The AEC Blueprint 2016-2025 refers to both harmonisation and convergence of ASEAN competition laws. It is not clear what is meant by these terms and whether they are intended to be used interchangeably, but it seems unlikely that this is the case. ‘Convergence’ may be considered a softer approach to achieving consistency, compared with the stricter approach required by ‘harmonisation’. ASEAN would benefit from further discussion on the different outcomes intended (if any) by these terms. This Study concludes that much can be achieved through a softer approach and therefore focusses on ‘convergence’. Convergence of laws in the ASEAN region is critical to assessing cross-border cartels and mergers (which will continue to grow in number). ASEAN has already experienced a significant cross-border merger in the Grab/Uber case. In addition, many of the ASEAN competition laws apply extra-territorially which means more than one AMS law may apply to any one fact situation, requiring a coordinated solution. The Study: (i) Provides a comprehensive overview of the commonalities and differences of the substantive competition rules in ASEAN; (ii) Identifies possible areas to prioritise for convergence and supporting arguments; and (iii) Makes initial recommendations on strategic options regarding the way forward, for consideration of the AEGC in the short to medium term. The Study found that much regional convergence can be achieved through soft law, coordination and cooperation between the AMS regulators. However, further research will be required to determine how some of the provisions are working in practice, in order to bring more alignment. The Study finds considerable similarity at a macro level between the AMS laws covering cartels, anti-competitive agreements (horizontal and vertical), abuse of dominance and mergers.