remained the same, and our net income and cash flows, including cash available for servicing our indebtedness, will correspondingly decrease. We have entered into, and may enter into additional, interest rate swaps that involve the exchange of floating for fixed rate interest payments in order to reduce interest rate volatility. However, we may not maintain interest rate swaps with respect to all of our variable rate indebtedness, and any swaps we enter into may not fully mitigate our interest rate risk, may prove disadvantageous or may create additional risks. Rising interest rates could also limit our ability to refinance existing debt when it matures or cause us to pay higher interest rates upon refinancing.

Regulatory and legal uncertainties could harm our business.

Securities and derivatives businesses are heavily regulated. Firms in the financial services industry have been subject to an increasingly regulated environment over recent years, and penalties and fines sought by regulatory authorities have increased considerably. In addition, following recent news media attention to electronic trading and market structure, the regulatory and enforcement environment has created uncertainty with respect to various types of transactions that historically had been entered into by financial services firms and that were generally believed to be permissible and appropriate. “High frequency” and other forms of low latency or electronic trading strategies continue to be the focus of extensive regulatory scrutiny by federal, state and foreign regulators and SROs, and such scrutiny is likely to continue. Our market making and trading activities are characterized by substantial volumes, an emphasis on technology and certain other characteristics that are also commonly associated with high frequency trading. Specifically, both the SEC and the CFTC have issued general concept releases on market structure requesting comment from market participants on topics including, among others, high frequency trading, co‑location, dark liquidity, pre‑ and post‑trade risk controls and system safeguards. The SEC has adopted rules that, among other results, have significantly limited the use of sponsored access by market participants to the U.S. equities exchanges, imposed large trader reporting requirements, restricted short sales in listed securities under certain conditions and required the planning and creation of a new comprehensive consolidated audit trail. The SEC has also approved by order a pilot proposal by the FINRA and the national securities exchanges establishing a “Limit Up‑Limit Down” mechanism to address market volatility.

In addition, certain market participants, SROs, government officials and regulators have requested that the U.S. Congress, the SEC, and the CFTC propose and adopt additional laws and rules, including rules relating to additional registration requirements, restrictions on co‑location, order‑to‑execution ratios, minimum quote life for orders, incremental messaging fees to be imposed by exchanges for “excessive” order placements and/or cancellations, further transaction taxes, tick sizes, changes to maker/taker rebates programs, and other market structure proposals. For example, the SEC adopted Regulation SCI, which imposes compliance and other costs on market centers that may have to pass such costs on to their users, including us, and could impact our future business plans of establishing a market center to avoid or reduce market center costs for certain of our transactions. Similarly, CAT imposes new reporting requirements and additional costs on U.S. broker-dealers. The Tick Pilot program, which is currently underway, includes a “trade at” component, requiring that certain of these transactions occur only on an exchange. If the trade at feature is adopted permanently for small capitalization securities without the trade at exemptions that currently exist, and it is not accompanied by a reduction in the fees paid to access liquidity on exchanges, the trade at requirement may increase the costs for certain of our transactions. Finally, the SEC has proposed amendments to regulations that would require our registered broker‑dealer that is not currently a FINRA member to become a member of FINRA, which, if adopted as proposed, would subject the broker‑dealer to FINRA’s rules and require payment of additional fees per trade that could adversely affect our profits given that we seek to make small profits on individual trades.  Additionally, the CFTC has proposed the adoption of Regulation Automated Trading, which would, among other requirements, require registration by direct market participants, mandate the use of certain types of risk controls, and require the maintenance of a source code repository in accordance with certain specifications.

Any or all of these proposals or additional proposals may be adopted by the SEC, CFTC or other U.S. or foreign legislative or regulatory bodies, and recent news media attention to electronic trading and market structure could increase the likelihood of adoption. These potential market structure and regulatory changes could cause a change in the manner in which we make markets, impose additional costs and expenses on our business or otherwise have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

In addition, the financial services industry is heavily regulated in many foreign countries, much like in the U.S. The varying compliance requirements of these different regulatory jurisdictions and other factors may limit our ability to conduct business or expand internationally. For example, MiFID, which was implemented in November 2007, has been

replaced by MiFID II/Markets in Financial Investments Regulation (“MiFIR”), which was adopted by the European Parliament on April 15, 2014 and by the Council on May 13, 2014, entered into force on July 2, 2014, and became effective on January 3, 2018. Many MiFID II changes are likely to affect our business. For example, MiFID II requires certain types of firms, including us, to post firm quotes at competitive prices and will supplement current requirements with regard to investment firms’ risk controls related to the safe operation of electronic systems. MiFID II will also impose additional requirements on market structure, such as the introduction of a harmonized tick size regime, the introduction of new trading venues known as Organized Trading Facilities, and the promulgation of a new bilateral trading arrangement called the Systematic Internaliser regime, new open access provisions, market making requirements and various other pre‑ and post‑trade risk management requirements. Each of these and other proposals may impose technological and compliance costs on us. Any of these laws, rules or regulations, as well as changes in legislation or regulation and changes in market customs and practices could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. These risks may be enhanced by recent scrutiny of electronic trading and market structure from regulators, lawmakers and the financial news media.

In addition, we maintain borrowing facilities with banks, prime brokers and Futures Commission Merchants (“FCMs”), and we obtain uncommitted margin financing from our prime brokers and FCMs, which are in many cases affiliated with banks. In response to the financial crisis, the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision issued a new, more stringent capital and liquidity framework known as Basel III, which national banking regulators are in the process of implementing in the various jurisdictions in which our lenders may be incorporated. As these rules are implemented and impose more stringent capital and liquidity requirements, certain of our lenders may revise the terms of our borrowing facilities or margin financing arrangements, reduce the amount of financing they provide, or cease providing us financing, each of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

Non‑compliance with applicable laws or regulatory requirements could negatively impact our reputation, prospects, revenues and earnings.

Our subsidiaries are subject to regulations in the U.S., and our foreign subsidiaries are subject to regulations abroad, in each case covering all aspects of their business. Regulatory bodies that exercise or may exercise authority over us include, without limitation, in the U.S., the SEC, FINRA, the Chicago Stock Exchange, the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, the Intercontinental Exchange, the CFTC, the NFA and the various state securities regulators; in Ireland, the Central Bank of Ireland; in Switzerland, the Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority; in France, the Autorité des Marchés Financiers (“AMF”); in the United Kingdom, the FCA; in Hong Kong, the SFC; in Australia, the Australian Securities and Investment Commission; in Canada, the Investment Industry Regulatory Organization of Canada and various Canadian provincial securities commissions; in Singapore, the Monetary Authority of Singapore and the Singapore Exchange; and in Japan, the Financial Services Agency and the Japan Securities Dealers Association. Our mode of operation and profitability may be directly affected by additional legislation and changes in rules promulgated by various domestic and foreign government agencies and SROs that oversee our businesses, as well as by changes in the interpretation or enforcement of existing laws and rules, including the potential imposition of additional capital and margin requirements and/or transaction taxes. While we endeavor to timely deliver required annual filings in all jurisdictions, we cannot guarantee that we will meet every applicable filing deadline globally. Noncompliance with applicable laws or regulations could result in sanctions being levied against us, including fines, penalties, judgments, disgorgement, restitution and censures, suspension or expulsion from a certain jurisdiction, SRO or market or the revocation or limitation of licenses. Noncompliance with applicable laws or regulations could also negatively impact our reputation, prospects, revenues and earnings. In addition, changes in current laws or regulations or in governmental policies could negatively impact our operations, revenues and earnings.

Domestic and foreign stock exchanges, other SROs and state and foreign securities commissions can censure, fine, impose undertakings, issue cease‑and‑desist orders and suspend or expel a broker‑dealer or other market participant or any of its officers or employees. Our ability to comply with all applicable laws and rules is largely dependent on our internal systems to ensure compliance, as well as our ability to attract and retain qualified compliance personnel. We could be subject to disciplinary or other actions in the future due to claimed noncompliance, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. We have been, are currently, and may in the future be, the subject of one or more regulatory or SRO enforcement actions, including but not limited to targeted and routine regulatory inquiries and investigations involving Regulation NMS, Regulation SHO, market access

rules, capital requirements and other domestic and foreign securities rules and regulations. We and other broker‑dealers and trading firms have also been the subject of requests for information and documents from the SEC and other regulators. We have cooperated and complied with these requests for information and documents. Our business or reputation could be negatively impacted if it were determined that disciplinary or other enforcement actions were required. Additionally, in December 2015, the enforcement committee of the AMF fined our European subsidiary in the amount of €5.0 million (approximately $5.4 million) based on its conclusion that the subsidiary engaged in price manipulation and violations of the AMF General Regulation and Euronext Market Rules. In May 2017, the fine was reduced to €3.0 million (approximately $3.5 million), subject to an incremental charge of €0.3 (approximately $0.4 million). The relevant trading activities were conducted on or around 2009, prior to our acquisition of that subsidiary from Madison Tyler Holdings, which acquisition was consummated in 2011.  To continue to operate and to expand our services internationally, we will have to comply with the regulatory controls of each country in which we conduct or intend to conduct business, the requirements of which may not be clearly defined. The varying compliance requirements of these different regulatory jurisdictions, which are often unclear, may limit our ability to continue existing international operations and further expand internationally.

Failure to comply with applicable regulatory capital requirements could subject us to sanctions imposed by the SEC, FINRA and other SROs or regulatory bodies.

Certain of our subsidiaries are subject to regulatory capital rules of the SEC, FINRA, other SROs and foreign regulators. These rules, which specify minimum capital requirements for our regulated subsidiaries, are designed to measure the general financial integrity and liquidity of a broker‑dealer and require that at least a minimum part of its assets be kept in relatively liquid form. In general, net capital is defined as net worth (assets minus liabilities), plus qualifying subordinated borrowings, less certain mandatory deductions that result from, among other things, excluding assets that are not readily convertible into cash and from valuing conservatively certain other assets. Among these deductions are adjustments, commonly called haircuts, which reflect the possibility of a decline in the market value of an asset before disposition, and non‑allowable assets.

Failure to maintain the required minimum capital may subject our regulated subsidiaries to a fine, requirement to cease conducting business, suspension, revocation of registration or expulsion by the applicable regulatory authorities, reputational harm and ultimately could require the relevant entity’s liquidation. Events relating to capital adequacy could give rise to regulatory actions that could limit business expansion or require business reduction. SEC and SRO net capital rules prohibit payments of dividends, redemptions of stock, prepayments of subordinated indebtedness and the making of any unsecured advances or loans to a stockholder, employee or affiliate, in certain circumstances, including if such payment would reduce the firm’s net capital below required levels. Similar issues and risks arise in connection with the capital adequacy requirements of foreign regulators.

A change in the net capital rules, the imposition of new rules or any unusually large charges against net capital could limit our operations that require the intensive use of capital and also could restrict our ability to withdraw capital from our broker‑dealer subsidiaries. A significant operating loss or any unusually large charge against net capital could negatively impact our ability to expand or even maintain our present levels of business. Similar issues and risks arise in connection with the capital adequacy requirements of foreign regulators. Any of these results could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

We are subject to risks relating to litigation and potential securities law liability.

We are exposed to substantial risks of liability under federal and state securities laws and other federal and state laws and court decisions, as well as rules and regulations promulgated by the SEC, the CFTC, state securities regulators, SROs and foreign regulatory agencies. These risks may be enhanced by recent scrutiny of electronic trading and market structure from regulators, lawmakers and the financial news media. We are also subject to the risk of litigation and claims that may be without merit. At present and from time to time, we, our past and present officers, directors and employees are and may be named in legal actions, regulatory investigations and proceedings, arbitrations and administrative claims and may be subject to claims alleging the violations of laws, rules and regulations, some of which may ultimately result in the payment of fines, awards, judgments and settlements. We could incur significant legal expenses in defending ourselves against and resolving lawsuits or claims even if we believe them to be meritless. An adverse resolution of any current or future lawsuits or claims against us could result in a negative perception of our

Company and cause the market price of our common stock to decline or otherwise have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

Proposed legislation in the European Union, the U.S. and other jurisdictions that would impose taxes on certain financial transactions could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial results.

On September 28, 2011, the former president of the European Commission officially presented a plan to create a new financial transactions tax which in February 2013 was formally presented for consideration by the European Commission under an enhanced cooperation procedure among 11 European Union Member States (Belgium, Germany, Estonia, Greece, Spain, France, Italy, Austria, Portugal, Slovenia and Slovakia) for the purposes of a financial transaction tax among those Member States (the “EU Financial Transaction Tax”).  The EU Financial Transaction Tax was initially intended to be implemented within those 11 European Union Member States in January 2014. As of December 31, 2017 such tax has not yet been implemented within the European Union and no final political or legislative proposal has been presented for consideration. In 2016, Estonia, of the original members withdrew its support for the proposal. Similarly, in 2013, U.S. Representative Peter DeFazio and former Senator Thomas Harkin introduced proposed legislation, a bill entitled the “Wall Street Trading and Speculators Tax Act,” which would have, subject to certain exceptions, imposed an excise tax on the purchase of a security, including equities, bonds, debentures, other debt and interests in derivative financial instruments, if the purchase occurred or was cleared on a trading facility in the U.S. and the purchaser or seller is a U.S. person. More recently, U.S. Representative Chris Van Hollen presented an “action plan” that included a financial transaction fee. These proposed transaction taxes would apply to certain aspects of our business and transactions in which we are involved. Any such tax would increase our cost of doing business to the extent that (i) the tax is regularly applicable to transactions in the markets in which we operate, (ii) the tax does not include exceptions for market makers or market making activities that is broad enough to cover our activities or (iii) we are unable to widen our bid/ask spreads in the markets in which such a tax would be applicable to compensate for its imposition. Furthermore, the proposed taxes may reduce or negatively impact trading volume and transactions on which we are dependent for revenues. While it is difficult to assess the impact the proposed taxes could have on us, if either transaction tax is implemented or any similar tax is implemented in any other jurisdiction in which we operate, our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows could suffer a material adverse effect, and could be impacted to a greater degree than other market participants.

We depend on our technology, and our future results may be negatively impacted if we cannot remain technologically competitive.

interruptions or other unintended consequences. If any of these risks materialize, they could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

Failure or poor performance of third‑party software, infrastructure or systems on which we rely could adversely affect our business.

laws or rules which require the maintenance of source code or other intellectual property in a repository subject to certain requirements and/or which enhance or facilitate access to such source code by regulatory authorities could inhibit our ability to protect against unauthorized dissemination or use of our intellectual property. Third parties have alleged and may in the future allege that we are infringing, misappropriating or otherwise violating their intellectual property rights. Third parties may initiate litigation against us without warning, or may send us letters or other communications that make allegations without initiating litigation. We may elect not to respond to these letters or other communications if we believe they are without merit, or we may attempt to resolve these disputes out of court by negotiating a license, but in either case it is possible that such disputes will ultimately result in litigation. Any such claims could interfere with our ability to use technology or intellectual property that is material to the operation of our business. Such claims may be made by competitors seeking to obtain a competitive advantage or by other parties, such as entities that purchase intellectual property assets for the purpose of bringing infringement claims. We also periodically employ individuals who were previously employed by our competitors or potential competitors, and we may therefore be subject to claims that such employees have used or disclosed the alleged trade secrets or other proprietary information of their former employers.

the referendum and withdrawal is highly uncertain and may significantly affect the fiscal, monetary and regulatory landscape(Withdrawal Agreement) Act 2020 received Royal Assent in the U.K., and could haveon January 31, 2020 the U.K. left the E.U. pursuant to the terms of the Withdrawal Agreement. The U.K. and E.U. then entered into a material impacttransition period during which rules on its economytrade, travel, and business for the future growthU.K. and E.U. continued to apply. The transition period came to an end as of its various industries, includingJanuary 1, 2021, at which point U.K. investment firms which had previously used passporting permissions under MiFID II to provide services to clients in the financial services industry, as well as global economic conditions and financial markets.  We presently accessE.U., ceased to subject to the E.U.'s MiFID II regime. Virtu accesses the E.U. markets primarily through our Irish regulated subsidiaries via MiFID II passporting permissions and accesses the U.K. market primarily via a combination of U.K. based subsidiaries and branch offices. The U.K. branch offices of VIEL and VFIL currently utilize the U.K. FCA’s Temporary Permission Regime and are therefore deemed to be authorized and regulated by the FCA. The Temporary Permissions Regime is due to come to an end at the end of 2023. VIEL and VFIL have submitted applications for full third country branch authorization to the FCA to ensure the long-term operational footprint of Virtu’s branches in the U.K. These authorization processes are ongoing. The U.K. subsidiary, VIUK, is an investment firm authorized and we do not expect any impactregulated by the FCA with permission to operate a U.K. MTF. Poor future relations between the U.K. and E.U., however, could adversely affect European or worldwide political, fiscal, regulatory, economic or market conditions and could contribute to instability in global political institutions, regulatory agencies and financial markets. Disruptions and uncertainty caused by these events may also cause our clients to closely monitor their costs and reduce their spending budget on our access to E.U. markets as a resultservices. Any of Brexit.  However, it is not possible at this point in time to predict fully thethese effects of an exit of the U.K.’s departure from the E.U., especially with respect toand others we cannot anticipate or that may evolve over time, could adversely affect our activities in the U.K. or the potential impact of interacting with U.K. based market participants, and it could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

Fluctuations in currency exchange rates could negatively impact our earnings.

A significant portion of our international business is conducted in currencies other than the U.S. dollar, and changes in foreign exchange rates relative to the U.S. dollar can therefore affect the value of our non‑U.S. dollar net assets, revenues and expenses. Although we closely monitor potential exposures as a result of these fluctuations in currencies, and where cost‑justified we adopt strategies that are designed to reduce the impact of these fluctuations on our financial performance, including the financing of non‑U.S. dollar assets with borrowings in the same currency and the use of various hedging transactions related to net assets, revenues, expenses or cash flows, there can be no assurance that we will be successful in managing our foreign exchange risk. Our exposure to currency exchange rate fluctuations will grow if the relative contribution of our operations outside the U.S. increases. Any material fluctuations in currencies could have a material effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

We may experience risks associated with future growth or expansion of our operations or acquisitions, strategic investments or dispositions of businesses, and we may never realize the anticipated benefits of such activities.

As a part of our business strategy, we may make acquisitions or significant investments in and/or disposals of businesses. Any such future acquisitions, investments and/or dispositions would be accompanied by risks such as assessment of values for acquired businesses, intangible assets and technologies, difficulties in assimilating the operations and personnel of acquired companies or businesses, diversion of our management’s attention from ongoing business concerns, our potential inability to maximize our financial and strategic position through the successful incorporation or disposition of operations, maintenance of uniform standards, controls, procedures and policies and the impairment of existing relationships with employees, contractors, suppliers and customers as a result of the integration of new management personnel and cost‑saving initiatives. We cannot guarantee that we will be able to successfully integrate any company or business that we might acquire in the future, and our failure to do so could harm our current business.

condition.

applicable jurisdictions. As a result of these regulations, our future efforts to sell shares of our common stock or raise additional capital may be delayed or prohibited. We may be subject to similar restrictions in other jurisdictions in which we operate.

We are dependent on the continued service of certain key executives, the loss or diminished performance of whom could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Our performance is substantially dependent on the performance of our senior management, Mr. Cifu, our Chief Executive Officer and Mr. Molluso, our Chief Financial Officer. In connection with and subsequent to the IPO, we have entered into employment and other related agreements with certain members of our senior management team that restrict their ability to compete with us should they decide to leave our Company. Even though we have entered into these agreements, we cannot be sure that any member of our senior management will remain with us or that they will not compete with us in the future. The loss of any member of our senior management team could impair our ability to execute our business plan and growth strategy and have a negative impact on our revenues, in addition to potentially causing employee morale problems and/or the loss of key employees. In particular, Mr. Cifu invests in other businesses and spends time on such matters, which could divert their attention from us. Our employment agreement with Mr. Cifu specifically permits his participation in and attention to certain other business activities, including but not necessarily limited to his role as the Vice Chairman and Alternate Governor of the Florida Panthers, a National Hockey League franchise, and his role as a director of the Independent Bank Group, Inc., a regional bank holding company. We cannot guarantee that these or other permitted outside activities will not impact his performance as Chief Executive Officer.

Our success depends, in part, on our ability to identify, recruit and retain skilled management and technical personnel. If we fail to recruit and retain suitable candidates or if our relationship with our employees changes or deteriorates, it could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Our future success depends, in part, upon our continued ability to identify, attract, hire and retain highly qualified personnel, including skilled technical, management, product and technology, trading, sales and marketing personnel, all of whom are in high demand and are often subject to competing offers. Competition for qualified personnel in the financial services industry is intense and we cannot assure you that we will be able to hire or retain a sufficient number of qualified personnel to meet our requirements, or that we will be able to do so at salary, benefit and other compensation costs that are acceptable to us or that would allow us to achieve operating results consistent with our historical results. A loss of qualified employees, or an inability to attract, retain and motivate additional highly skilled employees in the future, could have a material adverse effect on our business.

We could lose significant sources of revenues if we were to lose access to an important exchange or other trading venue.

Changes in applicable laws, regulations or rules promulgated by exchanges could conceivably prevent us from providing liquidity to an exchange or other trading venue where we provide liquidity today. Though our revenues are diversified across exchanges and other trading venues, asset classes and geographies, the loss of access to one or more significant exchanges and other trading venues for any reason could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

Risks Related to the Acquisition of KCG

Significant costs and significant indebtedness were incurred in connection with the consummation of the Acquisition of KCG, and the integration of KCG into our business, including legal, accounting, financial advisory and other costs.

We expect to incur significant costs in connection with integrating the operations, products and personnel of KCG into our business.  These costs may include:

The costs related to the Acquisition of KCG could be higher than currently estimated, depending on how difficult it will be to integrate our business with that of KCG, and the expected cost reductions and synergies may not be achieved.

In addition, we expect to incur a number of non-recurring costs associated with combining the operations of KCG with ours, which cannot be estimated accurately at this time.  While we expected to and incurred a significant amount of transaction fees and other costs related to the consummation of the Acquisition of KCG, additional unanticipated costs may yet be incurred.  Any expected elimination of duplicative costs, as well as the expected realization of other cost reductions, efficiencies and synergies related to the integration of our operations with those of KCG, that may offset incremental transaction and transaction-related costs over time, may not be achieved as projected, or at all.

In addition, we incurred $1,650.0 million of new indebtedness in connection with the Acquisition of KCG, $526 million of which we have prepaid as of March 13, 2018.  The debt we have incurred in connection with the Acquisition of KCG may limit our financial and operating flexibility, and we may incur additional debt, which could increase the risks associated with our substantial indebtedness.  Our substantial indebtedness may have material consequences for our business, prospects, results of operations, financial condition and/or cash flows. 

Integrating KCG’s business into our business may divert management’s attention away from operations, and we may also encounter significant difficulties in integrating the two businesses.

The Acquisition of KCG involves the integration of two companies that have previously operated independently.  The success of the Acquisition of KCG and their anticipated financial and operational benefits, including increased revenues, synergies and cost reductions, will depend in part on our ability to successfully combine and integrate KCG’s business into ours, and there can be no assurance regarding when or the extent to which we will be able to realize these increased revenues, synergies, cost reductions or other benefits.  These benefits may not be achieved within the anticipated time frame, or at all.

Successful integration of KCG’s operations, products and personnel may place a significant burden on management and other internal resources. The diversion of management’s attention, and any difficulties encountered in the transition and integration process, could harm our business, prospects, results of operations, financial condition and/or cash flows.

In addition, the overall integration of the businesses may result in material unanticipated problems, expenses, liabilities and competitive responses.  The difficulties of combining the operations of the companies include, among others:

These factors could result in increased costs, decreases in the amount of expected revenues and diversion of management’s time and energy, which could materially impact our business, prospects, results of operations, financial condition and/or cash flows.

We may not realize the anticipated synergies, net cost reductions and growth opportunities from the Acquisition of KCG.

The benefits that we expect to achieve as a result of the Acquisition of KCG will depend, in part, on the ability of the combined company to realize anticipated growth opportunities, net cost reductions and synergies.  Our success in realizing these growth opportunities, net cost reductions and synergies, and the timing of this realization, depends on the successful integration of our historical business and operations and the historical business and operations of KCG.  Even if we are able to integrate the businesses and operations of the Company and KCG successfully, this integration may not result in the realization of the full benefits of the growth opportunities, net cost reductions and synergies that we currently expect from this integration within the anticipated time frame or at all.  For example, we may be unable to eliminate duplicative costs.  Moreover, we may incur substantial expenses in connection with the integration of our business and KCG’s business.  While we anticipate that certain expenses will be incurred, such expenses are difficult to estimate accurately and may exceed current estimates.  Accordingly, the benefits from the Acquisition of KCG may be offset by costs or delays incurred in integrating the businesses.  We projected net cost reductions and synergies are based on a number of assumptions relating to our business and KCG’s business.  Those assumptions may be inaccurate, and, as a result, our projected net cost reductions and synergies may be inaccurate, and our business, prospects, results of operations, financial condition and/or cash flows could be materially and adversely affected.

The Company will be subject to business uncertainties that could materially and adversely affect our business.

Uncertainty about the effect of the Acquisition of KCG on employees, customers and suppliers may have both a material and adverse effect on the Company.  These uncertainties may impair the Companies’ ability to attract, retain and motivate key personnel, and could cause customers, suppliers and others who deal with the Company to seek to end, suspend or change existing business relationships.  If key employees depart because of issues related to the uncertainty and difficulty of integration or a desire not to remain with us, or if customers, suppliers or others seek to end, suspend or change their dealings with us as a result of the Acquisition of KCG, our business could be materially and adversely impacted.

Risks Related to Our Organization and Structure