Talk:International Securities Identification Number

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Finance (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Finance, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Finance on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Commercial Model and Controversy[edit]

Counterpoint to the above; To be accurate, ISIN is not free and open, and almost no ISO standard is made to be free and open. Some ISO standards are offered by their RA or MA as free and open. But ISO maintains rights for Intellectual Property on all ISO standards, and advocates cost recovery and RAND principles around those standards. Further, access to ISO standards library is one of the funding points for ISO. This is not an indictment, simply a statement. To say ISIN is open source is highly inaccurate. Free use is not uniform, even removing consideration of S&P issues. 'Competition' is perspective-based. Is there competition for issuance of ISIN? No. Are there multiple methodologies for identification of securities and financial instruments apart from using an ISIN? Yes, there are. Rcr203 (talk) 15:57, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

The VB code appears to be right, but the descriptions forget the reverse the string step[edit]

Either than or the examples are all wrong, we don't need the reverse the string step. Anyway it's a little foobar, needs some work. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 10:33, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Could someone please move this page to reflect the correct title[edit]

According to ISO 6166:2001 this system it is "Identification Number" not "Identifying Number"

ISIN and CUSIP difference[edit]

There seem to be some differences in ISIN and CUSIP validation that need to be made more clear. Let me see if I have it right:


  1. The letters are converted to digits (becoming two seperate digits)
  2. The numbers are split into two groups
  3. The digits from one group (the one which contains the right most character) are multiplied by two
  4. The digits are summed
  5. etc


  1. The characters are split into two groups
  2. The digits from one group (the one which contains the right most character) are multiplied by two (letters being converted to numbers before multiplying)
  3. The digits are summed
  4. etc

So ISIN splits a letter ('C' for example) into '1' and '2' and puts them in different groups, where CUSIP groups then multplies 12 x 2

Reference: CUSIP also detailed here:

Should it not be equities instead of securities[edit]

Shouldn't this sentence:

ISINs are created only for securities, and not derivatives such as options or futures.


ISINs are created only for EQUITIES, and not derivatives such as options or futures.

Since technically options and futures ARE securities?

See Security (finance)

Security is the legal right given to a creditor by a borrower.

In modern commerce, the creation of fungible credit, such legal interest became transformed as business people accepted the notes of third parties that were backed by credit worthy parties (banks). As a consequence a security became a type of transferable interest representing financial value. Traditionally, securities have been categorized into debt and equity securities, and between bearer and registered securities.

The uses that are made of securities have changed over time, for both the issuer and holder. Though the purpose of capital raising has sometimes been taken to be a defining characteristic of securities, its uses have expanded greatly in modern times.

They are often represented by a certificate. They include shares of corporate stock or mutual funds, bonds issued by corporations or governmental agencies, stock options or other options, limited partnership units, and various other formal "investment instruments." Banknotes, checks, and some bills of exchange do not fall into this category. Transferable interest in commodities like oil, food grains or metals can also be referred to as securities. One can enter into contracts to buy or sell various quantities of commodities in various commodity exchanges. These become transferable interest in the particular commodity.

Nancymc 20:04, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
No, Security is still right, because it includes both Equities AND Bonds. So maybe "but not" instead of "and not". (GAVollink) — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:25, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Freely available?[edit]

The CUSIP bureau claims that anyone who uses CUSIP numbers in a database needs to pay the CUSIP bureau a licensing fee, since they say that their numbers are copyrighted.

Are ISINs free for anyone to use? Does the CUSIP bureau complain about this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:00, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Haaaaa, laughabale. All these national numbering agencies makes millions of dollars yearly and try and keep anyone they can out, all in the name of 'this is not a real website' or 'that group is not a member of that agency (meaning a member of the monopoly). Disgusting. CUSIP makes everyone pay for data usage including ISIN CODES from the US that incorporation the CUSIP number!!!! They are not ever free. Disgusting all these groups and people and shame on your for defending these groups. Unreal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:51, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

How to obtain a ISIN code for a soon to be listed securities?[edit]

How to obtain a ISIN code for a soon to be listed securities? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 04:28, 15 February 2007 (UTC).

In the UK the London Stock Exchange will issue ISIN's for securitites and in Switzerland it is done by SIX Telekurs AG.

Please make it available to.....[edit]

I tried to search the string on the main page as 'International Securities Identification Number' and it doesn't redirect to the page of International Securities Identifying Number. According to the info at

My preference as above should also be valid —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 10:43, 16 April 2007 (UTC).

Well... now it does. You could have done it yourself you know. Rob cowie 19:13, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

REG-S and 144 A ISINs[edit]

Please brief about types of ISINs as well like REG s and 144 A ISINs. What type of ISINs are they? can any one security has both type of ISINs and some more....?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 07:56, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

The ISIN is just a number that identifies a security. Regulation S bonds get a common code and an ISIN and are generally accepted for clearance through systems outside the US. 144-A bonds get a CUSIP number and an ISIN and are generally accepted for clearance through The Depository Trust Company (DTC) system. See [1].Paul Foxworthy (talk) 07:36, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

The relation with the FIX Protocol could be stated as thus :[edit]

The SecurityID Field(48) specifies an ISIN number when the ID source Field(22) is equal to 4 : 22=4 48=ISIN samusz (talk) 09:29, 24 July 2008 (UTC) 09:12, 24 July 2008 (UTC)


A recent edit said:

This doesn't seem to work for Portuguese ISINS ie: PTOTEMOE0027

It does work...

  • ISIN code: PTOTEMOE0027
  • Converted to digits: 2529242914222414002
  • Split into two groups: 2222122102 & 594942440
  • Multiply group containing rightmost character: 4444244204 & 594942440
  • Sum of digits: 73
  • Modulo 10: 3
  • 10's complement: 7
  • Modulo 10: 7

Which correctly matches the check digit. -Stelio (talk) 17:39, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

What does "rightmost character" mean!?[edit]

I don't really understand, what "rightmost character" means!? Can anybody explain it? The examples don't help me. -- (talk) 10:31, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

- The rightmost character is the last character at the right hand end of the string. It's more to the right than any other, so the most right. The checksum algorithm splits characters in the string into two groups: odd and even. The rightmost character might be in either the odd group or the even group, depending on the length of the string. It's always the group that contains the rightmost character that is doubled. Another way to look at it is you start from the rightmost character and work backwards towards the beginning of the string, doubling every second character. Paul Foxworthy (talk) 08:46, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Proposed merge[edit]

I actually think that the ISO6166 page adds no further value and should be deleted.qhb (talk) 22:12, 20 July 2016 (UTC) I can't see any other discussion but would strongly support merging the ISO article in here. They are essentially the same subject Chrismorey (talk) 06:11, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

I agree Paul Foxworthy (talk) 07:22, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

I support the merge. JDAWiseman (talk) 23:00, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

I agree as well. Also update that ISO6166 is revised as of 2013, so ISO6166:2013 is the correct reference. Rcr203 (talk) 15:59, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

History of ISINs[edit]

Please could somebody who knows the history add a summary of it, even if only to say when ISINs started. JDAWiseman (talk) 23:02, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

Agreed and done. Sargdub (talk) 08:17, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Removing a space[edit]

Hello. I have been repetitively removing a single space in the article, in a three-quote, the rendered a bad formatting. Each time I have been reverted because of "spamming". I would like to discuss here the definition of spamming that could apply to removing a single space. Thank you. Kiwipidae (talk) 17:24, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

E.g. one of the edits removing a space
The space seems redundant, but I wouldn’t have edited it. Surely not worthy of much fuss? JDAWiseman (talk) 20:00, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Multiply redundant definitions of securities which may carry an ISIN[edit]

The article currently appears to define which securities ISINs apply to in 3 different places, using 3 different descriptions!

Paragraph 1: bonds, commercial paper, stocks and warrants
Paragraph 2: debt securities, shares, options, derivatives and futures
Description section: equities, debts, ETFs, options, derivatives, and futures

I recently edited "debts" to "bonds" but this was reverted. I happen to think I was right, since "debts" in this context is both mangled English and risks referring to non-securities such as bank loans. However, I do not have sight of a copy of ISO 6166, so if someone who does have access to the English version would like to consolidate these definitions in one place in the article, using the actual language of the standard, that would be hugely appreciated. Thanks. CharlesSpencer (talk) 18:13, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Wow; I didn't expect an ISO standard to cost so much. The current latest edition, ISO 6166:2013, is priced at CHF 58. Instead I found a free copy of an older edition, ISA 6166:2001, which I imagine is sufficient. Annex B ("Competence of numbering agencies") on pages 6-7 lists the following asset types:
  • Equities (shares, units, depository receipts)
  • Debt instruments (bonds and debt instruments other than international, international bonds and debt instruments, stripped coupons and principal, treasury bills, others)
  • Entitlements (rights, warrants)
  • Derivatives (options, futures)
  • Others (commodities, currencies, indices, interest rates)
As expected, that's a wide scope. Hopefully that's enough information for you. In particular, I see that "debt" is indeed the language of the ISO and encompasses bonds. The wording most in keeping with (certainly this edition of) the standard is "securities and other financial instruments (including equities, debt instruments, entitlements, derivatives, and others)". -Stelio (talk) 18:46, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
I absolutely agree - that price was what made me ask someone who had already spent that much to help!!! Thank you for your clarification. "Debt instrument" I have no problems with, because the word "instrument" goes to "security" (i.e. transferable). Just saying "debt" or worse yet "debts" on its own could, in technical English, theoretically encompass debts in non-securities form such as bank loans, which do NOT carry ISINs! Thanks again. Kind regards, CharlesSpencer (talk) 06:21, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
Ah, yes of course. Quite right that "debt instrument" is fine, but "debt" is unacceptably generic. :-) Nice work; thank you. -Stelio (talk) 11:25, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
Just seen all my hard work (and Stelio's) reverted by an unnamed someone editing from an IP address and characterising our work as spam. Rather than start an edit war, I am going to ask for contributors to this page to decide whether the version put together by Stelio and me, drawing from the ISO standard itself (albeit the 2001 version) is superior to the current version, and revert (partially or in full - no pride of authorship). Thanks. CharlesSpencer (talk) 10:37, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
I contacted the user but have had no response after a few days. So in the meantime I've restored your good work. -Stelio (talk) 10:05, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
Thanks Stelio. CharlesSpencer (talk) 11:17, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
A non-logged in user (assumed to be the same person as before) has reverted my edit now twice. Kiwipidae undid the penultimate act of vandalism, but my edit was again deleted so I have myself now reverted again! Does anybody know what we do now to try to stop this? Thanks CharlesSpencer (talk) 07:12, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

Request for Help[edit]

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

I'm having some difficulty on this article (International Securities Identification Number) where, in my opinion, good content is being removed (and replaced with a clickbait link). It's a slow process, with edits happening over days rather than minutes, but it still feels like an edit war to me. I'm currently reverting each time, and it feels like I'm crossing into 3RR territory (in spirit, since these are not within 24 hour periods).

I've tried reaching out to the offending user(s) via their talk pages but have had no response. I'm too close to this incident to make the call on whether this is clearly vandalism, and the slow speed of the war means it doesn't hit the normal thresholds for 3RR or semi-protection, so a request for help from experienced editors seems the appropriate thing for me to do. And I don't know whether this specifically needs an administrator to weigh in, hence I haven't used the Admin help template.

Phase 1[edit]

In this first phase, following conversation on the article's talk page above, user CharlesSpencer made revisions to improve the article (supported by information that I provided). This was then undone multiple times by anonymous IPs:

User Date Reverted 7 Jul Stelio - 12 Jul
2600:387:4:803::ad 18 Jul Kwipidae - 21 Jul
2600:387:4:803::59 23 Jul] CharlesSpencer - 8 Aug 9 Aug Stelio - 10 Aug

Phase 2[edit]

In this (more recent) phase, specific sections of the page have been targeted multiple times. The details of changes (used as headers in the table below) are:

  • NNA - Description of the NNAs' role being removed (the centralised National Numbering Agencies that are the official issuers of ISINs).
  • SEDOL - Reference to SEDOL removed (the official UK security identifier that forms part of GB ISINs).
  • Link - Link to anna-web (official Association of NNAs) being replaced with a link to (a commercial site that makes money from acting as a middleman between a buyer and an NNA).

Table of diffs for consideration:

User NNA SEDOL Link Reverted 23 Aug Stelio - 25 Aug 23 Aug Stelio - 25 Aug
2600:387:4:803::a4 30 Aug Stelio - 31 Aug
2600:387:4:803::a4 30 Aug
Jacoblin33 30 Aug 31 Aug Stelio - 1 Sep
TimothyMirr 3 Sep Stelio - 4 Sep 5 Sep Stelio - 7 Sep 7 Sep Stelio - 7 Sep
2600:387:4:803::68 8 Sep Stelio - 8 Sep
SteliosChineseKock 8 Sep Ponyo - 8 Sep
2600:387:4:803::63 10 Sep Stelio - 10 Sep
2600:387:4:803::63 10 Sep Stelio - 11 Sep
KimLeason 18 Sep Stelio - 19 Sep

Thanks for reading! -Stelio (talk) 12:28, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Hey Stelio. I'm definitely not an expert on the subject of the article, and you are right to be more concerned about the spirit of 3RR than the letter, not for the reason of sanctions, but for the reason of building a better encyclopedia. You seem to make a fairly convincing argument that these are not well-intentioned edits. I don't think anyone is going to be too terribly harsh on you for the whole thing. But it's probably way too slow-motion of an edit war to justify asking for page protection.
I would recommend you drop some notes on the talk page of the user next time they come around. Sometimes the easiest way to convince someone to stop being disruptive is to show them why they're being disruptive, rather than them apparently just visiting the article every so often, and seeing that their contributions have been reverted. Gotta keep in mind that a lot of new users don't even realize that talk pages exist in the first place. TimothyJosephWood 14:22, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for the comment. Agreed that semi-protection doesn't feel right for a war of this speed. But I've tried reaching out via user talk pages and have had no response. Attempts: [1] [2] [3] [4]. The shifting of IP addresses and the creation of a named user account for the sole purpose (so far) of a single one of these edits makes me feel like there will be no response in the future either.
I'll keep patrolling the page, reverting the disruptive edits, and posting again on whichever new IP address user page pops up next time. -Stelio (talk) 16:50, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
I've also added it to my watchlist. So I'll try to keep an eye out. TimothyJosephWood 17:25, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Timothy! (Also, new entry added to the table above for the latest new single-use account, TimothyMirr.) -Stelio (talk) 10:21, 4 September 2017 (UTC) Updated table again. -Stelio (talk) 08:59, 7 September 2017 (UTC) Ha! The latest IP vandalism had the temerity to repeat my edit description of "restoring good content as per talk page". I note with interest that user has not discussed this on the talk page. -Stelio (talk) 19:54, 7 September 2017 (UTC) More. -Stelio (talk) 19:15, 8 September 2017 (UTC) With the latest named account (that is a profane personal attack) it's clearly vandalism. I'll request semi-protection. -Stelio (talk) 20:03, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protection request[edit]

As per the above section...

  • This page is undergoing persistent vandalism from someone that is removing good links and replacing them with a link to a clickbait site.
  • The vandal uses anonymous IP accounts and single-use named accounts, so semi-protection will be an effective block.
  • I have left messages on the talk pages of various of the accounts used (assuming good faith at first) and have no response from any of them.
  • Given the slow speed of the edit war (typically once a day, as per the table of diffs above), I request a one-week semi-protection (one day will essentially have no effect).
  • There are currently few other edits to this article other than the edit war, so semi-protection will not be blocking good edits.

Thanks. -Stelio (talk) 20:15, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Thank you Maile66 for the semi-protection! :-) -Stelio (talk) 08:42, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on International Securities Identification Number. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:52, 15 November 2017 (UTC)