Yes(not specifically saying this data does - just that very similar data is essential to many HFs/QHFs). Search alternative market data.

Similar/Related: https://www.consumerreports.org/media-room/press-releases/20...

Yes there is a record for most trades done. The regulating body depends on the type of instrument (equities, options, futures, fixed income, etc.)

The Consolidated Audit Trail (CAT) is the primary location for this data as it relates to equities. https://www.finra.org/rules-guidance/key-topics/consolidated...

The settlement cycle also dictates the frequency of reporting for many investment instruments. https://www.finra.org/investors/insights/understanding-settl...

>find out what it is

Google Googles did this 13 years ago https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Goggles

It remains interesting to me how much we have been able to do, already, with technology. But discoverability, walled gardens, and <hand waving>marketing/positioning/hype</hand waving> have obscured awareness/adoption.

What criteria would you suggest to measure in an effort to make it clear that the FDA has >found the right balance between risk reduction and upside potential?

Not OP, but it's certainly not by leaving drugs unapproved in the US that have been in wide use in Canada, England, Japan, etc for years (and in some cases decades). The incentives are so misaligned for the FDA that the bias for inaction is enormous.

I also find it a bit patronizing that a federal agency determines whether or not a drug they've deemed safe has enough upside potential for me. That's a value judgement I'd like to make for myself.

Sorry if this sounds harsh, but the FDA's inability to approve drugs inside of a decade has personally impacted me quite a bit.

I don't think there's a good answer to that question, unfortunately. What we're doing now seems to be working for most people most of the time, but it'd be absurd to think there's no further room for optimization. And it seems unlikely that the best approach is more restrictive regulation, given that extremely-useful drugs are going undeveloped for decades.

So... that leaves more flexible regulation as a worthwhile approach going forward. I like the idea of making limited human trials easier to carry out and less costly in general.