Citadel and Susquehanna Dropped Insider Trading Lawsuit
The two firms reached settlements with individual defendants to resolve claims of market losses.
Updated on Sept. 29, 2026 in Financial Crime
Live Poll
Do you trust the market-making practices of firms like Susquehanna and Citadel?
Susquehanna International Group and Citadel Securities have moved to dismiss their lawsuit against alleged insider traders. The financial firms disclosed their plans to drop the case following the finalization of settlements with individual defendants.
Why it matters
The decision to abandon the litigation marks a resolution to the firms' claims regarding financial losses attributed to insider trading. By settling with the individual defendants, the companies have opted to conclude the dispute outside of a courtroom.
Susquehanna International Group and Citadel Securities confirmed they are dismissing their active litigation. The status of the legal process has shifted to finalizing individual settlements with the named defendants.
The players
Susquehanna International Group
This is a global quantitative trading firm that provides liquidity to financial markets.
Citadel Securities
This is a leading market maker that executes trades for retail and institutional investors.
The details
The companies filed the original suit alleging that they suffered losses due to the actions of insider traders. Having reached agreements with the involved parties, the firms informed the court of their intent to drop the legal proceedings entirely.
Timeline
September 28, 2026: The firms disclosed their plans in a letter sent Monday night.
Legal Context
The 2014 SEC investigation into high-frequency trading practices established a baseline for how market makers manage legal exposure related to trading integrity. This withdrawal follows a pattern where major market makers favor private resolution over extended public litigation in trading disputes.
The conclusion of this lawsuit resolves a high-profile legal dispute between significant market participants. Investors can view this as a closing of a chapter regarding allegations of insider misconduct within the industry.
The takeaway
Large financial firms often prioritize confidential settlements to resolve litigation efficiently once initial objectives are met. This approach avoids the unpredictability of prolonged trials and allows the organizations to return focus to their primary market-making activities.
Further reading
For more on market enforcement, visit the Financial Crime section.
Source note: This article includes information reported by Bloomberg Business.
Live Poll
Do you trust the market-making practices of firms like Susquehanna and Citadel?
