今春のカンファレンスを振り返る(その2)

本稿では、今春のアジア3都市での6つのカンファレンスを振り返ります。銀行、保険、証券、ウェルスマネージメントの各業界の議論に共通したキーワードは、フィンテック、デジタル、そしてモダナイゼーションでした。

 

Legacy Modernization Seminar (47日:東京)

http://www.celent.com/news-and-events/events/legacy-modernization-seminar

グローバルなITサービスベンダーの主催するコミュニティミーティングで、「レガシーモダナイゼーション」のプレゼンテーションをしました。

昨年セレントが実施したサーベイ結果は、日本の保険業界におけるレガシーシステムの現代化について、以下の示唆をもたらしました。

  1. 現代化の検討は本格化、既に実施ステージに:置換戦略は、新システムへの置換がバージョンアップやラッピングを凌ぎ、置換理由は、コスト、ITスキルや能力との合致、リスク許容度、が主流である。
  2. 置換プロジェクトの進捗は評価から実施段階へ入るも、新たな解決策(SaaS、BPO)の検討は十分とは言えない。
  3. 最大の課題は自社に最適なプログラムの選定にある。
  4. ビジネスケースの検討は不十分:ビジネスケースはプロジェクトの進捗管理ツールに止まり、ライブドキュメントとして機能していない。
  5. 現代化の進展による、ビジネス部門、IT部門の役割変化は、未だ責任分担を変化させるには至っていない。

この現状認識に基づき、カンファレンスでは、以下を議論しました。

  1. レガシーモダナイゼーションのフレームワーク
  2. 組織の優先課題と自社のリスク許容度の掌握
  3. スコープ定義

そしてレガシーの再生産をしないモダナイゼーションのKFSとして、以下を提唱しました。

  • 自動化とその複雑系への適用
  • コアスタンダードの確立と、ローカルバリエーションの許容
  • ソーシングモデルの見直し

ここでもまた、「フィンテック」「デジタル」が共通の話題でしたが、IT部門の最大の課題は、やはり「レガシーモダナイゼーション」にあります。それはITシステムの更新や新技術の導入だけでなく、IT部門の体制やイニシアチブの在り方にも大きく依存します。カンファレンス参加者の問題意識は、「データ移行」「プログラムコンバージョン」「コンフィグレーション」から「クローズド・ブック」のBPOまで、実に多様なテーマに及びました。

4

http://tekmonks.com/beta/beta/brochure/FI-Consulting.html

 

Tokyo Financial Information & Technology Summit  (412日:東京)

http://www.celent.com/news-and-events/events/tokyo-financial-information-technology-summit

キャピタルマーケットのトピックスも変化しています。

例年同様、東京金融情報&技術サミットのパネル運営をサポートしました。今年のカンファレンスでは、ウェルスマネージメント、フィンテックを新たなトピックスとして加え、「信託ビジネス」と「ブロックチェーン」のパネルをモデレートしました。

「信託ビジネス」パネルでは、以下のトピックスで議論しました。

変貌する個人金融市場と資産運用ビジネスの現状認識について:

  • 「貯蓄から投資へ」の潮目の変化(NISA、投信、ラップ口座)
  • ゼロ金利の影響
  • ターゲットとするセグメント

個人向け資産運用ビジネスへの取り組みについて:

  • 新チャネルの状況(対面チャネル、非対面チャネル、ハイブリッド)
  • プロセスの改革の度合(分析と自動化の活用度合)
  • オペレーション革新の状況(商品・サービス、IT、組織・体制の革新)

資産運用ビジネスにおけるイノベーションのドライバーと挑戦:

  • テクノロジー活用(チャネル、分析・自動化、商品・サービス)
  • データ活用(投資サポート情報、投資商品データ、投信データ)
  • FinTech活用(組織・体制、新市場とコミュニティの拡大)

日本のリテール証券・信託マーケットにおいても、ウェルスマネージメントビジネスとそこでのテクノロジー活用が重要テーマとなっています。

 

「ブロックチェーン」パネルでは、「資本市場」を中心とした「ブロックチェーン」の可能性、POCへの期待を議論しました。論点は、以下の3点でした。

  • 取引の透明性、コスト削減への効果期待と実現方策
  • 金融サービス事業適用の条件、POCに期待する成果
  • 期待される、ビジネスケース

ブロックチェーンを巡る議論は、「探索」の段階から「実証」の段階に入ったと感じました。また、カンファレンスの議論を通じて、以下の示唆を見出しました。

  • この技術は、多くの市場参加者が共有すべきもの:プライベートもしくは、小規模なコンソーシアムでこの技術を適用しても、そのメリット享受は難しい。
  • この技術は、グローバルに実装すべきもの:グローバルな制度変更を伴う、標準化のイニシアチブのなかでの設計と実装が本来の姿である。ビジネスケースは、国際送金、トレードファイナス、マイクロペイメントなど想定されるが、ビットコイン(の信任が増し)若しくは、新法定通貨が定まれば、金融取引の大半はそれでよく、後は、非金融情報をタグ付するだけで、その多くはXMLの範囲で解決する。
  • この技術は、アプリケーションではなく、プラットフォームの技術:従って、①基礎研究:新プラットプラットフォームの構築と、②応用研究:その上でのアプリケーションの構築作法、とを峻別し、POCの多くは、R&Dとして①を主に、②はサンプル・ユースケース程度であり、制度設計は皆無。多くのベンダー(や金融機関)は、旧態依然として、新標準が定まった後のAP構築方法論及びAP構築から利益を出す構造である。

そこでの課題は、以下の3点に集約出来ます。

  • 透明性:技術の特性として、秘匿性の高い情報の管理には向かない。大半の金融取引は秘匿性が伴い、法改正も必要。
  • 制度設計:大規模金融基盤適用には、制度設計、制度改定が不可避で、個別金融機関にはその動機がない。
  • 技術者の人口:メインフレームからC/S、Web、モバイル、AI&IoTへの変遷と全く同様に、広範な普及には開発者の人口が必要。

5

http://www.financialinformationsummit.com/tokyo/jp/static/programme

 

17th Asia Conference on Bancassurance and Alternative Distribution Channels (5月10日:ジャカルタ)

http://www.celent.com/news-and-events/events/17th-asia-conference-bancassurance-and-alternative-distribution-channels

今春2回目のジャカルタでは、このバンカシュランスのカンファレンスに参加し、保険業界におけるデジタル化をセレントの「デジタルフレームワーク」を用いて提唱しました。加えて、InsurTechの動向を、ソーシャルメディアのデータ分析、保険会社以外のデータ収集とその活用、IoTを活用した新たなデータソースの拡充、構造化データ以外の分析ツールの活用について紹介しました。また、銀行と保険会社のレガシーモダナイゼーションについても言及し、自動化と事務処理のSTP化の重要性を述べました。バンカシュランスの文脈においても、銀行、保険会社に跨る事務処理をシンプルにすることが鍵で、プロセスのデジタル化はすなわちコアシステムの現代化を誘導することを提言しました。

カンファレンス・チェアの役割を通じて、全プレゼンテーションを紹介し、質疑応答をモデレートしました。登壇者の顔ぶれは、現地の金融当局、保険業界団体、東南アジアで活躍するグローバル銀行と保険会社、再保険会社の現地法人、そして当地でのデジタルバンキングに商機を見出すテクノロジーベンダーとフィンテック・スタートアップ企業。各社の発表に共通するコンセプトは、デジタルエクスペリエンスが変える銀行と保険会社、そして保険契約者の関係でした。

社会インフラの制約条件は、シンプルな顧客関係を要求します。金融とITのリテラシーが未成熟な地域では、顧客の文脈での推奨や支援が必要とされます。それらを満たすプラットフォームとして、モバイルを中心とした顧客接点が取り組みの中心でした。Financial Inclusion(金融包摂)は、金融当局の強力なバックアップもあり、銀行、保険、そしてテクノロジーの業界にとって、大きな活躍の舞台とみなされます。今回も、アジア新興市場のダイナミズムを大いに実感しました。

6

http://www.asiainsurancereview.com/airbanc2016/Programme

 

From the Celent Innovation Forum, Tokyo

At Celent we have been focusing on financial services technology since our inception. Now of course all eyes are focused on fintech, which we might inversely call the use of technology to disrupt (traditional) financial services. Investment in fintech startups is significant, and the financial markets involved are huge – US$218 trillion annually in the capital markets alone. Celent recently held our latest fintech event in Tokyo to a full house, an indication of the intense interest in fintech in the Japanese market. The day consisted of two Celent presentations on fintech in the retail and institutional securities industries, followed by a discussion panel. Celent senior analyst John Dwyer presented on blockchain technology and its potential use across capital markets. Smart contracts powered by this technology could conceivably replace existing means of executing market transactions, and by enabling direct ownership might displace custodians and other intermediaries. As if this weren’t food for thought enough, governments including the US and UK are taking a serious look at putting the dollar and the pound on blockchains. Talk about fundamental disruption! Senior analyst Will Trout provided an analysis of how automated advice (robo advisory) is reshaping the wealth management industry. After the financial crisis many individuals quite naturally want to manage their assets themselves, but also require investment advice. Robo advisory, which perfectly suits the self-service, mobile lifestyle, is an answer to this dilemma. SoftBank, Nomura Asset Management and The Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ joined the panel discussion, bringing their respective views on cognitive computing; the potential of fintech to lure Japan’s famously reticent retail segment to participate in the markets; and how to mobilize a large organization for innovation. A fundamental question about fintech is who will ultimately derive value from these innovations: fintech startups; technology giants like Alibaba and Google; or the incumbent financial institutions? Due partly to the regulatory stance, in Japan more than in most markets financial institutions may be in the best position to end up in the winner’s box. Only time will tell, for Japan and for markets across the globe, but you can rely on Celent to continue to provide our clients with insights in the rapidly developing world of fintech.

Innovation and Legacy Modernization in Japan

As a regional unit, Celent Asia covers all of the industries under Celent’s purview: Banking, Insurance, and Securities & Investments. So it can be a bit of a challenge when we put on a Celent conference in Asia to find topics that resonate across all these verticals. Our recent (and sold out) Insight and Innovation Day in Tokyo hit the target by examining two interrelated themes of vital import to many financial firms today: strategies for innovation, and legacy renewal to support these strategies. The event was anchored by not one but two surveys Celent carried out this spring in Japan. A survey of 1,000+ Japanese consumers initiated by Celent’s CEO Craig Weber suggested that highly digital consumers are the best targets for innovative financial services. The challenge, as this survey revealed (and contrary to popular belief outside Japan), is that digitally savvy consumers are still just a tiny minority in Japan. This implies that financial institutions in Japan must not only innovate, but also educate and lead their customers into the digital financial future. The second survey, organized by Celent Senior Analyst Eiichiro Yanagawa, looked at legacy modernization trends at more than 60 banks, insurers and investment firms in Japan. Core system replacement is in full swing, with a majority of firms either planning or in the midst of their legacy transformation initiatives. Significantly, survey respondents indicated that the primary driver for replacing the core is to improve customer service and satisfaction. Which increasingly will require digital support for the customer experience. In a word, innovation. These surveys were modeled on the Celent reports Targeting Innovation: How Your Customers Might Respond and Tracking the Progress in Core Systems Replacement (Global Life and Global P&C editions). We’ll be publishing our analyses of the Japan surveys shortly. This is what our team does best and, I believe, uniquely: apply our global experience to the markets here in Asia to help firms deliver value.

On the cusp: regional integration in Asia

It’s 2015, the mid-point of the decade and a good time to start looking at major trends in Asian financial services over the next five to ten years. One of the major themes will be regional integration, which is another way of saying the development of cross-border markets. There are at least two important threads here: the ongoing internationalization of China’s currency, and the development of the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) in Southeast Asia. RMB internalization is really about the loosening of China’s capital controls and its full-fledged integration into the world economy. And everyone seems to want a piece of this action, including near neighbors such as Singapore who are vying with Hong Kong to be the world’s financial gateway to China. The AEC is well on its way to becoming a reality in 2015, with far-reaching trade agreements designed to facilitate cross-border expansion of dozens of services industries, including financial sectors. While AEC is not grabbing global headlines the way China does, we see increasing interest in Southeast Asia among our FSI and technology vendor clients. From Celent’s point of view, both trends will open significant opportunities across financial services. In banking, common payments platforms and cross-border clearing. In capital markets, cross-border trading platforms for listed and even OTC products. In insurance, the continued development of regional markets. Financial institutions will be challenged to create new business models and technology strategies to extract the opportunities offered by regional integration. It’s the mid-point of the decade, and the beginning of something very big.

Beyond HFT

Last week I attended the Tokyo Financial Information Summit, put on by Interactive Media. The event was interesting from a number of perspectives. This event focuses on the capital markets; attendees are usually domestic sell side and buy side firms and vendors, including global firms active in Japan. This year there was good representation from around Asia ex-Japan as well; possibly attracted by the new volatility in Japan’s stock market. The new activity in the market was set off by the government’s Abenomics policies aimed at reinvigorating the Japanese economy. But I suspect the fact that Japan’s stock market is traded on an increasingly low latency and fragmented market structure gives some extra juice to the engine. Speaking of high frequency trading, Celent’s presentation at the event pointed out that HFT volumes have fallen from their peak (at the time of the financial crisis) and that HFT revenues have fallen drastically from this peak. In response to this trend, as well as the severe cost pressures in the post-GFC period, cutting-edge firms seeking to maintain profitable trading operations are removing themselves from the low latency arms race. Instead, firms are seeking to maximize the potential of their existing low-latency infrastructures by investing in real-time analytics and other new capabilities to support smarter trading. HFT is not dead, but firms are moving beyond pure horsepower to more nuanced strategies. Interestingly, this theme was echoed by the buy and sell side participants in a panel at the event moderated by my colleague, Celent Senior Analyst Eiichiro Yanagawa. Even though HFT levels in Japan, at around 25 – 35% of trading, have probably not reached their peak, firms are already pulling out of the ultra-low latency arms race–or deciding not to enter it in the first place. The message was that for many firms it is not advisable to enter a race where they are already outgunned. Instead they should focus on smarter trading that may leverage the exchanges’ low latency environment, but rely on the specific capabilities and strategies of a firm and its traders. Looking at this discussion in a global context, it seems interesting and not a little ironic that just as regulators are preparing to strike against HFT, the industry has in some sense already started to move beyond it.

Quotes from the Innovation Roundtable

They said it couldn’t be done, but we held the latest installment in Celent’s series of innovation roundtables in Tokyo recently. Our innovation roundtables put the focus squarely on interactive discussion among the participants. This is a relatively untried model in Japan, where events typically take the form of conventional conferences with presentations. We’re glad we tried it though, because we got a very interesting line-up of firms. Participants included the whole spectrum: banks, capital markets firms, and insurers; Japanese and foreign firms; traditional mega-institutions and alternative new entrants. The discussion was lively; below are some quick notes I took of some of the more interesting comments made, to capture a bit of the flavor of the day. Why Innovate? “Innovation is not the goal, it is a method and a tactic.” “We need to innovate because it has become difficult to differentiate us from our competitors.” “In today’s environment, innovation is necessary if you want to stay profitable.” Paths to Innovation “Incremental innovation is an axymoron. You can’t innovate by increments; innovation requires a big bang change.” “It might be possible to rearrange existing elements to create something new.” “When to innovate? If our clients think a new service is interesting, we try and create it for them and see if it succeeds.” “Innovation needs to be business driven.” “Financial institutions need to have an innovation division; an incubation unit that accumulates ideas from throughout the company.” IT and Innovation “IT is not the impetus for innovation, but because IT inevitably evolves, that creates need for innovation.” “Legacy is a barrier: it is hard to throw things away.” Cultural Challenges “We need to justify ROI on any investment each fiscal year. It is hard to show this on an innovation project.” “If you think about it, financial institutions don’t even have R&D departments.” Quote of the Day “Changing company culture is really about changing oneself. I personally enjoy innovation and change. Innovative culture is about getting a bunch of people together who enjoy change.”

On Innovation

Celent held our most recent Innovation event in Singapore the last week of November, following similar events in New York, Boston, Toronto, Tokyo, London, and, most recently, San Francisco. Most of Celent’s work is focused on specific financial industry verticals, but Innovation is a topic that transcends industry barriers, and so—by design—do many of our Innovation events.

In Singapore we had representation from the entire financial services spectrum—banks, credit cards, insurers, capital markets firms and exchanges. We presented some of Celent’s recent thinking on innovation, much of it from our new innovation survey. But the main event was a peer discussion between the participants themselves.

It was one of the more lively discussions I’ve seen. We set aside two hours for the peer discussion, and it went by in a flash. Participants jostled to get their say in, and the session ended with the feeling that it could have gone several hours more. I think one of the keys was that there were a lot of different types in the room: the abovementioned full spectrum of FIs, from both the business and IT side, and even from compliance.

Everyone was naturally interested in how their “colleagues across the aisles” looked at innovation, how far each had come in achieving it, and what their technology, operational and cultural approaches were—or were not. Participants brimmed with on-the-spot case studies of initiatives at their firms. This was also refreshingly unusual, since firms are often reticent to divulge competitive information and “secret sauces.”

I think the reason for this relatively high level of enthusiasm lies in the industry’s realization that innovation is crucial to long-term success–and considering the rapidly expanding number of disintermediators, and the remarkable success of some of them, maybe even needed for short-term survival.

Tokyo Roundtable 2013: The Capital Markets Revolution in Japan and Asia

Tokyo, home to Asia’s largest capital markets, is also wonderful in May, and was a perfect location for two recent Celent roundtables.

The first was Exchange Panel: Drivers of Innovation and a Market in Transition. We invited Executives from five major global exchanges; CME Group, JPX Group, Korea Exchange, NYSE Euronext, and Singapore Exchange Limited. Representatives from both Asian and global exchanges discussed changing equities derivatives market structures, business models, challenges, and opportunities in Japan’s and Asia’s capital markets.

Though similar at first glance, the exchanges from the East and West presented a marked contrast. Asian exchanges insisted that competition, diversity, and deregulation are the keys to growth. Exchanges based in Europe and the United States said they found the diversity and competition excessive; they would prefer order and market discipline. All exchanges stressed the importance of innovation and collaboration, and all agreed the distinction between investment and speculation is important.

Such differences between East and West reflect the history of the global exchange business. Differences in time and distance are shrinking as networks grow, but, ironically, the advent of global capital markets has led investors to recognize the importance of individual trading venues.

For the second roundtable, The Capital Markets Revolution in Japan and Asia, we invited the top players. From online securities companies, Monex, Inc., from buy-side, Nissay Asset Management Corporation, and from sell-side, Nomura Securities Co., Ltd. This session focused on the emerging low latency landscape and the opportunities and challenges in the region’s equities and derivatives markets. In Japan and Asia, since the introduction of arrowhead, the latency has been lowered enough and the attention has shifted to its execution quality. Technologies such as Big Data and transaction cost analysis (TCA) are the focus of their challenges.

Finally, in response to questions from audience of the venue, we asked the panelist to comment on high frequency trading (HFT). There were two comments; one was “the opportunity to get everyone used to HFT is here”, and another “HFT is welcome in Japan”.

The market environment has changed drastically. Conversion of monetary policy, “Abenomics,” and the “three arrows” were a volcanic combination. Magma flowed, but all indicators began to rise.

FIG 1:Tokyo Equities Market last six months

Tokyo Roundtable 2013_GraphSource: NIKKEI, Celent
 
These discussions will continue in New York in June. Celent will continue to explore the market trends of tomorrow. We are looking forward to meeting you again.
 
 
 

Indian exchanges prepare for greater competition

The Indian capital markets regulator, SEBI, is talking reforms as it recently announced a blueprint that is potentially set to increase competition among exchanges. The regulator’s stance on increasing competition and allowing foreign investment in exchanges was closely anticipated in recent months, especially among large global banks. SEBI had to address pressing concerns on attracting foreign investment (Figure indicates the drastic fall in FII inflows into India in 2011) and failing to keep pace with developments in global capital markets. The new move by SEBI has cleared the way for listing of stock exchanges. This decision comes after an expert committee headed by former Reserve Bank Governor Bimal Jalan submitted its report in 2010 on governance and ownership issues relating to market infrastructure institutions. While SEBI has broadly accepted the recommendations, it has gone ahead with the move to allow public listing of exchanges despite the committee recommending against such a move on ‘conflict of interest’ grounds. The blueprint indicates that public holding of exchanges should be at least 51%, while exchange operator, banks and insurance companies are allowed to hold up to 15%. Foreign investors are allowed to hold up to 5%. Exchange operators, however, would not be allowed to list on their own exchanges. SEBI is watching developments in global capital markets closely. The developed markets in US and Europe are far ahead in terms of maturity of market infrastructure, while India is yet to reach a stage where alternative trading venues can compete with incumbent exchanges. The NSE started in 1994 to compete with the then singly dominant exchange, BSE. But ironically the NSE has today itself become what it set out to defeat, accounting for close to 75% of equity volumes. The attention is on regional exchanges to play more aggressively. With an intention to infuse more competition, the regulator has warned that dormant exchanges that are not attracting liquidity would have to be wound up. SEBI has stipulated a minimum annual trading volume of INR 1000 crores for exchanges to continue operating and the same would be reviewed after 3 years. While we see it as a timely warning bell, it is not enough. We have to wait and see how SEBI looks to empower and encourage regional exchanges. The Delhi Stock Exchange has already woken up to the competition by following in the footsteps of LSE in upgrading its IT infrastructure by partnering with MilleniumIT, a technology player which provides ultra-low latency trading solutions. The debate in ongoing in the case of clearing houses and the regulator is expected to come out with its view soon on having a single clearing house versus introducing interoperability. Although it appears that policy challenges facing SEBI are similar to those faced by regulators in developed markets in the past, and despite indications that SEBI is trying to align with developed markets, we should be careful while concluding that the Indian regulator would eventually follow in the footsteps of US and Europe.

Exchange Trading of Mutual Funds in India

In the last year and a half, the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) has taken a number of steps to develop the mutual funds industry in India. One significant move in this direction has been allowing trading of mutual funds at the country’s stock exchanges. After studying the feasibility of doing this in 2009, SEBI approved mutual fund transactions through stock exchanges in November last year. This was done to extend the convenience of the secondary market infrastructure to mutual fund investors who could earlier invest in funds only through the existing distributor/agent channel. India’s exchanges with a large number of trading terminals connected through numerous Lease Lines and VSAT terminals can reach investors in over 400 cities. Besides reach, exchange trading offers number of other benefits too: opportunity to invest in multiple asset class through a single (demat) account, aggregation of entire portfolio in a single place enabling easy monitoring and more efficient investment decision making, reduction of paper work and errors etc. Also the exchanges’ existing delivery vs payment process offers de-risking of settlement process and increases transparency. Following SEBI’s approval, the two Indian Exchanges, the National Stock Exchange of India (NSE) and the Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE) started trading in mutual funds in November-December, 2009 (NSE: Mutual Fund Service System, BSE: StAR MF). Under the current arrangements investors would be able to deal in Mutual funds that have signed up with the exchanges and in the schemes which the fund houses have permitted to be traded at the exchanges. Out of 40 Asset Management Companies, around 20-22 have signed up with the two exchanges so far. SEBI is planning to make listing of all schemes mandatory. A look at the figures (see graph below) reveals this new channel for investing in mutual funds has not been very popular among investors yet. It can be noted in this context, average daily transaction value (sales+redemptions) for the overall industry during May-July, 2010, had been around 690 bn Rs, which makes exchange trading around 0.3% of total trading during the same period. The occasional jump (July) in trading value is more because of market fluctuations than investors’ preference for exchange trading: Industry Assets Under Management went down by 10% in July as compared to May, as a result subscription went up. Though it has to be acknowledged that of late, there has been a push from the fund houses to encourage investors to take the exchange route. However, these are still early days for this new system. Moreover, since removal of entry load (distribution fee charged by agents to investors) in August, 2009, the industry has been in a state of flux with agents now focusing more on selling insurance products which have high distribution fees. To overcome this problem the fund houses have been trying a number of new distribution models in last one year for attracting new investors; but a clear pattern is yet to emerge. It can be argued with more investor education and awareness about the new technology channels and SEBI’s continuous push, exchange trading of mutual funds is likely to pick up in the future. Banks are a big player in mutual funds and the regulators’ urging banks to transact through exchanges may be one step towards achieving this. Another recent phenomenon is that many brokerages are placing orders through exchanges in the recent months. These all hold good promise for this new channel, however, its long term impacts are yet to be seen.