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.
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.
Celent has explored voice trading in Human & Machine-Rise of the Cyborg: The Cycle of Voice Trading, published yesterday. In this piece, we look at the power of voice trading as well as the business drivers, challenges and forces that are driving change in voice communication, collaboration and voice market engagement.
Celent believes that voice is a key channel that will remain relevant and will work more seamlessly with electronic and data channels in the coming years. A move toward unified communication approach and advances in technologies, combined with a challenging business environment, are reshaping the modern trading desk. Cost cutting, front office effectiveness, gleaning better insight into customer behaviour combined with digital automation are pushing this frontier forward. Voice trading remains the major channel for transferring risk, across asset classes, yet remains a challenge due to the difficulties in leveraging this unstructured data set.
Advances in both preparing and leveraging data for advanced analytics are creating a demand for business insights-the demand for better data is ever growing. Firms are beginning to leverage advanced data tools for not only risk mitigation and regulatory requirements, but are creating front office opportunities for better counterparty engagement and communication.
Fintech continues to advance in the capital markets and the implications are profound for incumbent players. Firms that effectively leverage the full spectrum of innovation available are becoming more streamlined and more effective. The overarching need for business model evolution and the importance of technology in the markets continues to ramp up. As one example,last week alternative dealer Citadel Securities hired Microsoft COO to be the new CEO of it electronic market making business.
We are surrounded by advances in voice technology for interacting with machines in our life in general. We are getting comfortable with Apple’s Siri on mobile, and Amazon's Echo in our homes. Similar technologies have advanced in areas outside the capital markets, but leading firms are trying to leverage voice data for better insight, engagement, and automation. While we are nowhere near Robotic Stingray Powered by Heart Cells from Rats published in last week’s WSJ, in merging machine and biological elements we are heading more into an era of the cyborg-where capital market participants will increase their direct engagement with machines via voice interaction.
So the Brexit has finally happened. The equity, forex and bond markets are still reeling from the news, the volatility probably caused as much by the fact that Brexit was unexpected as of yesterday night in the UK as by the event itself.
While the overall impact will reveal itself over the next several years, in the next few months the capital markets would have to deal with issues such as the future of the LSE-DB merger. Does it make sense anymore, and if yes, how do the two parties proceed? One would expect that now there would be political pressure to ensure that trading and jobs do not move away from either London or Frankfurt. Keeping all stakeholders happy would be a more complicated affair, although it could still be done.
EU wide market infrastructure regulations such as T2S and MiFID II would also now be seen in a new light. London was seen as the financial capital of Europe. The EU would now have to proceed with these significant changes at a time when the UK is preparing to exit, and is weighing its options in terms of how best to deal with the rest of Europe. It could take a middle ground as Switzerland has taken, or position itself even further away with more legal and policy independence but less overlap with the European capital markets.
In an earlier blog that considered the possibility of Brexit, I stated that technologically this might be the best time for an event such as the Brexit. Technology is more advanced and we are better connected than ever before across nations and continents. However, undoubtedly there will still be significant impact from an economic, financial and demographic point of view. As always, there will be winners and losers. As a neutral, one hopes that the people in the UK are able to achieve the goals they had envisioned in making this decision.
The recent news that a French consortium is beginning work on building post-trade infrastructure for trading of SME stocks in Europe will be of great interest to market participants across the world. The consortium comprises of BNP Paribas Securities Services, Euronext, Société Générale, Caisse des Dépôts, Euroclear, S2iEM and Paris Europlace.
There have been several notable developments with regard to experiments and adoption of Blockchain and distributed ledger technology in the leading capital markets globally. However, the signficance of this particular announcement lies in the fact that it tries to address the needs of the a sector that usually struggles to obtain easy access to the capital markets. If successful, such a project could drastically reduce the time taken for post-trade operations, slash costs and generally make it easier for SMEs to raise funds.
In a recent Celent report, we had found that most of the leading global post-trade providers believed that it was still a little early to expect major changes due to Blockchain technology. While this may be true, the current development would be of a lot of interest to the emerging markets around the world. In several such countries, the cost of accessing capital markets is comparatively high and the technology is also often found lagging, as in the case of European SMEs. If the French effort becomes successful, it could pave the way for application of Blockchain technology to specific tasks in emerging markets, not just to enable SMEs to raise capital better, but to help the overall market to leapfrog in terms of modernizing the market infrastructure.
Regulators and market participants in emerging markets should now see Blockchain and distributed ledger technology as a relevant means for streamlining their trading infrastructure. To that end, it is also important that they encourage firms within their jurisdiction to experiment and adopt such technology for specific local applications and requirements, and not just wait to see how it evolves in mature markets in the next few years.
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.
It is difficult to read financial news at present without coming across extensive coverage of the Brexit referendum in the UK and its possible impact. As part of the financial sector, capital markets could be at the forefront in terms of bearing the impact of any likely change. There are already widespread claims of how London could lose its position as the premier European financial center. Of special relevance is the advantage that London has due to the 'passporting' principle, which allows leading U.S. or Asian banks and other firms to access the Europan market without any restrictions. Certainly with regard to these firms, if the UK leaves the EU, US and Asian banks that have based their teams in London while serving the European market will have second thoughts about doing so. Different alternatives have been touted, including Paris, Frankfurt and even Dublin. Some believe that all of these cities, and some other European financial centers as well, would benefit from the departure of the leading global banks from London, but this could lead to fragmentation in the European financial industry and reduce the effectiveness and competitiveness of European firms.
There are various views and opinions that have been expressed during the run-up to the referendum. Many of these hold water. But in my humble view, when it comes to competitiveness, if the departure of the UK from the EU does lead to a fragmentation of the European financial industry, then this is the best time for it to happen. Technology has today advanced to a level that to an outsider, there would be little tangible difference if a thousand people in a bank are based across four difference financial centers in Europe instead of being in one place they were earlier, namely, London. There would certainly be a one-off rise in cost due to such as move, but the industry should be able to take that in its stride. Furthermore, a more fragmented industry in Europe would also have the ability to address national and regional requirements better than a single leading financial center. So financial creativity and innovation might get a boost across Europe. One would expect that London would continue to be a leading financial center globally, but it might be forced to reinvent itself to continue to be relevant for global banks and financial firms from outside the UK. Therefore, as a neutral and a student of capital market technology trends, Brexit does not necessarily hold many fears and might even lead to some interesting outcomes. Whether people in the City of London or the rest of the UK or indeed Europe have the same view, is of course, another matter!
The CEO of Deutsche Börse made some very interesting remarks at the recent IDX derivatives industry conference in London. He argued that the proposed merger between Deutsche Börse and LSE would aid the development of trading in global markets because it would unite and harmonize the European capital markets, which are more fragmented than those in the US and Asia according to him. However, in this author's view, the merger of two large global exchanges raises as many questions as it answers. While one can agree that there would be less fragmentation and more harmonization, the main issue is whether the European market has a high level of fragmentation when compared with its global counterparts. Due to the European Union, European capital markets are much less fragmented than the Asia-Pacific, Middle-East and Africa, and Latin America. There has been a great degree of harmonization over the years, driven both by common regulation and industry mergers & takeovers. It is difficult to argue that there is a pressing need for more integration at this point. Instead, the main argument for the merger of LSE and Deutsche Börse is the fact that it would create a larger exchange that would be able to take on the likes of CME, Nasdaq and some of the leading Asian exchanges more easily. The expected reduction in headcount would also make for a more efficient, streamlined, and competitive exchange. But there are concerns that remain from an antitrust point of view and it is quite likely the Deutsche Börse CEO was trying to assuage these when he spoke about the positive effect of such a merger on global markets. If the merger does go ahead with regulatory approval, the advantage for other leading exchanges would be the higher possibility of such mergers and takeovers being approved in the future as well, since these could well be expected in an industry that is undergoing heavy consolidation due to economic and technological factors.
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.