Ordering a System for Order Management
November 4, 2011
Order management systems help fund managers place orders on multiple trading venues.
Straightforward enough. Should be easy to order one.
Not exactly. Just about every order management system operates in more than one currency, provides portfolio rebalancing and has compliance with investment guidelines. And each system has to work across a firm’s entire flow of work for managing trade orders. Details and differences abound.
A new report issued by Woodbine Associates sheds some light into the criteria fund managers should use when comparing and choosing an order management system. Key features of nine of the most popular are compared. These are systems developed by Advent Software, Bloomberg, Charles River Development, ConvergEx Group, Fidessa Group, Investment Technology Group, InData, Linedata and SunGard Data Systems.
“Selecting an order management system is critical to the operations of fund managers, so they can’t afford to make a mistake,” said Matt Samelson, a principal at Woodbine Associates and author of the report. Because workflow and functionality are similar, fund managers will have to use other criteria when making a selection.”
First rule of thumb: Fund managers should never select an order management system based on a popularity contest, Samelson said.
Disregard how many other fund managers are using it or whether it has won any industry awards. “Comparing or judging solutions on some fairly random standardized criteria overlooks the fact that those criteria are not wholly representative of market needs, or for that matter, the needs of any particular constituency of trading firms,” he said. “Judging solutions is highly fraught with bias.”
Second rule of thumb: Never think this will be a short-term marriage. Order management systems are embedded into key portfolio management, trading compliance and middle office workflows. Implementation can take anywhere from three months to three years and are often disruptive to ongoing operations. Bottom line: once put in, such a system is hard to pull out so replacing an OMS is not a prospect to be taken lightly.
“A firm looking to change or acquire an order management solution should look for a vendor much the same way an individual looks for a partner, since the relationship will be long-term and difficult to get out of in the event differences emerge through time or if expectations are not met,” Samelson said.
Third rule of thumb: Costs can be deceiving. A system with a high initial cost can be the lowest total cost option, if a firm closely analyzes and tracks the effect on its work flow and processes.
“A so-called high cost solution in absolute terms may be well worth the expenditure if it facilitates day-to-day operations within the acquiring firm,” Samelson said.
What’s left, when you play the rest of your hand?
The key criteria for the decision-making process are to compare vendor initiatives, support, and hosting options, Woodbine contends.
“How a vendor handles research, development, and their particular projects can be very telling in how they are likely to interface with their client base,” Samelson said. “What works for one potential type of client may not work for another.”
