26.03.2026
Host: Andriy Kulykov, journalist, TV and radio host, media expert.
Guest: Inna Shcherbyna, Deputy Chairwoman of the Exchange Committee of the Ukrainian Energy Exchange (UEEX).
Listen to Energy Podcasts on:
🎧 Apple Podcasts 👉 https://apple.co/39r9q1R
🎧 Spotify 👉 https://cutt.ly/TtDAY12N
Episode Summary
From a 2010 startup to Ukraine’s primary exchange market operator. In this new episode of The Big Interview, Inna Shcherbyna discusses the transformation of UEEX, the development of organized energy markets, and the realities of commodity exchanges operating during wartime. She explains why blind copying of European models doesn’t always work in Ukraine, how market benchmarks for energy resources are formed, and the prospects for creating a Ukrainian gas hub amidst EU integration.
The Big Interview is a special media project by the Energy Club business community, featuring conversations with CEOs and top managers of Energy Club member companies. It is a candid, professional discussion about daily business operations and future plans.
Andriy Kulykov: Greetings to everyone listening to The Big Interview on the Energy Club platform. Today, our guest is someone who means a great deal to the energy sector and knows everything about it. This is Inna Shcherbyna, Deputy Chairwoman of the Exchange Committee of the Ukrainian Energy Exchange, who has been working there for over 15 years. Ms. Inna represents the team building organized energy exchange markets in Ukraine. Inna, I know you don’t just work at this company—you are transforming its operations. Tell us about your role, the role of the Exchange Committee, and to what extent you and your committee serve as market experts.
Inna Shcherbyna: Greetings to you and the entire professional community listening to us. Thank you for the invitation. Indeed, I serve on the Exchange Committee, which, according to corporate governance standards for exchanges, is effectively a Supervisory Board. At UEEX, it is headed by the owner. Therefore, my position involves management and oversight functions. As you correctly noted, I have been with the company almost since its inception in 2010. Back then, it was just an idea—a startup of sorts—and there were only a few of us. Although we have come a long way and have much to be proud of, I don’t consider myself an “expert” in the absolute sense. Though, perhaps I’m no longer an amateur either, as I sincerely love what I do and understand how energy and exchange markets function. As for the Exchange Committee and our exchange team in general, they are—without false modesty—the best experts in the industry.
Andriy Kulykov: Over the years of your successful work, a vast amount of knowledge has been accumulated, and the Ukrainian Energy Exchange is certainly no longer a startup but the primary operator of the exchange market in Ukraine. Based on your feelings and assessment, does the exchange currently occupy the position you envisioned back in 2010?
Inna Shcherbyna: One thing we must establish is that we are a commodity exchange. Very often, people get confused and criticize Ukraine for not developing its exchange market the way they see it in Wall Street movies. They start saying there should be 100 transactions per minute, derivative hedging, and execution through a Central Counterparty (CCP). This happens because people simply don’t distinguish between commodity, stock, futures, and currency exchanges. These are separate market segments with distinct licensing, regulation, and products. Granted, there are international players operating across multiple segments, combining spot and futures markets. However, the approach that Ukraine can simply blindly implement the models of foreign exchanges does not work.
At the very beginning, I also thought such a direct translation was possible. Later, I believed development should include a transition phase where spot markets balance the system while the rest operate via derivatives. Now, I no longer view our current market model as “transitional.” In Ukraine, we have a high level of digitalization and service. We should stop suffering from an inferiority complex. Therefore, UEEX is not at the exact point we imagined at the start, but we are definitely at the right point. We are fulfilling the tasks the Ukrainian market requires today: securing resources under free competitive conditions, ensuring transparency, preventing manipulation, and forming real market benchmarks.
Andriy Kulykov: In having to change certain perceptions, what played a bigger role—intuition or an analysis of what was happening in the market?
Inna Shcherbyna: I believe the market itself dictated the steps. Sometimes we introduced products that we essentially “copy-pasted” from the European market, and they simply weren’t in demand. These are significant financial investments. An exchange provides a service, and the participants must be mature enough for the instrument. We live in difficult realities and must offer the market solutions that solve its problems without creating an additional financial burden.
Andriy Kulykov: So, what architecture of the Ukrainian exchange market does the Ukrainian consumer need, and how achievable are these options now?
Inna Shcherbyna: Legislation divides the organized exchange market into capital markets and commodity markets. Unfortunately, Ukraine’s stock market is currently under-functional, even though its primary purpose is to raise funds for company development, not just speculation. Only the government and corporate bond market is working steadily.
Regarding the commodity market where we operate, the regulator (NSSMC) has issued four exchange licenses. Commodity exchanges can trade derivative contracts that are not financial instruments. If it is a financial derivative—for example, a cash-settled futures contract—that falls exclusively under the stock exchange and requires settlement through a Central Counterparty (CCP).
Today in Ukraine, only the Settlement Center holds such a license for the securities market, and it does not offer services for energy markets. However, there is a second type of clearing—clearing by determining obligations. Our subsidiary, the Ukrainian Clearing House (UCH), holds this license. It is the first clearing institution in Ukraine specifically serving commodity markets, already boasting nearly 6,000 clients.
Why hasn’t a commodity CCP been created in Ukraine yet? Even in developed European markets, a central counterparty isn’t present everywhere. Obtaining this status automatically subjects the institution to EMIR requirements, which demand complex hedging instruments, variation margins, and contributions to a default fund. For Ukrainian participants under current wartime conditions, this would be an unbearable financial burden.
Another reason: non-residents cannot trade freely here because we are not in the EU and have different tax regulations. The EU uses the Reverse Charge Mechanism for VAT, where the buyer declares both the obligation and the credit. Without this, it’s difficult for European traders to enter our market, and Ukrainian hubs won’t become part of the European network. The World Bank also noted in its report that the CCP model is only effective in very developed and liquid markets.
Andriy Kulykov: A quick follow-up: to what extent do you agree with the conclusions of that report?
Inna Shcherbyna: Obviously, we agree; otherwise, our clearing house would currently be operating under a CCP license rather than a license for determining obligations. We did the math and understand that the financial requirements would be too high for the market.
Andriy Kulykov: You’ve spoken in such detail about the working conditions in the EU—is this because you anticipate we will soon be working under these conditions, or are you offering a warning?
Inna Shcherbyna: How our market develops depends on the terms of EU accession. In the democratic world, markets are divided into regional ones for physical trade and transnational ones for hedging. For example, the gas market has hubs—Virtual Trading Points (VTP). A hub’s success depends on infrastructure, gas convertibility, and trading convenience. The only mature hub in Europe is the Dutch TTF, which accounts for up to 85% of all European gas. Global “monster” exchanges like ICE, CME, and EEX operate there.
The remaining markets function as regional ones, ensuring resources are provided transparently and competitively. However, we must consider the EU’s political strategy. The Electricity Market Design reform envisages transferring the management of price calculation algorithms to a Single Market Coupling Operator. Ukraine needs to prepare for this, as such an approach could destroy the development prospects of regional markets. We must maintain our agency—because if you’re not at the table, you’re on the menu. The absence of a powerful domestic operator for energy derivatives deprives Ukraine of status, and we could simply be swallowed by international players.
Therefore, our uniqueness lies in protecting Ukraine’s agency by creating our own infrastructure. UEEX is ready to invest its capital and technology into building infrastructure for energy derivatives in partnership with the state. We have developed a line of standardized forwards and even futures.
Andriy Kulykov: How is the war changing the realities and prospects of the market? And what about the idea of creating a Ukrainian gas hub?
Inna Shcherbyna: The war has shifted energy flows. Some exchanges have turned into genuine gas hubs. I lived with the idea of creating a Ukrainian gas hub for a long time, and I hope its relevance hasn’t been lost. Of course, our market has shrunk significantly. In electricity, we lost 9.5% in volume; in oil, 6.5%; but in natural gas, the drop reached over 47%.
The state has not introduced stimulating measures for the exchange gas market, like the European Gas Release Programs, although there are certain obligations for electricity and oil. But we continue to work. This year, we plan to present gas trading via standardized deliverable derivatives with full clearing through the UCH. This will provide participants with a predictable price and risk coverage guarantees.
Regarding the gas hub: we are import-dependent, but we have National Bank regulatory restrictions on currency, which complicates working with non-residents. To bring the Ukrainian market back into the game, we are in negotiations with the British company Trayport. This would allow our market to be included in the single Joule screen used by hundreds of European traders. They will see our prices and be able to join the trades on our exchange.
Despite all the difficulties, the fact that we preserved the markets at all and continue to develop them is a great victory. For this, we are infinitely grateful to our military. Building a market is a collective effort: the exchange provides the tools, the participants use them, and the state, as the primary beneficiary of transparency, must facilitate this.
Andriy Kulykov: Ms. Inna, your words bring a sense of optimism. The situation is difficult, but you are ready and offering real solutions. Thank you for this deep conversation!
