ltd. → Trayport Holdings Limited n/a 3.6x 45.1x NICE-Systems Ltd. agreed to acquire Trayport Holdings Limited at 45.1x EBITDA and 3.6x revenue. It is the highest disclosed EBITDA multiple among the seven transactions shown, on a market-facing data and technology asset rather than on execution revenue. Oct-2015 Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. → Interactive Data Holdings Corporation n/a n/a 13.8x Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (ICE) agreed to acquire Interactive Data Holdings Corporation at 13.8x EBITDA in 2015. It is the second transaction here in which a listed exchange group reached outside execution for recurring revenue. Nov-2013 BC Partners → Mergermarket Limited n/a n/a 13.2x BC Partners agreed to acquire Mergermarket Limited at 13.2x EBITDA. Sponsor activity in the information layer is a long-running feature of this record, and this multiple sits at the lower end of the disclosed EBITDA multiples shown.

19. 19
    06 · METHODOLOGY

    Sources, Assumptions and Data Quality

    Sources, Assumptions and Data Quality.

    Sources, Assumptions and Data Quality How this report was built, what was excluded, and where every underlying disclosure lives · as of 2026-09-28 Every figure in this report links to the record it was taken from. Where a figure has no link, the appendix names its source and the basis on which it was read. 19

    Everything on this page

    06 · METHODOLOGY Sources, Assumptions and Data Quality How this report was built, what was excluded, and where every underlying disclosure lives · as of 2026-09-28 Every figure in this report links to the record it was taken from. Where a figure has no link, the appendix names its source and the basis on which it was read. Financial Exchanges and Data Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice 19 VALUATION BASIS Primary valuation basis: EV / EBITDA on CY2027E consensus (5 of 8 companies eligible; multiples failing the platform's plausibility gates are excluded, never plotted). Practitioners price this industry on EV / EBITDA rather than P / E; validated coverage supports the industry standard (5 of 8 companies), so this report follows it. EV / EBITDA on CY2027E is the lead convention: it is the sector-appropriate prior for Financial Exchanges and Data and it clears the coverage gate with 5 of 8 companies (62%). EV / Revenue is carried as a cross-check. The set earns: 5 of 8 companies carry a meaningful forward EBITDA on CY2027E, so the profit multiple leads and a revenue multiple would understate what the market is pricing. DATA QUALITY & EXCLUSIONS 1 records were excluded or quarantined by the platform's validation gates (unit errors, implausible ratios, ineligible securities and classification failures); the full ledger ships in the companion tables and never feeds a statistic in this report. DEFINITIVE VS DIRECTIONAL Definitive content is disclosed or consensus data passed through stated arithmetic. Directional content — tier boundaries, situation cuts, "why it matters" commentary, the agenda pages — is NeuraCap analyst judgment and is labeled as such where it appears. WHAT THIS REPORT IS NOT This report characterises a sector. It does not recommend buying, selling or holding any security, and no statement in it should be read as investment advice or a price target. WHERE THE DATA LIVES 230 registered source documents stand behind the figures in this report. Metric hyperlinks throughout the deck open the specific filing or data record; by publisher: sec.gov (229) · home.treasury.gov (1). The companion workbook beside this deck carries the complete source index.

20. 20

    The Top of This Range Sits with Recurring Revenue, Wide Margin and Owned Clearing.

    Closing page stating that the top of the valuation range sits with recurring revenue, wide margin and owned clearing.

    The top of this range sits with recurring revenue, wide margin and owned clearing — that's the pattern this whole report has been building toward. The companion tables carry the full universe, the exclusion ledger and the complete source index for any figure a client wants to trace further.

    Everything on this page

    The Top of This Range Sits with Recurring Revenue, Wide Margin and Owned Clearing. NeuraCap AI — Financial Exchanges and Data Coverage September 2026 · Prepared by NeuraCap AI · Confidential Financial Exchanges and Data Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 20

More coverage in Financials

• Bi-Weekly Update · Sep 28, 2026Financial Exchanges and Data Bi-Weekly Industry Events & M&A Update — September 14–28, 2026
• Bi-Weekly Update · Sep 28, 2026Mortgage REITs Bi-Weekly Industry Events & M&A Update — September 14–28, 2026
• Sector Report · Sep 28, 2026Mortgage REITs Sector Outlook — September 2026
• Sector Report · Sep 28, 2026Private Equity and Alternative Investments Sector Outlook — September 2026