Sizing a REMIT disclosure against what the market actually traded

This is a sizing aid. It takes what your firm cleared in an auction, divides it by what each delivery period actually traded, and marks the periods that reach the share your own disclosure policy treats as material.

Whether an event is inside information, and whether it must be published, remain your decisions. The tool screens for materiality; it does not make the call, and it produces no determination that anything should or should not have been disclosed.

The cleared volume and threshold you enter are held in the browser tab only. They are not sent to a server, not written to the URL and not stored, which is also why they do not survive a reload and why this page cannot be shared by link in the state you are reading it. That is a deliberate constraint on the product, recorded as ADR-0019: a position is the most sensitive thing a desk holds, and the only way to promise it is not retained is not to receive it.

There is no single “market volume” for a delivery period. Four denominators are available depending on what the publisher served, and each is wrong in a different, stateable direction. The console names which one it used and which way it biases your percentage.

Buy and sell, published and sided

Two figures for one interval, and neither is 'the' volume. The sign on your position picks which one you are measured against, so a sale and a purchase of the same size are genuinely different shares. It is one auction's own cleared volume for one market area: the two sides differ by what crossed the zone's borders.

Traded volume, one exchange's

That venue's published figure for its own market area. Volume your firm cleared elsewhere in the same coupled area is in neither the numerator nor the denominator.

The curve crossing, ours not the exchange's

Where no cleared volume is published, the crossing of the aggregated supply and demand curves is used. It covers the whole coupled area, so it runs roughly a tenth above any single exchange's traded volume: your share against it is biased LOW by about that tenth, the direction that under-flags. A period reading just under your threshold deserves a second look.

A shared order book

Where an exchange publishes one merged book for every zone clearing at the same price, the crossing is that whole group's volume rather than one zone's. Your share is biased LOW wherever the zones were uncongested, again the direction that under-flags. A period where the zone was congested off carries its own book.

The market publishes rates. MW is a rate averaged over each delivery period, so a share of published volumes is independent of how long a period is. MWh is energy per delivery period, and every figure is converted for you against that day's own period length - or against each period's own length, on a day whose periods are not all equal.

The share is the same either way; only what you type and read changes. Switch the unit rather than converting by hand, because a day at a different resolution differs by a factor the eye will not catch.

For a period backed by an aggregated curve, the console can re-clear the auction without your volume in it, and report the difference between the price that cleared and the price that would have. That is a stronger materiality signal than share alone: a large share that moved nothing, and a small share that moved the clearing price, are different facts.

It is still a counterfactual over a published aggregate. It cannot represent block orders, and it assumes everything else would have been submitted unchanged.