1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates generally to trading systems. More particularly, the present invention relates systems and methods of generating liquidity by indicating interests in trading assets. More particularly, according to embodiments of the present invention, a confidential, anonymous matching system and method provides a means for matching indications of interest and executing orders based on the matches, thereby increasing the liquidity of an order execution system.
2. Description of the Related Art
Institutions trading large blocks of securities are faced with significant inefficiencies in the markets as a consequence of the markets' focus on retail traders. Such inefficiencies have led to enormous costs in executing institutional trades. Institutional traders cannot share their entire order size information with the markets without causing an adverse impact on the share price.
Recently, some institutions have turned to the use of “indications of interest” (IOs) to seek out liquidity. Typically a broker receiving a large block from an institutional customer would attempt to find a natural other side to the transaction to avoid a trade imbalance on the primary exchanges and reduce market impact. Matching systems are known in the prior art for identifying potential counterparties to a transaction. See, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 5,924,082 to Silverman et al. In the Silverman system, traders use subjective criteria, such as a party's credit rating, geographic location, political affiliation, or other subjective criteria, to filter out unacceptable trading parties. The users of the system enter subjective ranking information for all other users, who are identified to each user in a display. A user then enters bid/offer information together with minimum rank information that represents the lowest rank of any potentially acceptable counterparty to the transaction entered by the user. A matching computer then matches bids and offers entered based on the bid/offer parameters and the ranking information. Once potential matches are identified, the matching computer signals the potential counterparties to enable the parties to communicate with each to commence direct negotiations.
The use of such “indications of interest” systems has certain advantages in that it is relatively easy to participate in an indication of interest pool, and traders maintain complete control over their orders. However, the current systems have significant shortcomings, in that 1) information leakage can occur through the negotiation process, which could result in adverse price impact; 2) negotiations frequently can be lengthy and cumbersome, and may not even result in a trade being transacted; 3) the liquidity pool is not diverse; and 4) transactions are limited to two parties.
Thus, there is a need for improved systems and methods for generating liquidity utilizing indications of interest.
According to the present invention, systems and methods are provided wherein indications of interest are used to seek out additional liquidity, while full anonymity is preserved and information leakage is avoided.
According to an embodiment of the present invention, unexecuted trading positions may be used as indications of interest, and the corresponding party, trader, etc. may be alerted to the existence of potential indication crosses or matches. The corresponding party, trader, etc. then, for a limited period of time, may convert or “promote” the indication of interest to a “firm” order. The alert maintains anonymity and confidentiality regarding the identity of the trader and the size of the indication of interest. A matching algorithm is then used for share allocation and pricing at which the transactions will occur.
According to an embodiment of the present invention, the system is configured to take non-executable orders or indications of interests, such as an indication to buy or sell an amount of a tradable asset (e.g., a number of shares of a given security), and match indications of interest with a contra trade (i.e., a corresponding indication of interest having the opposing side). As will be described in further detail below, a matching algorithm may be configured to consider multi-party trades (e.g., three-way) and other complex ways of matching indications of interest.
A system for generating liquidity according to an embodiment of the present invention a plurality of client user interfaces and a matching system. Each client user interface includes a trading desktop which stores unexecuted trading positions. The matching system is coupled with the plurality of client user interfaces and configured to receive information about the unexecuted trading positions. The system can identify as a match one or more first indications of interest which can fulfill one or more second indications of interest, based upon the information about the unexecuted trading positions. For the identified matches, the system can provide a notification of the match and an invitation to execute the match to corresponding client user interfaces. When at least one invitation on each side of the match is accepted, the system forwards orders corresponding to the match, to an order execution system for execution.
According to another embodiment of the present invention, a method for generating liquidity includes the steps of: receiving a plurality of indications of interest to trade an amount of a tradable asset; identifying as a match, one or more first indications of interest from the plurality of indications of interest which can fulfill one or more second indications of interest from the plurality of indications of interest; for the match, providing an invitation to execute the match to each party corresponding to the one or more first indications of interest and one or more second indications of interest; and if at least one invitation on each side of a match is accepted, generating an executable order corresponding to the accepted one or more first indications of interest and the accepted one or more second indications of interest in order to execute a trade of a tradable asset.
According to one embodiment, when an invitation is accepted, an order is generated base on the indication of interest and submitted to the order execution system. However, if, during the window of time for accepting the match, no contra-party orders are accepted, or the order is otherwise not crossed, the order expires and the indication of interest is reset. That is, it reverts back to the client and can be resubmitted as in indication of interest.
Further applications and advantages of various embodiments of the present invention are discussed below with reference to the drawing figures.
a-2i are screen shots of an exemplary interface for a system for creating liquidity according to an embodiment of the present invention.
While the present invention may be embodied in many different forms, a number of illustrative embodiments are described herein with the understanding that the present disclosure is to be considered as providing examples of the principles of the invention and such examples are not intended to limit the invention to preferred embodiments described herein and/or illustrated herein.
Clients 102 may be connected with the trading system 104 via an electronic data network, direct connection, etc. Trading system 104 may be connected to a number of trading entities, such as exchanges, ECNs, or the like, for receiving trading information, and routing and executing trades. Trading system 104 preferably includes an order execution system 106, which may be a crossing system for executing orders. For example, ITG Inc. owns U.S. Pat. No. 5,873,071. Trading system 104 also preferably includes an order routing system 108 for routing live orders for execution. The system may be connected to a back office system 110 or a ticker tape or other reporting system 112. The system 104 may include appropriate hardware and software for performing encryption, security and connective, such as, for example, proxy servers 114.
The system also includes a matching module 116 for matching indications of interests and converting matches to firm orders as described in more detail below. Indications of interest are preferably kept confidential and anonymous even when a match occurs. The system 104 includes a pricing module (which may be a part of matching module 116) that calculates a price for executing matched indications. Preferably, the pricing module uses a mid-point pricing algorithm.
In order to create a “pool” of indications, the system 100 may be configured to scan each client 102 for uncommitted positions or certain committed yet unexecuted positions (collectively, “indications”) that could result in a match against contra-side indications of another client 102 and/or a contra-side order, which may be residing on some other system. This scanning is sometimes called “sweeping.” Sweeping may occur at the client 102 or be controlled remotely (e.g., by matching module 116), depending on the configuration and where blotter data is stored. Alternatively, a means for manually entering indications to the pool could be provided. Once indications are swept, the information can be stored locally and provided to the matching module 116, or stored at the matching module 116, or in a separate memory storage unit (not shown).
According to the invention, “sweeping” can be performed in a number of ways. On some periodic basis, the system can take a slice from a trading desktop blotter and send it to the match pool as an 101 order. Some possible options include:
Matching module 116 is configured to access the indications pool and match contra-indications with each other. Once contra-indications are matched, the matching module 116 is configured to notify each party to the match and provide a means for accepting the match. When a match is accepted, the matching module converts the match into executable orders and enters the orders into the order execution system 106. The price of the order is determined by the pricing algorithm (preferable, the mid-point for the asset).
A number of filters or conditions can be utilized for determining when a match exists or when a client 102 is notified of the existence of a match. For example, whether a client 102 will be alerted to the existence of a possible match can be made dependent upon the potential size of an indication. Take the case of a stock with a 21-day average daily trading value of $1,000,000 or more, the system might be configured to generate an alert for a match only when it has an available position of 25,000 shares or more in that security. For positions in securities with lower 21-day average daily trading values, the position could be limited to those greater than 10,000 for the client 102 to be alerted of a match.
When system detects the possibility of a match for a particular security meeting the applicable alert threshold, the system will send an electronic notification to the affected client 102 informing them that a possible match exists. Preferably, the notification will merely identify the security involved and the side (buy, sell) of the market of the indication. It is usually important to maintain the anonymity of the parties and the confidence of the size and trading constraints of an indication in order to prevent impact on market, gaming, etc. Therefore, it is most preferred that the system will not identify the contra-side parties, the potential size of the transaction, or any other details or trading constraints applicable to the contra-side order or indication.
Once a client 102 receives the notification of a potential match, that client preferably has a set-period (e.g., 45 seconds) to respond to the notification or the match expires. By responding to the notification within this time frame, each of the parties' indications are converted to orders that are submitted to the order execution system 106 for participation in the next match of orders. The indication in the client's trading desktop remains an uncommitted position during this time-window until the client responds to the notification and accepts the match. Until the client accepts the match, the client remains free to ignore the notification and/or send an order relating to that position elsewhere.
Also, an indication of interest may be matched with an order. In this case, orders could be made “indications eligible,” such as by adding a parameter to the order, which would allow the system to consider those orders for its matching indications pool. Order execution system 106 could “push” eligible orders to the matching module 116, or the matching module 116 could sweep indication eligible orders from the order execution system 106, to include those orders in the matching indications pool. One should recognize that the price of such indications eligible orders should be considered during matching in order to avoid generating false matches.
If a client does not respond to the electronic notification within the response time-window, it will be notified that a potential match opportunity was missed. The client may subsequently elect to reactivate the indication. As an option, the position can be excluded from consideration for future matching opportunities within the system until it is reactivated.
At the time of converting an indication into an order for submission to the order execution system 106 (i.e., responding within the notification window), the client may elect to specify a period of time (time-in-force) in which any uncrossed portion of that order will remain in execution system 106 as an order, during which time it can potentially interact with other orders. If the order has not been completely filled, the unfilled portion is returned to matching module 116 or to the client user 102, where it may revert to an indication of interest.
Synchronization between order execution systems and the conversion process may be required in order to ensure that the converted indication is crossed. In such cases, when a client is notified of a trading opportunity (alert) for a particular security (with the contra side being another client or an Indication-eligible order), crossing in that security in order execution system 106 can be suspended until the earlier of the following: (a) all clients receiving alerts have responded by sending accepting matches, or (b) the alert response window has expired. This mechanism permits a client user, if it responds to the notification within the allotted time, to participate in a match against any order in the order management system 106 on the contra side of the market without fear that the contra side order(s) would become unavailable through a cross with an existing or intervening order on the same side of the market as the user.
All orders matched within the order execution system 106 are executed at a price between the national best bid and offer at the time of the match (e.g., mid-point), thereby providing price improvement for all contra-parties involved in the match. The exact execution price for orders matched within the system and, correspondingly, the amount of price improvement received by a party to a match, can depend on various factors.
It should be understood that
a-2i are screen shots of an exemplary client user interface (e.g., graphical user interface (GUI)). By way of example, a system and method according to an embodiment of the present invention will be described with reference to the screen shots. The example of
a shows a GUI 200, which includes tabs for accessing an OMS screen blotter 202, active orders 204, reports 206, and indication system 208. A lower block 210 includes the detail information for each tab (here, the OMS blotter tab is active). In the lower block 210 displaying the blotter information, a number of uncommitted trades or indications are shown. Each indication includes the names of the equities 214 along with side 216, size available 218, order size 220, limit price (type of order) 222, and destination of order 224. Also shown, is an “include” check box 212, which allows the user to have the orders on the blotter to “indicate out.” A sweeping routine pulls the data regarding each order that has the include check-box 212 checked.
b shows the indication system tab 208 highlighted, and the detailed information in block 210 includes the recently swept information. However, this user is not participating yet and the swept indications are striked-through, meaning that they are not currently indicating out to the system. If participation button 211a is depressed, then the system will indicate out.
c shows that participation is now on. There is an alert indicator 226 which notifies the user whether a match exists. Note that no other details are given except that a match exists. What this means is that one or more parties can fulfill an order having the parameters of the indications of interest. For example, this user has indicated of interest to buying 50,000 shares of MSFT, 90,000 shares of T, and 35,000 shares of PFE. A match indication 226 means that one or more parties have indications that would complete the orders—indications of interest to sell 50,000 shares of MSFT, 90,000 shares of T and 35,000 shares of PFE. No order is executed here without at least one party on each side making the choice to execute. The number of matches “[3]” is shown in an “alert” button 219.
In
Referring to
If an match indication (invitation) times out, then the match is terminated (
One skilled in the art will readily understand that the GUI shown in
Referring to
Referring to
Thus, a number of preferred embodiments have been fully described above with reference to the drawing figures. Although the invention has been described based upon these preferred embodiments, it would be apparent to those of skill in the art that certain modifications, variations, and alternative constructions could be made to the described embodiments within the spirit and scope of the invention.
For example, users could be classified by, for example, user profiles, and matching could be limited to users having a specified user profile.
The present application claims the benefit of priority to U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 60/622,019 filed on Oct. 27, 2004, the entire contents of which are hereby incorporated by reference.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3573747 | Adams | Apr 1971 | A |
4412287 | Braddock, III | Oct 1983 | A |
4674044 | Kalmus et al. | Jun 1987 | A |
4903201 | Wagner | Feb 1990 | A |
5077665 | Silverman et al. | Dec 1991 | A |
5101353 | Lupien et al. | Mar 1992 | A |
5136501 | Silverman et al. | Aug 1992 | A |
5297031 | Gutterman et al. | Mar 1994 | A |
5375055 | Togher et al. | Dec 1994 | A |
5497317 | Hawkins et al. | Mar 1996 | A |
5592375 | Salmon et al. | Jan 1997 | A |
5615269 | Micali | Mar 1997 | A |
5664115 | Fraser | Sep 1997 | A |
5689652 | Lupien et al. | Nov 1997 | A |
5715402 | Popolo | Feb 1998 | A |
5717989 | Tozzoli et al. | Feb 1998 | A |
5727165 | Ordish et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5787402 | Potter et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5794207 | Walker et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5794219 | Brown | Aug 1998 | A |
5809483 | Broka et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5818914 | Fujisaki | Oct 1998 | A |
5835087 | Herz et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5842178 | Giovannoli | Nov 1998 | A |
5845266 | Lupien et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5873071 | Ferstenberg et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
5897620 | Walker et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
5924082 | Silverman et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5924083 | Silverman et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5926801 | Matsubara et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5950176 | Keiser et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5950177 | Lupien et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
6012046 | Lupien et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6014627 | Togher et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6029146 | Hawkins et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6029195 | Herz | Feb 2000 | A |
6055504 | Chou et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6058379 | Odom et al. | May 2000 | A |
6112189 | Rickard et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6131087 | Luke et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6134535 | Belzberg | Oct 2000 | A |
6141653 | Conklin et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6157918 | Shepherd | Dec 2000 | A |
6195647 | Martyn et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6247000 | Hawkins et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6266652 | Godin et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6278982 | Korhammer et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6313833 | Knight | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6401080 | Bigus et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6408282 | Buist | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6418419 | Nieboer et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6421653 | May | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6493683 | David et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6505174 | Keiser et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
6505175 | Silverman et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
6704716 | Force | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6747692 | Patel et al. | Jun 2004 | B2 |
6968318 | Ferstenberg et al. | Nov 2005 | B1 |
7035819 | Gianakouros et al. | Apr 2006 | B1 |
7136834 | Merrin et al. | Nov 2006 | B1 |
7315840 | Keith | Jan 2008 | B1 |
7565313 | Waelbroeck et al. | Jul 2009 | B2 |
7627516 | Gianakouros et al. | Dec 2009 | B2 |
7769668 | Balabon | Aug 2010 | B2 |
7912780 | Cleary Neubert et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 |
20010037284 | Finkelstein et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20010047323 | Schmidt | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20020007335 | Millard et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20020032632 | Sernet | Mar 2002 | A1 |
20020052824 | Mahanti et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
20020055901 | Gianakouros et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
20020099646 | Agarwal et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020099647 | Howorka et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020128955 | Brady et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20030004859 | Shaw et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030014354 | Madoff et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030050888 | Satow et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030061069 | Silverman et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030093362 | Tupper et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030120585 | Rosenblatt | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030216932 | Foley | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20030220868 | May | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20030229563 | Moore et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20030229566 | Moore et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20040034591 | Waelbroeck et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040059666 | Waelbroeck et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040172356 | Agarwal et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040199453 | Brady et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20050114254 | Condie | May 2005 | A1 |
20050197857 | Avery | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050234805 | Robertson et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20060015446 | Burkhardt et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060026090 | Balabon | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060031153 | Kim | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060059082 | Silverman et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060080220 | Samuel et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060085317 | Allen | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060089899 | Durkin et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2002-366746 | Dec 2002 | JP |
2004-528658 | Sep 2004 | JP |
2004-287893 | Oct 2004 | JP |
WO 0070518 | Nov 2000 | WO |
WO 0125996 | Apr 2001 | WO |
02097589 | Dec 2002 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Microsoft Press Computer Dictionary, Third Edition, 1997, p. 456. |
J. Davis: “Big Storm Rising,” Business 2.0, Sep. 1, 1998, 2 pages. |
A. Svaidi: “Wall Street Turns to Durango for Help,” Denver Business Journal, Jan. 30, 1998, 3 pages. |
LEXSEE 1991 SEC No-Act. Lexis 1112, Oct. 1, 1991, 16 pages. |
Victor Kulkosky, “Making Connections in Off-Exchange Trading,” Wall Street & Technology, New York, Oct. 1993, vol. 11, Iss. 5, p. 14, 4 pgs. |
Peter Chapman, “Merrin's Solution to Liquidity Problems,” Traders Magazine, Oct. 2000, vol. 13, Iss. 173, p. 54, 3 pgs. |
Mary Schroeder, “Liquidnet to Build Interfaces With Four OMSs,” Securities Industry News, Nov. 2000, vol. 12, Iss. 43, p. 5, 1 pg. |
Anthony Guerra, “Will Liquidnet Catch the Buy Side,” Wall Street & Technology, Jul. 2001, 19, 7, p. 75, 3 pgs. |
www.liquidnet.com “Have a Change”, Why Use Liquidnet: Features & Benefits, 5 pages. |
E-mail string containing an e-mail dated Jun. 19, 1998 from Eric Legoff to James Nikolai transmitting the Proposal to Jeffries & Company, Inc. |
Vie Systems, Inc.: “Proposal to Jeffries & Company, Inc.,” Jun. 19, 1998, pp. 1-16. |
K. Lupowitz: “Merrin (DOS)/Harborside Installation Guide,” Jul. 28, 1998, 7 pages. |
T. Tarrant: “@Harborside Links Demonstrate New Paradigm as Leading Order Management and Network Vendors Connect,” Jul. 12, 1999, 3 pages. |
Translation of Japanese Office Action, issued in JP 2007-539144 on Nov. 22, 2011, 6 pages. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20060136326 A1 | Jun 2006 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
60622019 | Oct 2004 | US |