Vendors
日本語

Research as a Service: Assessing the Implications of MiFID II on Investment Research

Create a vendor selection project
Click to express your interest in this report
Indication of coverage against your requirements
A subscription is required to activate this feature. Contact us for more info.
Celent have reviewed this profile and believe it to be accurate.
We are waiting for the vendor to publish their solution profile. Contact us or request the RFX.
Projects allow you to export Registered Vendor details and survey responses for analysis outside of Marsh CND. Please refer to the Marsh CND User Guide for detailed instructions.
Download Registered Vendor Survey responses as PDF
Contact vendor directly with specific questions (ie. pricing, capacity, etc)
13 March 2017

Abstract

Research aggregators have offered the buy side access to research via a platform with transparent pricing, usage analytics, and budgeting tools. A key driver of the success of these platforms will be the pricing strategy; we explore the implications of a “per report” pricing approach versus a subscription-based Research as a Service approach.

Celent has released a new report titled Research as a Service. The report was written by John Dwyer, a Senior Analyst with Celent’s Securities & Investments practice.

Research aggregators have emerged offering the buy side access to research via a platform with transparent pricing, usage analytics, and budgeting tools.

A key driver of the success of these platforms will be the pricing strategy; we explore the implications of a “per report” pricing approach versus a subscription-based Research as a Service approach.

Research as a Service harnesses best-in-class technology to optimize transparency, compliance, and pricing of research. In addition, it combines digital publishing and alignment of incentives to create a network generating actionable alpha. For example, Smartkarma is pioneering the Research as a Service model across Asian markets. Its recent partnership with Société Générale is a milestone for the investment research industry. Real consensus among the buy and sell side remains elusive — other than an expectation that the regulatory picture is likely to remain mixed.

“The regulatory pulse is likely to quicken through 2017 as evidenced by the Financial Conduct Authority’s recent announcements regarding firms failing to meet their expectations in a number of key research-related areas, including monitoring, pricing, budgeting, and record-keeping,” commented Dwyer.

“The initial focus of the incumbents on the buy side and sell side is likely to be on compliance. However, as new operating procedures are put into place and the research evolves to a peer-to-peer approach, then greater scrutiny will emerge on commercial implications of how alpha-generating research should be monetized,” he added.