Request complimentary report

Trading technology: keeping up with change

By Martin Nilsson
January 20, 2017
Share:

The build vs. buy debate has raged for decades now. Financial technologists know they must build to get the complete customization their internal customers demand. But they must buy if they are to make ongoing maintenance of cutting edge systems both an economic and a practical reality.

Keeping up with change in the global financial markets is more important than ever. Regulatory change, business change, operating model change; all mean that banks, brokers and trading firms can’t afford to stand still when it comes to trading technology. But a number of factors are conspiring to make keeping up difficult at best, and in some cases impossible.

Staffing is a major issue. A decade on from the first inkling of the oncoming global Credit Crisis, staff continue to be trimmed as firms focus on cost concerns. At the same time, the cost of finding qualified staff is rising, not least as competition from non-financial segments – think: Google, Amazon and the like – pushes up salaries globally. The US Department of Labor, for example, estimated the median cost of a computer design specialist last year at almost $90,000. Financial services specialization adds to the cost substantially, particularly in areas such as coding for trading firms.

This lack of staffing has a direct impact on project timelines. Many internal design build projects are delayed due to lack of human resource. Ongoing maintenance of mission-critical systems and adaptation to regulatory requirements takes priority. New functionality – underpinning new business – is taking a back seat to business as usual, or rather maintenance under pressure.

In the derivatives trading space, many firms are using vendor-supplied elements to supplement their internally built systems. But increasingly – given regulatory pressure, internal inflexibility and lack of resource – banks, brokers and trading firms are turning to their vendors to provide their entire trading infrastructure.

Key to this development is a drastic change in the approach to system architecture and design, including the ability for clients to access the vendor’s source code and development tools. Financial firms now have the freedom to tailor software to match their exact needs, just when they need it. This ‘buy and build’ model allows firms to benefit from the stability and ongoing development afforded by a vendor offering, while at the same time adapting the systems to fit their specific needs.

It’s a win-win situation that addresses the challenges of today’s fast-changing derivatives marketplace, and one that’s sure to take hold as firms look to move to their next-generation trading infrastructures.

Related Content

The need to take an enterprise approach to testing

The need to take an enterprise approach to testing

FIX Infrastructure It goes without saying that it’s imperative for trading technologists to thoroughly test their systems before the put them in a production environment. Clearly, building a market-beating trading platform requires a high level of uptime and a propensity for failure that’s as close to zero as possible. And for years technologists have used a range […] November 5, 2018

The operational benefits of infrastructure testing

The operational benefits of infrastructure testing

FIX Infrastructure Getting it right. In earlier blog posts, we’ve discussed the challenges of implementing efficient trading infrastructure testing systems, and the intricate complexities of their adoption. But once all this hard work is completed, what are the potential rewards to be reaped? The operational benefits from instituting an enterprise-wide approach to trading system testing go far […] October 23, 2018

Exploring the business side of Systematic Internalisation

Exploring the business side of Systematic Internalisation

Risk & Compliance Nine months into the MiFID II era, it’s time to look beyond the compliance issues and start considering the business opportunities presented to firms operating under the Systematic Internaliser regime. With the support from a value-adding regulatory solution, SI status can be used for competitive advantage, suggests Jonas Lindqvist, Principal, Trading and Trade Execution, Itiviti. […] October 9, 2018

Trading infrastructure testing: the main challenges

Trading infrastructure testing: the main challenges

FIX Infrastructure In previous blog posts, we have discussed the importance of trading infrastructure testing and the regulatory and operational impetus driving its necessity. But when push comes to shove, how easy is it to implement these complex systems? What types of testing solutions are available, and what are the biggest challenges to their adoption? Today’s trading […] October 2, 2018

Request TABB Group Report: Derivatives Trading Technology: Structural Complexity Driving Next Generation Demands.

Please complete the form to download this report.

By submitting this form, you acknowledge that data collected by us will be handled in accordance with our Privacy Notice.

Itiviti Talks

Get our view on global capital markets

Subscribe

Subscription successful

Thank you for subscribing!

Close window

Itiviti Talks

Get our view on global capital markets

Weekly email

    Trends in global capital markets from a technology perspective.

By submitting this form, you acknowledge that data collected by us will be handled in accordance with our Privacy Notice.