It’s a valid question to ask FXPBs what constitutes a “good” client these days. Post-Basel III, firms taking big positions in non-spot products are going to consume vastly more balance sheet and capital than a firm trading only spot in smaller amounts, which can easily be serviced with a relatively little net open position (NOP).
This obviously suggests that, for example, an HFT deploying a spot-only strategy could potentially be a more attractive business proposition than a large macro fund trading longdated NDFs or options products.
However, speaking to a number of FXPBs, it immediately becomes apparent that such a view is too simplistic. One FXPB head says that this basic analysis is correct, but only assuming a legacy pricing model, which is derived primarily by frequency and size of transaction activity.
In a recent survey by Profit & Loss, 29% of respondents cited balance sheet strength as the most important factor when selecting a prime service provider. Meanwhile, 19.9% said that pricing was the most important factor and 14.5% said that the technology available at the prime service provider was the key motivator when selecting a prime.
The product range offered and the existing relationship with the prime provider were both picked as the most important factor by 13% of respondents. Only 3% said that the leverage available is the most vital consideration in a prime service provider. Meanwhile, 7.6% of respondents chose to specify alternative priorities when selecting a prime service provider, and some of their comments are illuminating.
“Prime Brokerage Participants should strive to monitor and control trading permissions and credit provision in Real Time at all stages of transactions in a manner consistent with the profile of their activity in the market to reduce risk to all parties.” – Principle 41
Prime Brokerage Participants should strive to develop and/or implement robust control systems that include the timely allocation, monitoring, amendment, and/or termination of credit limits and permissions and adequately manage associated risks.
• Prime Brokerage Clients should strive for Real-Time monitoring of their available lines and permitted transaction types and tenors so that only trades within permitted parameters are executed.
Over the past few years, some FX prime brokers have gone from aggressively competing for market share to off-boarding clients and increasing their fees. What happened to make the pendulum swing so dramatically, and is it due for another reversal? Galen Stops reports.
Relatively speaking, it wasn’t all that long ago that banks were aggressively trying to build out their FX prime brokerage (FXPB) businesses and competition was fierce. This precipitated a race to the bottom in terms of fees by some FXPBs. Numerous market sources claim that Morgan Stanley was at the forefront of this race, although they note that a number of major FXPB players were not far behind.
Liquidity, fragmentation and geopolitics dominate closing conversations on Day 2 at Profit & Loss Forex Network Chicago.
After each of the five topic speakers gave their debriefing of discussions within the working groups, the conversation opened up between the panelists to explore some of the themes raised during the working group recaps.
Drawing on discussions around both liquidity and geopolitics, Chip Lowry, senior managing director, State Street Global Markets, kicked things off with the topic of de-globalisation, and whether the current trend of countries looking more inward is affecting liquidity.
The Debriefing session brought together each of the five speakers after convening with their table heads to get feedback from each of the respective working groups, the results of which were presented in a panel discussion about the findings.
In the final act of Forex Network Chicago, The Debriefing session featured the five topic speakers providing an overview of the working group sessions that took place around each of the five topic working groups.
The main speakers and the table heads they worked with included: Geopolitics: Mario Manna, CEO, Nightberg, with support from table heads George Dowd, president, G. Dowd & Co; and Bob Savage, CEO, CCTrack.com.
Profit & Loss introduced a new format at Forex Network Chicago, which took place September 28-29. The second day was dedicated to the Profit & Loss Challenge, during which conference participants broke into working groups under five key topics: Geopolitics, Regulatory, Liquidity, Execution and Technology.
Raising the curtain on the day’s discussions during a new format on Day 2 at Forex Network Chicago, managing editor Colin Lambert kicked off with a series of questions to get the conversations going with topic speakers.
The introduction of SEFs was just one piece of the overall puzzle in the G20 swaps reform mandate. To see
the whole picture, Galen Stops looks at the impact of swaps infrastructure rules on market participants'
workflows and why MiFID ...
Market participants remain concerned about liquidity conditions in markets, but as Colin Lambert reports,
central bankers are less than sympathetic.
If 2016 is the year in which Swap Execution Facilities (SEFs)
ramp up their market presence and seek to take their
As the pace of regulatory reform for the swaps market slows, Galen Stops finds market participants divided
on the impact that SEFs have had on the market.
Ask two different swaps market participants about the
impact that Swap Execution Facilities (...