The buy side continues to struggle with increasing regulatory requirements, and having the right compliance tools is all the more important in today’s trading environment, where tracking risk is key. As a result, order management systems have become essential to the trading and portfolio management process.
There is no doubt, however, that installing an OMS is no easy task; it is a large undertaking that can’t be easily reversed once implemented. According to a recent TABB Group survey of buy-side firms, including traditional asset managers and hedge funds utilizing a wide array of trading strategies, 68% of the 52 respondents described switching to a new OMS as “very” or “extremely difficult.”
Meanwhile, opinions on EMS technology can be summed up in one phrase: Less is more. The buy side is consolidating the number of EMS platforms on the desktop from an average of six platforms five years ago, down to just one or two today. Interestingly, those platforms tend to be broker-neutral, as the preference for EMSs on the buy side shifts to independent providers and agency brokers.
Overall, constrained wallets are forcing asset managers and hedge fund managers to seek ways to lower their tech costs; but at the same time, they need sophisticated trading and back-office technology to stay competitive in a market with withering liquidity and increased fragmentation. This introduces the idea of combining the two technologies into one system to accommodate smaller budgets. While it is possible for the OMS and EMS to be brought together into one platform to form an “OEMS,” however, 44% of the respondents to TABB’s survey said “no” to a combined platform (see chart, at left).
Powering Intelligent Alpha Capture (
Comments | Post a Comment
1 Comment to "The Future of the OMS & EMS: One System to Rule Them All?":
Martin Jermakyan
08 February 2013
In my view the value of combined OMS and EMS platforms is not simply in the increased or decreased productivity of the fast-pace trading environment trading platforms nor has to be found merely in the cost savings. There is not whole a lot to be lost from the segregation of the post-trade OMS functionality from the EMS platform, while the pre-trade order flow management functionality can and perhaps should be combined with the EMS.
The reason for such combination is hidden in the necessity to manage price and volumetric risk in one cohesive manner and not to confuse volumetric risk and premium with the price risk and premium frequently resulting in an illusion of hedging and presentation of extraction of beta corresponding to volumetric risk as extraction of alpha.