Hacker News Reader

How does this sit with other innovations such as all to all trading in OTC markets that are designed to match many buyer/sellers at, for example, a mutually beneficial mid price?

View on HN

The products that still trade predominately {OTC, bilateral, non-electronic} do because non-price factors, trading conventions, and counterparty risk make it difficult or impossible to trade on a central exchange. Expressive Bidding and a mechanism that allows for matching market dynamics (OneChronos) will enable electronification and more active trading in these markets. Ten years ago, I would have said that there were commercial headwinds against this (dealers wanting to trade bilaterally). With banks increasingly focused on repeatable and less variable trading revs, such is no longer the case. The unsuitability of such products for double auctions is the limiting factor.

Thanks. It is worth noting a lot of traditional OTC products since 2008 crisis have moved to either electronic (exchange, ATS, MTF etc) with CLOB/RFQ/Auction style of execution and in some causes that's coupled with central clearing. A lot of this has come from regulation - DoddFrank, MiFID2 and its still on-going.

The most interesting aspect of this is that its enabled non-dealer <> non-dealer trading via certain venues.

This is a significant tailwind for the next wave of electronification that we're hoping to advance. US swap dealers, for example, now have a SEF reporting requirement, but most of the pre-trade is still in the screens. A Smart Market that allows dealers to control for non-price factors could change that.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com