Straddling the Old and the New – Fintech in the Capital Markets

Straddling the Old and the New – Fintech in the Capital Markets

We are sitting at an extraordinary inflection point in the capital markets. The competitive landscape is in flux as competitors find their way through a maze of constraints. The constraints are well known-increasing regulation, rapidly changing market structure, liquidity challenges, and difficult macroeconomic conditions. There is also a feedback loop with the broader economy; many of the same forces that are constraining the capital markets are creating an unusual political landscape. We have seen this playout with Brexit, and the world awaits the outcome of the US presidential election. These then feedback into the capital market as uncertainty around managing volatility, risk and whether regulation will proceed as expected will be delayed or, radically altered.

For many capital market incumbents: the investment banks, broker-dealers, asset managers, and infrastructure firms are also saddled with extremely complicated legacy systems that are highly siloed, very expensive to run and even more expensive to change. While many are rationalizing systems, in certain areas it is just not possible. In many cases, ancient systems are running broad swaths of the back office, and sit under decades of add-ons, fit-ins, force-ins, and integrate with countless systems internal and external. Capital market firms are often in the habit of creating an abstraction layer above systems to tie more and more data and systems together. This creates a kludgy infrastructure, but it can, and does work.

Given that there are so many challenges, and hence opportunities, we have seen a slew of fintechs increasingly offering capital market solutions. There are those that come from the capital markets and speak the language of the markets. They have grown up in the space and see an opportunity to solve a particular pain point in investment process, trading or operations. There are other fintechs that have entered the vertical from another and are leveraging their data processing, analytical, machine learning, and hardware acceleration prowess in the capital markets.

We have seen fintech disruption in banking, but in the capital markets, so far, it has been much more collaboration than disruption. Fintech firms are bringing unique data, analytic, technology solutions into a highly regulated business. Fintechs that partner with existing firms are offered scale, legitimacy, and clients in a highly risk averse and regulation heavy business. For the brave incumbent firms who are providing capital and nuanced expertise to these innovators, there are rewards: new ways of looking at their business, but more importantly, ready built solutions that they can scale. Overcoming the fear of engaging these firms effectively is a path to finding better and more cost-effective solutions.

In my report, From Financial Technology to Fintech: Trends in Capital Markets, I look at the areas in which the rate of change is greatest, the nature of fintech partnerships in the capital markets and how they are evolving. I look at the pain points in KYC, liquidity, trading, liquidity, collateral and operations. I investigate the growing acceptance of cloud, the importance of leveraging data correctly and analytics and tie these to specific providers with solutions in InvestmentTech, MarketTech, RegTech and AltData. I also look at emerging technologies such as distributed ledger technology, AI, and business models that are looking to remap the capital markets at its core.

Yes, we are at an inflection point and some of the systems out there are kludgy, but in the short term, solving specific business pain points is the key to solving some of the industry’s thorniest problems.

Spot FX Gets Walloped!

Spot FX Gets Walloped!

The BIS triennial survey, the most comprehensive data point, indicated that overall FX volume shrunk 5% from $5.36 Trln in 2013 to $5.09 in 2016. However, FX spot fell by a whopping 23.7%. London maintained overall geographic leadership but saw its share move down to 37% from 41% in 2013. APAC trading centers saw growth from 15% to 21% market share.  Overall, FX swaps and currency swaps grew, and cross currency swaps grew sharply, while FX option volume nosedived.

Spot fell across the major currency pairs Euro 12.5%, Yen 12.5%, Swiss Franc by 13.6% with Sterling rising by 2.6% as the lead up to Brexit caused considerable repositioning in Sterling assets.  No surprise as the Chinese Renminbi rose 41% and became the 8th most traded currency pair.

Capital constraints, digestion of regulatory change in the US and impending global regulation, changes in traditional liquidity provision, scandals and market disruptions since the last survey in 2013 are the main causes of the drop in spot. Additionally, the impact of the SNB’s surprise move in 2015 dislocated active FX trading and had many prime brokers reevaluating  their risk considerations. Creating challenges for smaller and riskier trading shops and hedge funds in maintain FX prime brokerage probably moved some of the FX spot volume onto exchange trade FX futures.


The market structure in FX continues to change quickly with acceleration in the adoption of digital models for trading and analyzing data in the FX market at the same time as major changes in FX market making and liquidity provision which has impacted spot FX trading.

 

 

The next wave of fintech disruption

The next wave of fintech disruption

The bank has traditionally sat in the center of the broader financial world.  The post-crisis challenges have allowed fintech firms to capture market share in traditional banking endeavours such as payments, lending, investments, and financial planning. First wave fintech disruptors with no asset base or legacy banking infrastructure have made significant inroads into challenging banks in their core businesses. Banks have reacted in a variety of ways to these challenges with disparate degrees of success, but only those actively partnering with and supporting fintech innovators have gained a competitive edge.

Similarly, exchanges have stood at the centre of the capital markets for much of human history. The years of connectivity, combined with the earth-shaking changes in the ability of firms to access capital and a global regulatory model that has focused on risk mitigation, have created an ideal world for next wave disruptors to bring solutions to complex trading, liquidity, regulatory, and operational problems that have been difficult for incumbent firms to solve on their own. This investment is going toward blockchain, RegTech, AI and other tools for driving change in the capital markets.

As it has happened with banks, those market infrastructure providers that decide to embrace, leverage and coexist with upcoming fintech firms will be able to further their historical strengths and stay at the core of financial markets.

Since 2008, capital flow into fintech investments has grown sixfold. Last year, about $19 billion in capital was invested in fintech across approximately 1,200 deals, nearly doubling funding flows in 2014. We have seen banks partnering with fintech, filling gaps and bringing critical experience and enterprise scale to these endeavours. Major parts of the financial services ecosystem run the risk of being transformed by pioneering financial technology firms. At the same time, strategic firms have developed innovation centers of excellence, laboratories, and their own CVC funding vehicles to invest and guide in areas of core interest to these firms. CVCs now represent 25% of global fintech capital flows.

This week the Deutsche Bourse announced the creation of its CVC DB1 to fund innovativation in the capital markets. Celent, on behalf of Deutsche Bourse, explores this next wave of fintech in the capital markets and highlights the power of future collaboration between leading financial infrastructure players and fintech firms.

Future of Fintech in the Capital Markets can be downloaded from the DB1 Ventures website. I look forward to your comments.

Proof of artificial intelligence exponentiality

Proof of artificial intelligence exponentiality

I have been studying Artificial Intelligence (AI) for Capital Markets for ten months now and I am shocked everyday by the speed of evolution of this technology. When I started researching this last year I was looking for the Holy Grail trading tools and could not find them, hence I settled for other parts of the trade lifecycle where AI solutions already existed.

Yesterday, as I was preparing for a speech on AI at a conference, one of my colleagues in Tokyo forwarded me an Asian newswire mentioning that Nomura securities, after two years of research, would be launching an AI enabled HFT equity tool for its brokerage institutional clients in May –  here it is: the Holy Grail exists, and not only at Nomura. Other brokers have been shyly speaking about their customizable smart brokerage, e.g. how to use technology so that tier5 clients feel they are being served like a tier1. Some IBs are working on that, they just don’t publicly talk about it.

Talking to Eurekahedge last week I realized that they are tracking 15 funds that use AI in their strategy, I would argue there are even more than that because none of those were based in Japan (or Korea where apparently Fintech is exploding as we speak).

All this to reiterate that AI is an exponential technology, ten months ago there were no HFT trading solutions using AI, and we thought they were a few years away but no, here they are NOW. And the same with sentiment analysis, ten months ago they were just a marketing tool, now they are working on millions of documents every day at GSAM. Did I forget to mention smart TCA that’s coming to an EMS near you soon?

Stay tuned for more in my upcoming buy side AI tools report.

A last look at Last Look? Barclays and FX market structure

A last look at Last Look? Barclays and FX market structure
The FX market is trying to digest the latest large FX fine and the impact on market structure. According to last week’s press release from the New York Department of Financial Services (NYDFS), Barclays was fined US$150 million for “automated, electronic foreign exchange trading misconduct.” The order goes on to detail this additional fine is a result of using its Last Look system to automatically reject what Barclays determined would be an unprofitable trade within the time window created by the system’s defined Last Look window. This brings foreign exchange fines by NYDFS against Barclays to $635 million. After spending time this weekend reading the order, it is clear that the issue at hand is not a Last Look issue, but rather improper customer notification and trading practice. In this case, Barclays was abusing both the intent and scope of Last Look. While Last Look gets a lot of discussion recently, it is a byproduct of market making in principal markets, such as FX and fixed income from a pre-electronic age, and the translation of those markets into electronic trading. As FX became more electronic, the European banks were early innovators in mapping principal trading functionality into electronic trading. In the case of FX, it became necessary to create a means to quote to thousands of customers through various channels (i.e. single dealer portals, multi dealer platforms, aggregated feed channels) at acceptable bid/ask spreads. Given that there are different types of clients, it is necessary to be able to quote different types of clients with very different risk profiles, technology ability, and holding time frames in different ways. A liquidity provider looks at an HFT counterparty much differently than a large asset manager putting on a hedging FX trade. Last Look is not inherently a bad practice, but it is a practice that when performed needs to be clearly mapped out to users of a platform. Platforms that incorporate Last Look functionality will be ensuring that guidelines are clear, functionality is sound, and procedures are well documented. In an OTC principal market, liquidity provision is not free. In the current FX market structure, Last Look is a necessary tool for many liquidity providers. Over time Last Look will become a less important component of FX trading. It is not clear that can be regulated away without disrupting the ability of market makers to provide liquidity in the current market structure, and given the global nature of FX. At the same time, concerns around Last Look are changing the calculus of liquidity between disclosed liquidity and anonymous liquidity. In my latest report FX Trading 2.0: Technology and Platforms, I explore the evolution of FX and how the market will incorporate all the forces at play. In many ways, after building on incremental change over decades, the FX landscape has shifted abruptly recently. The venue landscape has brought together once disparate centers of liquidity within the same firms. From the perspective of identifying the ideal venue to interact with, the landscape has become more challenging. Many of the FX platforms are separate or partially separate pools of liquidity within the same firm.

Launch of Luminex shows competitive market structure of US equities

Launch of Luminex shows competitive market structure of US equities
The launch for trading this week of  Luminex is another example of the creative forces that come to light in the competitive and open market structure of US equities. Luminex will create an entirely dark, non-quoted, market protocol for real money buyside institutions. This has been described by some as as an exclusive club, but so what? The Luminex ATS is owned by a consortium of buy side firms: Blackrock, BNY Mellon, Capital Group, Fidelity, Invesco, J.P. Morgan Asset Management, MFS Investment Management, State Street Global Advisor, and T.Rowe Price.  The platform will begin trading this week with seventy three institutions with a minimum AUM threshold of 1 billion dollars. In aggregate, between the consortium owners and the other members of the ATS represent nearly 65% of US fund assets under management. The firm will be run as a not-for-profit with a low cost structure. The market protocol is completely dark, and non-quoted. Furthermore, it will run as entirely closed system, with no ability to route orders from within Luminex. The fabric of integrated venues-exchanges, ECNs, ATSs, internalization engines that make up the U.S. equity markets create an environment that offers tremendous choice for investors and traders of all stripes.  From the smallest retail clients, offered the key to this entire lattice at the cheapest and quickest executions ever through the wholesale market, to  the largest financial institutions, who can create a venue that meets their needs-moving natural size,  minimizing market impact and information leakage. Luminex is a powerful example of innovation in a market that fosters (perhaps forces) innovation. It will be an example of what a buy side consortium can create in an equity market with an already existing diverse means of accessing liquidity. Furthermore, it can set the tone, and structure for the evolution of other buy side consortia in asset classes with less diverse liquidity choices than US equities, and where access to liquidity remains an ongoing challenge, such as in fixed income. Whether another purely dark venue, with no incentivized intermediaries can gain noticeable market share, is always an open question. Low match rates are typical of a venue of this sort- but the users of the platform represent such a large chunk of assets under management and resident, natural liquidity is so great within the subscriber firms. It will be interesting to see the results of trading with this network and the market protocol.  

MiFID II on the minds of fixed income leaders

MiFID II on the minds of fixed income leaders
I am getting excited about participating and speaking at the Fixed Income Leaders Summit in Barcelona, Spain this week.  The timing could not be better; the fixed income world is grappling  with the challenges of an evolving market structure, innovation and technology, all within the context of a recently delivered regulatory MiFID II/MiFIR proposal. I am looking forward to hashing out the most pressing challenges facing the market, with the best and brightest leaders from all corners of the fixed income world. In advance of the conference, the European Fixed Income Industry Benchmarking Survey 2015, surveyed 50 senior buy side leaders to get a sense of their focus. The primary challenges  identified, include: the evolving center of gravity in the relationship between the buy side and sell side; digesting and understanding the regulatory framework and MiFID II guidelines: and, engaging with the changing landscape of sourcing data and electronic trading. Celent is very focused on the evolution of the fixed income business within the context of evolving market models, data aggregation/analysis and regulation.  We continue to discuss these topics in our ongoing research. I am especially eager to participate in discussions  around requirements for quoting and new reporting requirements that will impact the buy side. I will also be discussing the evolution of trading tools and electronic trading-looking at the landscape of trading platforms, new analytical tools for accessing liquidity access, and creating a holistic approach with engaging with the market across products. I look forward to catching up on all these topics. Please come by and see my session on market structure and electronic trading tools at 11:45 on Thursday in lovely Barcelona.

MiFID II and you – here before you know it

MiFID II and you – here before you know it
A brief review indicates that ESMA has given more clarity on its view of fixed income trading in the post-MiFID II world. We are now one step closer to a new world of secondary trading in European bonds. In the context of the heated debate around liquidity in fixed income recently ESMA has moved to an approach that looks at each bond to determine the liquidity thresholds and hence the exact nature of the required pre- and post-trading transparency. ESMA will be looking at 100,000 Euro thresholds with at least two trades occurring daily in at least 80% of trading sessions. Hence, a certain proportion of European bonds will become subject to a wholly new regime of trading-scheduled for January 2017 if there are not additional delays to the start of MiFID II. Bringing a new level of transparency to the pre- and post-trading of fixed income products, in conjunction with the myriad other touch points of MiFID II, will stretch the resources of most financial market participants. While firms have been preparing for some time, there are different degrees of readiness.  For most firms,  the next year will be huge effort, to get ready for this new trading regime.

The future is here

The future is here
The pressures are well known in banking and the capital markets. Each month there are front page articles of scaling back, overhauling, reorganizing, or closing major bank lines. A continued reworking, a forging of a new business is occurring. Old models are shrinking and being replaced by new business models or being cast aside. Since the 2008 crisis, wave after wave of pressure has made this perfectly clear. Capital constraints, on-going regulatory pressures, and an ultra-low interest rate environment have all struck hard at the existing banking & broker/dealer system. Nearly all players-big and small- are rethinking the very core of their businesses. And this is a multi-threaded problem across all businesses: equities, FX, fixed income, and derivatives. Banks and broker/dealers are trying to balance their existing franchises against the pressures they are facing to create a lean profitable business that supports their clients. There are no easy answers, given the strong interdependence between the wealth, asset management, and capital markets businesses across all products. Many of the solutions are moving from efficiency, or cost-cutting to effectiveness. Costs are being cut-there are improvements in risk, compliance, processing. The cost side is getting better but the challenge remains on the revenue side. This drive for effectiveness is driving business models that support internal and external clients from a compliance, transparency, regulatory, fairness and cost perspective are driving more automation and electronic trading solutions. Celent will be discussing the evolving landscape of innovation in automation and technology at two upcoming roundtables. On September 15th in London we will be looking at changes in the US and European fixed income markets and how new technologies are driving change. Then on September 22nd in Zurich, we will be looking at wealth management and the capital markets and the many changes that are occurring in Swiss banking.

Swiss Banking 2025: getting to tomorrow

Swiss Banking 2025:  getting to tomorrow
What will the Swiss Capital Markets look like in a decade from now-in 2025? As private banking and wealth management digest the many changes in the post-crisis financial world what will be the implications on sourcing financial products and liquidity? We have already seen new business models reacting to these new pressures. At our next client roundtable this September 22 in Zurich, the Celent wealth management and capital markets teams will look at opportunities for innovation in the face of regulatory and economic pressures, including the pressures on flow businesses that support a variety of clients, operational forces driving automation and the hunt for liquidity in capital markets. Topics such as competition from emerging offshore hubs such as Singapore will be discussed as well. Joining us for a lively and interactive discussion will be strategy, technology and innovation leaders from European banks, brokerages and other financial institutions. This will be a great opportunity to hear the views of numerous financial service leaders in a private setting. While space for the roundtable is limited, I’d welcome hearing from individuals interested in the topics above and/or potentially attending.