The CFTC has recently revealed the instant messages written by Citigroup traders related to benchmark manipulation. Having recently published a report on Market Surveillance industry trends and soon to publish another one on the leading vendors, this seemed quite relevant. Current surveillance systems, be it for trade or communications surveillance, use the latest technology to capture possible instances of market abuse or manipulation. The capabilities are far beyond what was available a few years ago, and are holistic and comprehensive in nature. But in the end, the system is only as good as the people using it. The recent revelations have put a question mark over not just the traders involved in the benchmark manipulation scandal, but also the management of some of the leading institutions. Some firms are now going to great lengths to monitor their traders, but this is not an end in itself. The industry culture has to be transformed. The next instance of manipulation will not be in the same place and firms would have to overcome the motivation to profit in order to ensure compliance. The rise in the levels of regulation in the last few years probably would play the part of a positive reinforcer in the decision-making process and help influence industry culture, but is not a guarantor of propriety.
Cyber security has long been a serious matter for financial institutions and corporates alike, but fintech and the digital era make cyber security more of an issue. Delivery of products and services through digital channels means that more systems are available to scrutiny by malefactors. The continuing adoption of fintech APIs (by which institutions provide their clients with third party services) and cloud computing may introduce further vulnerabilities. Meanwhile, the growth of the digital economy is also creating a large population of highly trained technologists — potentially creating greater numbers of cyber attackers and cyber thieves.
Cyber threats affect all industries, but financial institutions are particularly at risk, because of the direct financial gain possible from a cyber intrusion. An important question is whether the existing cyber security guidelines issued by various industry organizations will continue to be adequate in the age of fintech and digital financial services.
Fortunately, the evolution of fintech also entails the development of new technologies aimed at creating the next generation of cyber security. A number of startups are beginning to develop applications using semantic analysis and machine learning to tackle KYC, AML and fraud issues. Significantly, IBM Watson and eight universities recently unveiled an initiative aimed at applying artificial intelligence to thwart cyber attacks.
The traditional cyber security paradigm is one of “defense,” and unfortunately defenses can always be breached. Artificial intelligence, as advanced as it is, still represents the traditional cyber security paradigm of “defense,” putting up physical and virtual walls and fortifications to protect against or react to attacks, breaches, and fraud or other financial crime.
What if there were a technology that broke through this “defense” paradigm and instead made cyber security an integral aspect of financial technology?
This is precisely the approach taken to cyber security by blockchain technology.
Bank consortia and startups alike are engaged in efforts to develop distributed ledgers for transfer of value (payments) and for capital markets trading (where the execution of complex financial transactions is done through blockchain-based smart contracts). Accordingly, distributed ledgers and smart contracts are likely to one day have a place in treasury operations, for both payments and trading.
Blockchain is gaining attention primarily because its consensus-based, distributed structure may create new business models within financial services. In addition, though, blockchain technology has at its core encryption technologies that not only keep it secure, but are actually the mechanism by which transactions are completed and recorded. In the case of Bitcoin, blockchain has demonstrated that its encryption technologies are quite secure. The further development of blockchain will necessarily entail significant enhancements in next-generation encryption technologies such as multi-party computation and homomorphic encryption, which are already under development. In other words, blockchain is likely to not only play a role in altering the way payments and capital markets transactions are undertaken, but also in the way next-generation financial systems are secured.
The recent statements by Nasdaq regarding the possible use of a trading delay by the proposed IEX Exchange puts the spotlight on a battle for supremacy not just between rival exchanges, but very different philosophies regarding what the ultimate role of exchanges in the global capital markets should be. The established exchanges, willingly or unwillingly, represent the status quo in terms of how exchanges should function. IEX on the other hand hopes to represent the interests of those trading participants who believe that they have been left behind in the race for speed in today's capital markets, especially the retail participants and the smaller buyside. It seems like an inevitable outcome in the aftermath of the global financial crisis, which has stoked the debate on economic inequality and the unfair advantage that a select group of trading participants have over others due to their advanced technological capabilities and use of highly sophisticated financial products.
Getting back to the objections raised by Nasdaq over the SEC proposal that any delay of less than a millisecond could qualify as immediate, which would enable IEX to operate in the way it wants, there is certainly some substance in Nasdaq's argument. The SEC would have to come up with a solution that is acceptable to both sides, and does not leave it vulnerable to legal challenges. It is going to be an interesting couple of months for industry obervers as they follow the debate over the fairness and validity of the SEC proposal, and the decision on the IEX application.
The recent purchase by Citadel Securities of the assets of Citigroup's Automated Trading Desk business has further cemented Citadel's position as a leading market-maker. It follows closely on the heels of Citadel's acquisition of KCG Holdings' designated market maker business at the NYSE. Citadel has also been performing strongly in the swap markets in the US, specifically the swap execution facilities (SEF). It has built a reputation for reliability in difficult market conditions, at a time when broker-dealers are finding it difficult to maintain their market presence.
While the success of Citadel is noteworthy, it represents significant industry and regulatory undercurrents. Investment banks have labored under tougher market conditions and stronger regulatory restrictions. Firms such as Citadel have benefitted as they are not as tightly regulated as the banks. While this trend had been predicted in the years immediately after financial crisis, it is interesting to see the predictions coming to bear. The effect on the market structure has also been profound, and while many of the relevant developments have taken place in the US, other leading capital markets should also see similar changes in the near future due to similar economic and regulatory evolution. Investment banks will continue to narrow their focus in terms of their capital market presence, and we expect the leading ones to carve out specific niches instead ofmaintaining the comprehensive presence they had in the last decade.
From the buyside's point of view, while the lower presence of investment banks could indicate lower volumes and liquidity, it also represents a market in which there might be greater responsiveness to the needs of medium and smaller sized buyside firms.
The Bank for International Settlements (BIS) recently reported that there was a decline in the cost of replacing outstanding OTC derivatives, the first since the financial crisis. There was a similar decline in the gross notional amount outstanding as well. While this indicates the tough regulatory regimes worldwide in the aftermath of the crisis, it also a sign of a healthier and more resilient OTC derivatives market. Due to the rising regulation-related costs of trading, market participants are looking to make their OTC derivatives trading more efficient. Tools such as trade compression and collateral optimization are being used for this purpose. So the decline in outstanding is also an indication of more efficient trading due to compression. Another sign of the efforts to reduce systemic risk is the rise in volumes of OTC derivatives that are being centrally cleared. The greater use of clearing houses is something that regulators have been espousing for some time, and an approach that most market participants and observers agree with. Besides the internal factors, external economic ones such as interest rates and exchange rates also explain some of the decline in value of OTC derviatives trading. Again, these are a sign of market fluctuations and do not necessarily represent any market decline. In our view, the BIS numbers are indicative of both the changes that regulators have put in place over the last 7-8 years and of a global economy that is still recovering from the financial crisis and the following economic challenges.
The recent resignation of the head of the integrity committee at Deutsche Bank has highlighted the complexity around the handling of regulatory requirements, and fines related to Benchmark Manipulation. Firms are struggling to find the right balance between putting checks and balances in place on the one hand and being able to keep the costs of implementing new processes and systems under control on the other. There is also the need to ensure that the surveillance capabilities of capital market participants, trading venues and regulators are able to deal with the possibility of market abuse and manipulation in the future. Regulations such as the upcoming Market Abuse Regulation (MAR) in Europe are placing a lot of emphasis on the intent of traders when it comes to analysing any suspected rogue activity. Surveillance systems need to overlay order and trade data with the related electronic and voice communication in a cross-asset, cross-market context. This is a tricky task at the best of times. To provide some insight into the recent industry trends and updates to the products of the leading vendors, Celent is coming out with a two report series on the topic in the month of May. The first report will look at the recent market trends, while the second one will discuss the updates to vendor products in the last year and the areas in which future development is expected to take place. This research builds upon our four report series from 2015.