The investment management software industry continues to evolve as we have seen new players emerge offering modern technologies and expanded functional offerings. Vendor M&A also continues to integrate former ‘best of breed’ offerings into enterprise platforms supporting more consolidation of functions. For example, we see front and middle office functions merging into common platforms, in addition to public and private asset support. Lastly, we have a set of legacy vendors who continue to enhance their cross-functional solutions with the goal of widening their product offering.
All the while, investment managers are launching new products, moving into new asset classes, and want to achieve efficiency and cost savings through scalable processes and technology. A confluence of these factors is shining light on a compelling case for considering more consolidated software platforms.
When defining the term ‘consolidated,’ the context is not meant to infer a single ‘front-to-back’ solution meeting all-in requirements. Although it sounds good, the reality is most organizations will require flexibility to integrate with other investment systems and have plug-and-play capabilities.
Over the past 20 years, I’ve witnessed and participated in debates over implementing ‘best of breed’ solutions versus more consolidated platforms. Back then, many mid-large size firms with AUM > $100B typically started out with a ‘best of breed’ approach to their application architecture, as the benefits of ‘specialization’ outweighed the benefits of having a single platform. Consolidated vendor choices were limited, and there was less appetite for making more ‘enterprise-wide’ decisions around investment software.
In the past ~5 years we have seen more investment managers evaluating and implementing consolidated platforms as the business case has shifted with more convincing benefits.
In summary, asset management firms considering a strategic look at their application architecture should contemplate consolidated software platform options. Potential benefits can provide organizations with competitive advantages and contribute to cost savings, reduced risk, operational efficiencies, and increasing revenues through more trusted and timely data. Obtaining organization-wide alignment with a diverse set of business leaders may be challenging, but this should not be an upfront deterrent to include consolidated software platform options in your evaluation/selection process. You may be surprised at what the cost/benefit analysis reveals.
Ken has over 25 years of progressive technology and operations experience in the investment management industry. He has provided both advisory and delivery services to large, global investment managers and service providers. Ken’s specialties include program and project management, strategic operational and technology assessments, operations outsourcing transitions, software evaluation/selection and implementation, business process improvement, and business analysis. Prior to joining Citisoft, Ken held senior level roles at companies including PwC, State Street, JP Morgan and Headstrong (GenPact).