The Conflict: Native vs. Governed WhatsApp

For those who are not familiar with WhatsApp monitoring and related technology solution options, there are currently two options that exist in the market:

• WhatsApp Native mode - not official and not Meta API based. Vendor builds monitoring capability unofficially (not using the Meta official approved API). Voice calls can be made/received but are not recorded/archived.
• WhatsApp Govern mode - official and approved Meta approach via Microsoft Teams user experience or via a standalone app (vs. native WhatsApp user experience). Vendor builds monitoring capability using the Meta-official-approved API, either via Microsoft Teams or a native standalone app. Voice calls are captured and recorded (a workaround built by a vendor to capture via Teams)

Firms are essentially choosing between functionality and stability. The table below outlines the trade-offs identified by industry experts:

One firm's internal assessment of 150 monitored traders found that 80% require broadcasting and group chat functionality for broker communications, making Native mode the necessary, if unstable, choice for most front-office roles.

Managing Continuity Gaps and Meta Device Bans

Participants reported that Meta implements periodic blocks on devices used for Native mode surveillance, seemingly following a 90-day cycle. During these blocks, surveillance capture stops even though trading continues.

Firms are managing this risk through two primary methods:

• Maintaining existing numbers: This preserves client relationships but requires the firm to accept periodic surveillance gaps.
• Pre-emptive number changes: Resetting the ban cycle during vendor transitions, though this requires extensive change management to maintain contact continuity with counterparties.

Bridging the Voice Recording Gap

Standard Native mode does not record WhatsApp voice calls. To manage this, firms are using policy-based controls rather than technical ones. Traders are required to redirect WhatsApp calls to recorded channels like Microsoft Teams or Cloud9.

One firm reported using self-reporting protocols, where traders document accidental voice call answers. This generates roughly six documented policy exceptions per month. Building this compliance culture requires multi-year development and a high level of organisational trust to ensure disclosure does not trigger punitive consequences.

Segmented Deployment as Best Practice

Rather than a uniform platform, firms are now exploring and deploying technology based on specific workflows:

• Native Mode: For broker-facing roles requiring broadcast and group chats.
• Governed Mode: For client relationship management roles, conducting one-to-one communications.

This segmented approach allows firms to frame technology limitations as industry-wide constraints rather than firm-specific failures when seeking management support.

Retention Policy Complexity: MiFID vs. REMIT

Retention policies vary significantly based on jurisdiction and regulatory framework:

• MiFID Alignment: Regulated entities typically implement a seven-year global retention policy.
• REMIT Variance: In Europe, some firms retain voice for only six months based on REMIT requirements, creating a notable disparity with their seven-year written records.
• Legal Holds: These introduce the need for indefinite preservation, potentially spanning decades, which is particularly challenging when legacy voice recordings lack unique user identifiers.

Looking Forward: The "Coexistence App"

Vendors report that Meta is investigating a "coexistence app" that would combine the Native user experience with enterprise-grade API stability. Development priorities include broadcast reception and enterprise billing. While this represents progress, implementation is not expected in the near term, meaning firms must continue to operate with documented risk acceptance and multi-layered controls for the foreseeable future.