Tag Archives: corporate bond electronic trading

openbondx-maker-taker-rebate

e-Bond ATS “OpenBondX” Promotes Maker-Taker Rebates

Start-up corporate bond trading system OpenBondX is hoping to pull a rabbit out of its hat and jump start activity by emulating what the universe of equities-centric electronic exchanges and ATS platforms do in order to attract order flow to their respective venues: pay broker-dealers for orders given to them buy customers (retail and institutional) and offer a Chinese menu of kickbacks for those who ‘make’ liquidity and those who ‘take’ liquidity, otherwise known as maker-taker rebates.

Before dissecting the proposal by OpenBondX, which is open to buy-siders and sell-siders alike, for those following the ongoing discussions with regard to maker-taker rebates offered by exchanges and the assortment of ATS (alternative trading systems), you already know that the topic has increasingly become a big issue with regulators and buy-side investment managers, who are somehow just beginning to understand the implications within the context of fiduciary obligations and the ever-evolving definition of ‘best execution.’

That said, electronifying the corporate bond market so that buyers and sellers can transact in the secondary market in a way similar to how equities are traded has been a holy grail quest going back more than 20 years, starting with a platform known as “BondNet”, which started its life in 1995 as an inter-dealer-broker (IDB) system and soon thereafter, was acquired by Bank of New York Mellon, with the vision to roll out the platform as an ATS and invite institutional corporate bond traders to have direct access to the dealer market place.  When that acquisition, along with BNY’s strategy was announced the biggest banks on Wall Street, along with many of the nearly 90 regional BDs subscribing to that platform put BondNet in the penalty box and pulled the plug on the computers to protest BNY “disintermediating” the relationships those banks and brokers had with the buy-side firms, and more importantly to punish BNY for even contemplating that buy-siders should be able to see wholesale pricing that was available only within the inter-dealer marketplace.

The challenges encountered by the close on 40 different initiatives, 98% of which have failed within 12 months of their respective launch are a matter of historical record. Other than cultural and political issues, the most important obstacles can be found in the fact that “bonds are sold and stocks are bought.” Meaning: institutional investors rely on sell-side institutional sales people to sell them on a particular bond,  simply because buy-side portfolio managers don’t have the time or resources to filter through the many thousands of bonds that have been floated and now trade in the secondary market, each with different terms and conditions, different structures, different ratings and assortment of other criteria that goes into calculating the ingredients for a corporate bond portfolio.

The other big item that has been lost on the assortment of “Wall Street electronic trading veterans” and the many entrepreneurs who have attempted to create a robust and liquid electronic trading market for bonds is the simple fact that buy-side managers are most often interested in being on the same side of a trade as their peers; they don’t tend to take each other out of positions. Which is where Wall Street dealer desks had, until the past few years, always played an integral role. Alas, tose big banks have been legislated out of the market-making business courtesy of post financial crisis regs that prohibit banks from holding any significant inventories that can be sold to buy-siders, and hence, they are not able to purchase any significant amounts from institutions unless they have a buyer for those bonds in hand.  Today, 98% of corporate bonds are held by institutional investors and the notion of creating a system by which they could trade among each other is still a pipe dream that has passed along from one generation of electronifiers to the next. But, OpenBondX thinks they can be different. Here’s the news release issued this week:

OpenBondX Electronic Trading Platform Rolls Out New Rebate/Fee Structure For Fixed-Income Trading

Recently-launched electronic bond-trading venue OpenBondX, LLC (www.openbondx.com) is implementing an innovative pricing strategy that previously has helped transform other markets.

Alistair-Brown-openbondx
Alistair Brown, CEO OpenBondX

A twist on the “Maker-taker” rebate pricing model that propelled the successful electronification of markets in other asset classes, OpenBondX (OBX) will incentivize initiators of order flow with rebates that are built into the trade’s settlement.  Dealers whose streaming prices result in executed trades on OpenBondX are also eligible for rebates.

Currently live with high-yield and investment-grade U.S. corporate bonds, the OBX Alternative Trading System (ATS) now offers the following rebate/fee structure for liquidity providers and seekers:

  • Order initiators of an RFFQ® (Request for Firm Quote®) will be rebated 2 basis points of the notional value per trade (or $200 per million).
  • Order responders will be charged only 2.5 basis points of the notional value per trade (or $250 per million).
  • Post trade, the rebate or fee is applied to the net settlement value, i.e., the initiators’ cost is adjusted by the rebate of $200 per million dollars and the responders’ cost is adjusted by the fee of $250 per million dollars.
  • No additional ticket, transactional or monthly terminal access fees are incurred. This is less than half the typical pricing at electronic venues.
  • As OpenBondX is an “all-to-all” platform (open to both buy- and sell-side traders), any subscriber can earn rebates by initiating an RFFQ.  And access to the platform is free for all.

Chapter 5: Electronic Corporate Bond Trading—Do I See a Chapter 6?

Same story, different day..’electronifying the corporate bond market’. . Folks have been looking for this Holy Grail for the past 20 years..That’s right..other than Bloomberg’s 1990’s system, a company named BondNet was the first to launch a web-based platform. That was an independent IDB platform created by some very innovative folks who got put into the penalty box when it was announced they would allow buyside managers to access it.Then Came Market Axess with their corporate bond offering (which was sponsored by a consortium of BDs and provided 2 different levels…one for the wholesale market (BDs) and the other for buyside…no need to guess why there were 2 levels of access…because there were 2 levels of prices displayed…Duh..that’s how the corporate bond market works, silly!

At the same time that BondNet and MarketAxess were getting their feet wet, TradeWeb was already in 2nd gear with their US Treasury bond offering…Great technology..great pioneers……Well, 20 yrs flash forward and TradeWeb..which had judiciously avoided going down a path that was full of torn limbs, is trying to steal corporate bond thunder from MarketAxess. TradeWeb’s focus is on the meat i.e. trade sizes of $1mil bonds and greater—while MarketAxess is somewhat stuck in the odd-lot land…not because they haven’t tried to get larger block orders, but because the culture of the corporate bond landscape is not friendly to trading blocks on a live screen… 

That said, the WSJ thought it only fair to give TradeWeb some publicity via a very complimentary profile their current capo di tutti…Here is the opening of that story:

Can one man drag corporate-bond trading into a new age, where others have failed?

Meet Mehra “Cactus” Raazi, a former salesman from Goldman Sachs Group Inc., who has been working to do just that at fixed-income technology operator Tradeweb Markets LLC.

The New York firm is counting on Mr. Raazi as the frontman for its new electronic bond-trading system, an effort to bring the corporate-bond world into the 21st century. It has charged him with drumming up interest among asset managers and hedge funds for a system it says will enable easier and cheaper trading in U.S. corporate debt.

While trading technology can be humdrum, Mr. Raazi is anything but. Tall and athletic, with chiseled features, a neat crop of salt-and-pepper hair and a taste for custom motorcycles, he sometimes sports an ascot with skulls on it or a leather wristband featuring silver skulls. He practices the combat sport muay thai and has a stake in a lower Manhattan late-night burlesque club, The Box, said people familiar with his activities.

“He comes off very polished,” said Michael Adams, managing director at Sandler O’Neill + Partners LP, who saw Tradeweb’s new platform in the fall.

Whether the new platform, and Mr. Raazi’s efforts to sell it, will succeed still is uncertain, according to traders and analysts. Tradeweb has been silent on any progress it has made so far.

That is despite investors calling for more efficiencies amid shrinking stockpiles of bonds at securities dealers. For years, electronic trading has remained a fraction of the $7.7 trillion U.S. corporate-bond market. Instead, much of the trading is done over the phone.

Only about 15% of corporate-bond trading in the U.S. between investors and dealers is conducted electronically today, up from about 8% in 2010, according to bond-platform owner MarketAxess Holdings Inc., which has the vast majority of that volume.

Appetite is rampant among startups, exchanges and others to find the magic formula that can boost that share of electronic trading, because of the vast sums to be made from becoming the dominant player.

As many as 18 new companies are in various stages of launching competing platforms this year in the U.S., according to researcher Greenwich Associates.

“We’re not coming at this thing with a crystal ball,” said Tradeweb’s Chief Executive Lee Olesky in a briefing with reporters in the fall. Mr. Raazi declined to comment for this article through a spokesman.

Tradeweb’s effort has powerful backers in the 11 banks that co-own the company, including four of the big U.S. bond dealers: Bank of America Merrill Lynch, Citigroup Inc., Goldman and J.P. Morgan Chase & Co.

But it faces significant headwinds, as shown by the failure of numerous recent bond-platform launches, including at least two previous attempts by Tradeweb in the U.S. Past efforts have foundered for a variety of reasons, including that old trading habits are slow to change.

Advancing the workings of corporate-bond trading is the latest challenge facing issuers and investors. A doubling of issuance volumes since the financial crisis has vastly expanded U.S. corporate-debt securities outstanding to $1.46 trillion at the end of 2014, from $707.2 billion at the end of 2008, according to the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association. Yet liquidity, reflecting the capacity to buy or sell securities quickly at a reasonable price, has retreated, traders say.

Into this breach steps Mr. Raazi, who is 44 years old and was educated in California. In 2007, Goldman praised him for swiftly closing out $1.2 billion of bets against souring mortgage securities. In 2010, a Senate subcommittee probing banks’ role in the U.S. housing crisis released a March 2007 email in which a Goldman executive lauded Mr. Raazi’s timely trading. “Cactus Delivers” was the subject line.

For the entire article from WSJ, click here

Electronic Trading of Corporate Bonds: Buy-Side Says: Don’t Fix What Ain’t Broken

Marketsmuse.com continues coverage of corporate bond electronic trading initiatives with outtake courtesy of coverage by Traders Magazine and column authored by Wall Street & Technology’s Ivy Schmerken. MM editor note: Since it was our chief honcho who coined the phrase “electronification of markets” 20 years ago, we’re also the first to say “If anyone has their pulse on fixed income electronic trading schemes, Ivy does.”

While new electronic venues are pushing to solve a liquidity shortage, buyside traders say the market is working fine, and they value dealer relationships.

Ivy Schmerken
Ivy Schmerken

Buyside traders say they are still finding liquidity from traditional voice dealers in the corporate bond market, though they will increase their usage of electronic venues for small trades to boost efficiency.

Despite concerns about a looming liquidity crisis and sellside balance sheets constraints, head traders speaking at an industry conference sponsored by Tabb Group said they mainly rely on voice traders to meet their liquidity needs.

Though the panel discussion was focused on the liquidity conundrum and the development of electronic bond trading networks, buyside traders said the market is working fine and they are not in a panic over a potential liquidity crisis.

“There are people confused as to where we are now and where they think we will be if we don’t see some automation or electronification of the market,” said Michael Nappi, VP Investment Grade Trader, Investment Grade FI at Eaton Vance. He said liquidity weaknesses do not affect all issues and sectors. Continue reading