Buy-side Perspectives Issue 9 | Page 13

efforts is focused around how I can maximise the potential with our partnerships. • As technology is core in the automation and workflow, I need to involve the IT department and ad hoc organise special task forces to, for example understand how our technology suppliers are adapting to regulatory change and will support us in the transformation. Looking at the current workload, I can foresee that there may be a further need to organise an additional oversight committee responsible for the increasing number of policies and processes in the unbundled organisation. I also work actively with our broker counterparties, MiFID II consultants as well as the buy-side peer association Association Française de la Gestion financière (“AFG”) to make sure we leverage as much external knowledge as possible. Partnerships and market outlook It is important for us to maintain a good broker list based on objective quantitative data where we have granular understanding of flow. We want to work with brokers that invest in best-of-breed in-house trading system for low touch and we need brokers with many liquidity specialists. The brokers must make strategic business decisions in the areas they want to lead, be it order processing, flow management or being a flow specialist. It is hard to cover all areas. I believe that brokers that neither demonstrate best in class in-house technology nor offer liquidity specialists will be challenged by losing buy-side relationships in the future. Broker specialisation will not disappear as it is very important with good knowledge. The spread between order-flow brokers and specialists are likely to widen and all brokers cannot be specialists. While the trend is to reduce the number of brokers is mainly true for low-touch flow algorithmic trading, the opposite challenge applies to the small-/mid cap market where we must work with whoever is the liquidity specialist. Post 3rd of January 2018 with the implementation of MiFID II, we need to make hard decisions if we want to interact with systematic internalisers (“SIs”) and all new venues. We need to understand how the venues meet our chosen benchmarks and the level of toxicity. We prefer to post passive orders in less toxic venu es and to be able to use conditional order types such as minimum quantity to trade. We need to configurate our order routers to minimise market impact. While want to be interactive with SIs, the value of the order book can be changing. If the SI can only fulfil a small part of the order, it may signal the market too much. We have many discussions with our brokers about the SI regime and need to understand their level of interaction with high frequency traders (“HFT”) and if we can trade truly anonymous or not. The broker will be challenged to deliver real liquidity and the large trades must be truly dark. SIs will likely need to reveal what type of flows they interact with. We are also making sure that we have all the tools ready to execute and interact with alternative venues such as BATS LIS, Liquidnet, and Plato as an alternative pool for real liquidity.