“Learn how to see. Realize that everything connects to everything else.” – Leonardo DaVinci
These are the primary goals of market structure mechanisms. A place to gather – whether that place be a Buttonwood tree or a bank of caged servers – and a playing field framed with enough freedom for participants to discover and set asset prices based on publicly available information.
Now, as most of you know, this opening salvo can go off the rails and into the complicated (and sometimes angry) weeds rather quickly. And, under most circumstances, I’d be happy to throw a few stones: There are strong arguments to be made that technology and regulation have (permanently) altered the nature of capital formation mechanisms in the digital era, which may be why private market solutions are thriving so much – and why the stock market is actually made up mainly of things other than stocks. Meanwhile, price discovery is no longer real price discovery as long as the price of money – and anything priced off of the price of money, which is most financial products – is centrally managed with such a heavy hand.
Anyway, let’s pretend I didn’t just say any of that – and let’s agree to set aside the arguments for the time being in order to explore a phenomenon that is impacting the constellation of participants in the market ecosystem in a way that I think all asset managers and their stakeholders need to understand far better than they currently do:
The Physics of Market Structure
Let’s go back to first principles: Consider that each transaction absorbs information within a buyer and seller – and then reflects that information in price movement after the transaction. The metaphor of throwing a pebble or something much larger into a pool of water – and the waves that each creates – is often used here.Now, consider that this basic mechanism is happening throughout various financial products and transaction venues – like exchanges, alternative trading systems (ATSs), single dealer platforms (SDPs) and multilateral trading facilities (MTFs) to create a multiplicity effect of information transmission:
Now, if we were to rewind the scenario to reflect less technology, less fragmentation and less dark liquidity – and then re-run the tape forward from a prior time to reflect increasing workflow automation, increasing liquidity fragmentation and increasing dark liquidity venues – we might see a dynamic where the incremental impact of each transaction ( and the information transmission potential) goes down, much in the same way that throwing successively smaller rocks into a pool of water would have, like this:
Now, let’s overlay the dynamic of incremental transaction and information transmission impacts on Alphacution’s asset management ecosystem map. In the exhibit below, we illustrate the sources of (listed) market liquidity in the structural alpha zone as the epicenter of information transmission in a strong form – as in, a point in time when there was less automation, liquidity fragmentation and dark liquidity:
Here we are basically saying that the value of the data is not fully decayed by the time it reaches the outer zone of the ecosystem where larger, slower, and longer-term asset managers reside.
Now consider the aforementioned impacts on information transmission into the outer zones of our map as automation, liquidity fragmentation, and dark liquidity venues are dialed up – and where market makers and a subset of proprietary trading firms and leading quant hedge funds that operate closest to the sources of liquidity are becoming increasingly dominant:
Here we are illustrating that the value of the information is fully decayed sooner than before; that essentially there is little or no remaining information asymmetries that exist at the (slower) reaction rate of the outer zone players.
On May 17, 2019, Institutional Investor published the following:
“After a turbulent 12 years for the industry, investors now have as much money in index funds as they do in active strategies.”
Is the phenomenon we find today between active and passive strategies related to what we have presented above?
Alphacution believes that the capacity of “outperformance” is finite – and, measurable.
Alphacution also believes that that capacity is being harvested by a declining roster of tech-wielding leaders.
These tech-wielding leaders operate closest to the sources of liquidity.
This is why we are being so maniacal about modeling and quantifying the impacts of the Top 100 Players in Market Structure; the leading players in our structural alpha zone.
With a few exceptions (that we will eventually be able to detail), this Top 100 list may ultimately contain the last of the active managers.
We’ll be back with more in Part 2…
Support the Feed!
Note: Business credit cards and bank accounts can be used via our PayPal payment portal.
Alphacution is in the intelligence business.
We are uniquely focused on harvesting, packaging and distributing intelligence about the impacts of technology in financial markets and on the businesses of trading, asset management and banking. Our growing model library is our intelligence asset. Today, this intelligence asset primarily supports written research content, which can be accessed via standardized subscriptions and customized engagements. Occasionally, this core asset also supports video, audio and live presentation content. In time, Alphacution’s intelligence asset will support a broader platform of products and services, like data feeds and software.
For the past year or so, Alphacution has been publishing most of its research content on its Feed for free, and promoting that content via periodic newsletter. The purpose of this strategy has been to assess the interest in and demand for a unique perspective and a new level of intelligence on the financial markets ecosystem.
And, based on the growth in network and activity around that research, it seems that we have struck a cord with many of you – a network of senior executives representing some of the most advanced players in the global financial markets arena and their stakeholders.
The recent trajectory of pageview metrics on our site is symbolic of this claim, as shown below:
Now it’s time to take that level of engagement and direct it towards a more viable long term economic support model that ultimately allows us to scale our team and enhance the quantity and quality of our intelligence.
So, here’s what we are going to do about that:
For those of you who are eager to derive greater value from this work and apply that intelligence to your own business interests, Alphacution is offering individual introductory subscription options priced at $275 per year or $25 per month, cancellable at any time. Both of these options include a rebate on purchases of deeper, more substantive reports and case studies.
In other words, the entire value of an individual subscription paid up to the point of purchasing a single report will be deducted from the purchase of that report. (Rebates not to exceed the maximum value of an annual subscription.)
Examples of upcoming reports – that fall within our 2019 research strategy, outlined in the post Alphacution’s Book: Not Hiding, In Plain Sight – that will be available via the aforementioned subscription rebate mechanism include:
- Case Study: Citadel, LLC (~ Q1-2019)
- Case Study: All-Time Top 10 Hedge Fund Managers, Ranked by Profits (~ Q2-2019)
- Case Study: Top Proprietary Trading Firms (~ Q3-2019)
- Case Study: Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (~ Q4-2019)
Enterprise subscription packages and custom content/service engagement options are available upon request at email@example.com.
|Individual Subscription Options|
Note: Business credit cards and bank accounts can be used via our PayPal payment portal.
Now, for those of you who don’t expect to take advantage of the offers outlined above but want to continue to enjoy the insights, intelligence and occassional entertainment that remain openly available on the Feed, I want to make this specific plea:
Free doesn’t mean there are no costs. In fact, in this case, there have been extraordinary costs in the accumulation of experience and sight, meticulous curation and assembly of data, and creative visualization of and storytelling around our findings.
So, if you value quality content – here or anywhere else – then you need to find a way to support that content at some level simply because you want it to continue to exist. Our post, In Support of Digital Content – which was adapted from other notable digital era content developers – makes a more expansive case for this perspective.
Bottom line: Your efforts to support via one-time or recurring contributions will help guard against this content needing to move from the currently preferred audience-driven model (for its level of independence) to a sponsorship-driven model (which can be found on most other industry media outlets).
So, if none of the subscription options suit you, one-time and recurring support contributions can be made at any level here:
Of course, as always: If you value this work, please continue to “like it,” share it, comment on it – or discuss amongst your colleagues – and then send us firstname.lastname@example.org.
As our “feedback loop” becomes more vibrant – given input from clients and other members of our network, especially around new questions to be answered – the value of this work will accelerate.
Don’t be shy…
Unsubscribe from prior subscriptions without further obligation, at any time, here: