[ S U R V E Y | A L G O R I T H M I C T R A D I N G ]
UBS
UBS recorded an overall average score in this year’ s survey of 5.81, a modest improvement from 2024 with an increase of 0.08. However, this comes short of the survey average of 6.00. The broker achieved an increase across most categories in 2025, with the largest year-on-year upticks being anonymity( 0.21) and reduced market impact and speed( 0.18). The least improved category was customisation features, which declined by-0.16. UBS’ highest scores were in ease of use( 6.06) and increase trader productivity( 6.04), whilst reduced market impact and speed tied for third( 6.00).
When compared across the category benchmarks, like other bulge bracket banks, UBS experienced below average scores across all areas under review, most notably in customer support( 5.67) and algo monitoring( 5.54), which fall-0.50 and-0.41 respectively below the category averages. Key areas such as reduced market impact, speed and cost performed much better, landing marginally short at-0.01,-0.04 and-0.06 respectively.
This year, UBS received 103 responses – up from
89 responses in 2024- which ranks the bank third in terms of number of submissions. Half of the longonly managers responding to this year’ s survey that do business with UBS indicate they hold more than $ 50 billion in AUM, followed by 24 % managing between $ 10 and $ 50 billion in assets. The UK( 17 %) and Europe( 61 %) collectively represented 78 % of the respondents, with the remainder split between North America( 17 %) and Asia-Pacific( 5 %). The most commonly used algo performance measurement metrics were VWAP TCA and implementation shortfall TCA.
Sample feedback from respondents included the following:
• Best around service across asset classes
• Great team coverage from US / sales team and very good structure research team
• Access to better pair trading algo
• Better dark liquidity analysis
• Better customisability
UBS RATINGS FOR ALGORITHMIC PERFORMANCE
Increased trader productivity |
Reduced market impact |
Execution consistency |
Cost Speed Anonymity Price improvement Customisation |
6.04 6.00 5.98 5.85 6.00 5.96 5.72 5.53
Ease of use |
Order routing logic / analysis |
Customer support |
Execution consulting |
Dark pool access |
Flexibility and sophistication of SOR |
Algo monitoring |
Average score |
6.06 5.55 5.67 5.56 5.93 5.70 5.54 5.81
KEY STATS Overall Outperformer: NO Category Outperformer: NO
6.06 Highest score( Ease of use) |
5.53
Lowest score( Customisation features)
|
0.21
Most improved( Anonymity)
|
-0.16
Least improved( Customisation features)
|
|
|
|
Issue 83 // thetradenews. com // 79 |