Blog article
See all stories »

Market Data, Reference Data and Blockchain

Blockchain, or distributed ledger technology (DLT), has the potential to disrupt a wide range of business models across the financial services industry. However, the potential application of blockchain to the worlds of market data and reference data has not received that much attention.

It’s difficult to predict the extent to which this emerging technology will impact the financial industry. Advocates of cryptocurrencies will tell you the disruption has already happened.

Bitcoin, together with a growing list of alternative coins (all powered by various guises of blockchain technology) have already enabled individuals to store wealth and transact entirely outside the remit of the established industry. From central banks that mint currencies, to deposit-taking retail banks and the myriad of intermediaries involved in payment and transaction processing – the entire system has been displaced by cryptography and a decentralised network of miners, churning out a stream of newly validated transactions.

Lately, cryptocurrencies have been in the spotlight for the volatility of their valuation. But they remain marginalised by the established financial services industry. That is hardly a surprise given their potential to disintermediate incumbents (financial institutions would hardly queue up to champion their own disappearance).

Yet from the perspective of any individual institution, the blockchain technology underpinning cryptocurrencies holds undeniable promise. The industry is full of intermediaries. Being able to cut out links in a value chain – to disintermediate intermediaries – has the potential to make processes more efficient.

The Data Value Chain

In the financial information industry, market participants serve as both data consumers and data producers. While they source and license data to fuel their investment and trading operations, they also generate data every time that they interact with the market. This might happen when they publish a quote, send or amend an order, execute a trade, agree a bilateral OTC deal, or underwrite a security and bring it to market. All of these events (and more) result in the market participant being a source of market and reference data.

But although market participants are original sources of data, the value from the data they consume is captured entirely by intermediaries. Exchanges, interdealer brokers, data aggregators and technology vendors all serve a role in aggregating, cleansing and distributing data back to market participants. These intermediaries take ownership of the data, and license it back to market participants under increasingly strict terms and conditions.

Market Data Blockchain?

In theory, blockchain could disrupt this value chain significantly. Let’s assume the global financial services industry were to embrace the technology head-on. All securities and derivatives transactions would be validated and recorded on a decentralised ledger. This ledger would be open to all market participants to access, and as a result, the information contained therein would be free of any licensing restrictions.

There would be no commercial models restricting use of market data contained in the blockchain. The data would also be of undeniable quality because it would be integral to the way transactions were processed and would undergo validation prior to being recorded.

Transparency would not only mean market participants get free data, but also regulators get a clear picture of what’s happening. The need for a ‘consolidated audit trail’ or any form of transaction reporting would be negated. Details of all trades – whether executed on-exchange or OTC – would already be recorded publicly, along with details of counterparties and beneficiaries. The audit trail would be built in to the market’s infrastructure. Regulators would find it much easier to identify any wrongdoing. This heightened transparency would also serve as a deterrent, discouraging participants from acting inappropriately in the first place.

Unrealistic Expectations

A future where market data is freely available, market mechanisms are completely transparent and participants behave impeccably may sound like utopia. But is it feasible? Probably not anytime soon.

Within the financial services industry, finding an optimal solution to an industry challenge is never that straight forward. Whether something sounds like the most practical solution from a technical or logical perspective can be beside the point. Political and economic barriers will stand in the way of adoption. Incumbents that stand to lose out from disruptive technologies will fiercely protect their interests.

Were we to design a global securities market infrastructure from scratch with the technology that is available today one would expect something different from that which emerged organically. But new technology needs to fit into legacy infrastructures, processes, rules and regulations.

Blockchain has the potential to be revolutionary and disruptive to the industry. But its adoption will need to happen gradually, first focusing on processes where it might add the most value (like international trade finance).

One would sense that market data might not be the right use case to tackle first. So what of reference data?

Reference Data Blockchain?

Perhaps a decentralised ledger could be a great way to record and distribute accurate reference data. Every time a bookrunner was looking to bring a security to market, they would publish terms and conditions via a global blockchain. The same would apply for newly created derivatives. And when a company was due to pay out a dividend or a coupon, split its stock, or announce a merger – it could publish that information to be validated and recorded via the same blockchain.

Imagine having all of that information recorded on an immutable, distributed ledger. Everyone would have access to the same high quality, validated reference data, straight from the source, without the need to reconcile or validate multiple records. It sounds like another mini nirvana.

But we could probably achieve the same result using different technology. The barrier to adoption is getting everyone to agree to change. And by threatening the destruction of existing value chains, we immediately run into opposition.

Many disruptive innovations deliver value to consumers, but also result in many of the spoils concentrating with a single entity and proving bitterly unpopular with incumbents. Amazon angered book sellers, Uber incensed incumbent taxi drivers and Airbnb irked hoteliers. Any blockchain-powered data vendor would run into some pretty stern and well-organised resistance.

Even if all participants in the global capital markets agreed that it would be more efficient to publish reference data via a single entity (something that isn’t that far-fetched), the question of who would own that entity would quickly prove a stumbling block.

The one thing that counts in blockchain’s favour is its potential to support a distributed ownership structure. In theory, a blockchain-powered reference data utility need not be owned and governed as an individual entity, but rather by the network as a whole. Such a model might make the benefit easier to sell.

That said, the impact of such disruption would be significant and the effort to get it off the ground colossal. Whether it is feasible remains to be seen.

 

6784
External | what does this mean?
This content is provided by an external author without editing by Finextra. It expresses the views and opinions of the author.

Comments: (5)

Maxim Pertl
Maxim Pertl - DACEBOOK Digital Asset Class Data & Software Inc. - Frankfurt Am Main, New York 14 March, 2019, 09:13Be the first to give this comment the thumbs up 0 likes Great points JP, the growing team from DACEBOOK-BLOCKCHAIN is providing a DLT powered platform for validated reference and specific validated market data for capital market pros - covering the new digital asset class.
Richard Barden
Richard Barden - Cboe Global Markets - London 14 March, 2019, 13:201 like 1 like

JP

Interesting idea - there are some powerful vested interests in stopping this happening, unless they are directly involved or (even better from their pov) with a controlling interest. Reconciling these together with blockchain could take some time.

David Collins
David Collins - GFT - London 14 March, 2019, 15:45Be the first to give this comment the thumbs up 0 likes

Market data and reference data are two areas that could greatly benefit from modernisation and disruption. Jean-Paul correctly points how the crazy situation where the originators of the data, surrender it and then have to buy it back several times over. Sure there is value in the aggregation service but the cost feels disproportionate.

There have been multiple attempts at reference data utilities, all have failed but the use case remains for a centralised utility. It is also worth remembering that the banks are good at creating centralised non-commercial utilities that provide value to the market: DTCC, ISDA, CLS, LCH are just a few so they don’t lack the precedent.

But the reference to blockchain? It’s another example of wandering around with a hammer looking for something to hit. DLT is a poor storage mechanism that is neither necessary in these cases or performant enough to deal with market data and as he rightly points out the adoption costs are too great.

Blockchain applied to market data? The technology is inappropriate, there is no use case and no business case.

Jean-Paul Carbonnier
Jean-Paul Carbonnier - CarboKinetic - London 15 March, 2019, 10:05Be the first to give this comment the thumbs up 0 likes

Richard - thanks for the comments, and I agree that this isn't something that would easily be put into action. 

David - I agree that the industry has been good at creating utilities - probably because there are functions that are best served by a single entity. The problem lies in the fact that if those utilities are succesful, they end up becoming natural monopolies. That means they have a tendency to become inefficient (even if you try to run them on a cost-plus basis). I am a blockchain sceptic (see from an earlier artlce: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/market-data-reference-blockchain-jean-paul-carbonnier-cfa/) but I think that its most interesting feature is its networked governance / ownership model - not necessarily smart contracts, immutability or other features of the tech. 

Jean-Paul Carbonnier

Jean-Paul Carbonnier

Director

CarboKinetic

Member since

23 Nov 2016

Location

London

Blog posts

1

Comments

3

More from Jean-Paul

This post is from a series of posts in the group:

Data Management 101

A community blog about data and how to manage it


See all