- 1.0 Assessing the Collateral Management & OTC Derivatives Processing Solutions Competitive Landscape
- 1.1 The Business Perspective
- 1.2 The Functionality Perspective
- 2.0 Assessing the Surveyed Collateral Management & OTC Derivatives Processing Solutions
- 2.1 Solutions Assessment Methodology
- 2.2 Analysis of GreySpark Partners Survey Findings
- 3.0 Vendor Sheets: Collateral Management & OTC Derivatives Processing Solutions
- 3.1 Collateral Management Solutions
- 3.1.1 Calypso
- 3.1.2 FIS APEX Collateral
- 3.1.3 IHS Markit Collateral Manager
- 3.1.4 Murex MX.3
- 3.1.5 Nomura Research Institute (NRI) GX Margins
- 3.2 OTC Derivatives Processing Solutions
- 3.2.1 Calypso
- 3.2.2 Finastra Fusion Market
- 3.2.3 FIS Front Arena
- 3.2.4 IHS Markit Portfolio Valuations / MarkitSERV / thinkFolio / EDM
- 3.2.5 Murex MX.3
- 3.2.6 Nomura Research Institute (NRI) GX Derivs
- 3.1 Collateral Management Solutions
- 4.0 Appendices
- 4.1 Glossary of Terms
- 4.2 Table of Figures
The Search for a True, Front-to-Back, Modular Vendor Offering
In 2019, the collateral management and OTC derivatives processing vendor solutions space is dominated by two questions from a Tier I and Tier II investment bank selection process perspective:
- Vendor Selection & Total Cost of Ownership – Which vendor solution is capable of offering a ‘true,’ front-to-back, single-platform experience at an enterprise-wide level, thus negating the need for costly, labour-intensive deployments and implementations of two or more systems? and
- Modularity & Buy-and-Build – From a product or technology architecture perspective, which solution is modular-enough to allow an investment bank to pluck out specific components of a vendor offering that can then be married with existing, in-house built, legacy middle- or back-office systems that are often near-impossible to displace?
