> For the complete documentation index, see [llms.txt](https://www.mica.wtf/llms.txt). Markdown versions of documentation pages are available by appending `.md` to page URLs; this page is available as [Markdown](https://www.mica.wtf/eu-level/q-and-a/pending-questions/esma-qa-2414-micar-casp-best-possible-outcome-client.md).

# MiCAR CASP - Best Possible Outcome for the Client

|                 |                                                                                  |
| --------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| **Authority**   | ESMA                                                                             |
| **Q\&A ID**     | ESMA\_QA\_2414                                                                   |
| **Status**      | Question Published                                                               |
| **Published**   | 25 January 2025                                                                  |
| **Legal basis** | None mapped                                                                      |
| **Source**      | [ESMA Q\&A](https://www.esma.europa.eu/publications-data/questions-answers/2414) |

### Question

There is a practice in the crypto-asset industry when dealing with client orders which involves the following scenario: i) a crypto-asset service provider (CASP) providing the service of execution of orders (CASP-broker) receives client orders; ii) this CASP-broker systematically executes the orders received on behalf of the clients with another entity of the group as counterparty (the “group entity B”) instead of executing such orders on the group’s trading platform for crypto-assets; iii) group entity B then immediately places an offsetting order to hedge its exposure on the group’s trading platform for crypto-assets. In this scenario, the price offered to the client by group entity B (through the CASP-broker) is in excess of the top of book price achievable on the order book of the trading platform for crypto-assets to reflect a "guaranteed price" offered to the customer for a limited period, for example 30 - 60 seconds. Group entity B then enters an order on the group’s trading platform on the same side as the customer order would have been had it been executed directly on the group’s trading platform. However, the price is not really guaranteed: if during the execution of group entity B’s order on the group’s trading platform, the price moves in favour of the client order, group entity B trades at that more favourable price but fills the client’s order at the agreed “guaranteed price”. But, if during the execution of group entity B’s order, the price moves against the client order, the client’s order will be filled by group entity B only if the price movement doesn't exceed the spread applied by group entity B when quoting the “guaranteed price”. Otherwise the order of the client will be cancelled. In such scenarios, the client pays: (i) to the CASP-broker: a fully disclosed commission for the “execution of their order”, and (ii) to group entity B: a spread which is priced in to the “guaranteed price” quoted by group entity B. Is this scenario compliant with [MiCA](https://github.com/jakesenfti/micawtf/blob/main/mica/README.md)?

***

### Answer

> **ESMA has not published a final answer to this question.** Its current status in the ESMA Q\&A register is *Question Published* (submitted 25 January 2025). This page will be updated if ESMA publishes a final response.

***

**Source:** [ESMA original document](https://www.esma.europa.eu/publications-data/questions-answers/2414)


---

# Agent Instructions
This documentation is published with GitBook. GitBook is the documentation platform designed so that both humans and AI agents can read, navigate, and reason over technical content effectively. Learn more at gitbook.com.

## Querying This Documentation
If you need additional information that is not directly available in this page, you can query the documentation dynamically by asking a question.

Perform an HTTP GET request on the current page URL with the `ask` query parameter, and the optional `goal` query parameter:

```
GET https://www.mica.wtf/eu-level/q-and-a/pending-questions/esma-qa-2414-micar-casp-best-possible-outcome-client.md?ask=<question>&goal=<endgoal>
```

`ask` is the immediate question: it should be specific, self-contained, and written in natural language.
`goal` is optional and describes the broader end goal you are ultimately trying to accomplish on behalf of the user. GitBook uses it to tailor the answer towards what is most useful for that goal.

The response will contain a direct answer to the question and relevant excerpts and sources from the documentation.

Use this mechanism when the answer is not explicitly present in the current page, you need clarification or additional context, or you want to retrieve related documentation sections.