You have been granted access to this page through First Click Free. Subsequent use of TabbFORUM will require logging in. If you don't have an account, registration is free.

Videos

  • Rail_thumb_adam_honore_david_etue-finqloud-safenet-cloud_security_in_financial_services

    Debunking the Cloud Security Myth

    The idea that the cloud is not secure is a misperception, says David Etue, SafeNet. While the cost and agility gains that come with moving to the cloud also come with a loss of some...
     
  • Rail_thumb_steve_phillips-nasdaq_omx-latam

    Latin America's Quest for Liquidity

    Brazil no longer is the only game in town when it comes to trading in Latin America. According to Steve Phillips, senior managing director, Latin America and Caribbean, NASDAQ OMX...
     
  • Rail_thumb_adam_will_screen_shot

    What Will Nasdaq Do With eSpeed?

    Following several failed cross-border exchange mergers, Nasdaq’s acquisition of the electronic fixed income trading platform eSpeed provides the exchange with a way to diversify...
     
 

More Video | Podcasts

Advertisement
Original_cn_mkts300x250b
Original_300x250
Original_original_300x250_12493_0
Original_chicago_300x250
Spotlight-blackInnovations in Trading and Technology (more stories)

18 July 2011

No Desk Left Behind: The E-Desk Is Growing

E-desk might mean different things to different people but Fidessa's Kristin Kelly says technology development and innovative delivery methods mean more people will be using them. So what should an e-desk actually do?

E-desk. It’s a broad term that covers a number of activities from industry-standard regional algorithms to end-to-end automated global order management.

Whatever its definition, the e-desk’s capabilities are going to extend to a broader set of market participants who are gaining access to complex automated workflows as technological developments and innovative delivery methods become more widespread.

Underpinning the global e-desk is a properly managed connectivity network that enables a firm to monitor its client network to determine which network solutions are the best from a cost perspective and to determine whether the client flow is there to justify the connection at all.

Such a centralized system, which allows firms to evaluate, cancel, add and amend client connections, is an invaluable tool and since the costs of connectivity can sometimes outweigh those associated with the order management system (OMS) itself, it is a priority area.

Firms should also have the means to properly manage the message flow in order to provide a true one-stop shop for the full range of their customers’ trading needs, from direct market access (DMA) and algorithmic orders, to derivatives and baskets. Transparent FIX middleware solutions enable firms to translate customers’ desires into appropriate instructions for the chosen destination seamlessly. If that destination is international, then the ability to queue international order flow appropriately will be required.

Aside from its connectivity to the wider marketplace, an e-desk is only as good as its risk management tools. Consolidated counterparty risk controls, in particular, have almost inevitably become a critical consideration since they allow the firm to monitor client's exposure across multiple regions and different order flow types accurately. Firms are finding that risk checks can actually improve the customer offering and, if installed properly, need not have a negative impact on the efficiency of the system.

Automated order handling strategies remain complex, whether they are in a FIX engine or the OMS. Even at the simplest level, brokers should have the ability to automatically evaluate a customer's order flow based on the region and desired trading strategy. Meta algorithms can be incorporated into the desk to run decision-making processes that determine the best algorithm for the order, taking into account the customer, region, current market analytics and basic order attributes.

Automating order handling in this way also allows for customization of strategies based on counterparty. Firms that wish to distinguish themselves from other algorithm providers are focusing on customization of industry-standard models. Providing these customizations while maintaining a fully automated, co-mingled, direct strategy access platform benefits both the customer and the brokerage.

Flexibility is critical to these direct access arrangements and interaction with routing rules, as well as enrichment parameter settings, should be user-friendly and available on the fly. At the same time, comprehensive low-latency liquidity access can dictate the success of an algorithmic strategy so orders that are ultimately handled internally by the firm’s automated trading strategies should exploit the firm’s electronic execution management tools.

So it’s extremely clear that the technological capabilities of the e-desk go beyond just the algorithms in use. And, at the same time, these technology platforms are becoming more globalized as firms expand their international reach to offer trading opportunities on non-local markets and attract customers from overseas.

However, it’s not just the bigger players who will be able to benefit from full-service electronic trading desks. The ability to offer full-service functionality will also extend to other smaller firms. Increasingly, these firms will exploit the technological advancements that are continuing to level the playing field and which are enabling them to broaden their offerings.

And while customer service remains a priority in this post-financial crisis market, the ability to offer the necessary balance of automation and attentiveness to satisfy a specific customer base is becoming accessible to more and more market participants.

Spotlight-white-trans For more stories in the Innovations in Trading and Technology Spotlight Series click here.

Comments | Post a Comment

2 Comments to "No Desk Left Behind: The E-Desk Is Growing":
  • Anon_avatar
    Anonymous

    19 July 2011

    Given the recent activity of the UK and European Regulators perhaps the Completion Commission should now turn their attention to your statement "the costs of connectivity can sometimes outweigh those associated with the order management system (OMS) itself." The high charges from the ISVs, rather than the highly competitive telecom market, for connections or gateways is highly questionable and the more dominant the ISV the greater the problem this represents. There seems little justification for the high and charges levelled unevenly across the buyside and brokerage user base. Many ISVs apply such high charges that it is damaging to smaller brokers, limits buyside connectivity and prevents establishment of new venues competing for business. In short it constrains fair competition.

  • Anon_avatar
    Anonymous

    19 July 2011

    Competition Commission not Completion Commission, sorry.

You must log in to comment.