最有看点的互联网金融门户

最有看点的互联网金融门户
区块链国际资讯

使用数据区块链加速股票交易的五大弊端

曾经被人们寄予厚望的能够提供自动廉价便捷的股票交易的区块链技术,最近被资本市场分析员Larry Tabb泼了一大盆冷水。

作为Tabb集团的负责人,Larry在二月二十二号的一份文件中表示,加密货币比特币技术能够有效改善自动股票交易进程。但同时数据区块链技术的使用也面临很多问题,其中甚至有些问题是不可避免的。

区块链是在网络上广泛传播的一种交易分类账。很多金融机构都投入大量资源开发该技术,期望得到更加快捷便宜的清算过程。其目的就在于在交易执行当天完成清算过程,即所谓的T+0,而现在所使用的技术只能支持T+2或T+3。

Tabb在了解了区块链的优势的同时,也列举了现有区块链技术和当前资本市场之前的潜在的弊端。这些弊端包括:

1.证券借贷

Tabb表示实时清算技术的任何进步都会对当前证券借贷的执行惯例造成影响。

大部分机构投资者都会允许他们的首席经纪人把他们的闲散挣钱借给需要填补空头的投资人。当投资人决定要卖掉所有股票的时候,借贷过程必须执行反向操作。这就意味着在交易前所有股票必须返还到投资人账户。在当前欧洲T+2,美国T+3的清算制度下,首席经纪人有足够的时间来完成该操作。

而T+0的清算制度就意味着股票必须实时返还到投资人账户,或者是在交易执行前。

如果没有办法完成实时操作,那就意味着在股票被返还到投资人账户之前,他们都会处于空头状态。之后投资人便可以完成可实时执行清算的交易过程。

如果这样的话,就会产生信息泄漏的问题。投资人想要卖出股票的意向会被市场知晓。

2.所有权认证

在美国,金融工具并没有注册在其持有者的名下,而是注册在美国预托证券或者是清算公司。托管公司并不知道具体投资人持有的股票份额,他们只知道首席经纪人持有的份额,而经纪商才知道其投资人客户的持有额。

“这对大型投资人来说会是一个很严重的问题,因为他们并不想要别人知道他们持有的份额。”

使用区块链技术进行实时交易清算就意味着交易一旦提交便不可更改,交易在提交前就必须要有投资人的姓名。

这样也有可能造成信息泄漏。他表示“这对大型投资人来说会是一个很严重的问题,因为他们并不想要别人知道他们持有的份额。”而T+0制度就意味着会把当前的匿名市场转化成实名市场,从而影响市场的流动性。

3.大宗交易

Tabb认为T+0制度同样也会影响机构投资人的交易过程。交易商通常会将同一种证券的交易汇总成一单大宗交易,从而减少价格波动和交易成本。

区块链技术会使得大宗交易更具挑战性。

区块链是对资产所有权的一种记录,而理论上讲证券的法律主体并不是投资组合经理所在的机构,而是经理人管理的基金。

因此,不同经理人之间,哪怕是相同证券的交易也无法汇总成大宗交易。

这就意味着同一家母公司的不同经理人在同一时间对同一证券的交易,会产生对彼此的竞争。大型投资机构就会在公司内部产生竞争。

4.净额结算

正如其他分析师所说的那样,Tabb也认为使用区块链技术会对净额结算产生影响。

交易后服务提供商每天会将大型经纪商对特定证券的交易进行净额结算和汇总,完成交易之间的相互冲抵,从而减少清算成本。

在T+0制度下,每一笔交易都需要立即执行清算。单单针对美国市场来说,这都将会对行业造成290万倍的处理量。

如果使用目前的公共区块链,大概需要一个月才能完成一天交易额的结算。因此Tabb会建议使用私有区块链。

除了在交易量方面的挑战外,Tabb认为系统风险也会增加。任何断电或暂时的故障都将会是致命的。

5.并非清算部门的灵丹妙药

尽管使用区块链技术会帮助公司改进股票交易记录和报告技术,但Tabb认为区块链技术并不能像现有技术一样解决清算部门的其他问题。

他指出,在其他诸如计量风险方面,区块链技术优势全无。而对风险的估算要求清算部门拥有强大的计算系统。

因此,Tabb预测“区块链技术将会成为另一个连接性技术,最终整合成为公司复杂核心技术设备的一部分。”

High hopes that blockchain might provide fast, cheap automated processing of securities trades have received a large dash of cold water from capital markets analyst Larry Tabb.

The founder of research house Tabb Group acknowledged in a report published on Feb. 22 that the technology underpinning the cryptocurrency bitcoin has “substantial capabilities” to help automate securities processing. But he warned that such use of blockchain also faced massive difficulties, some of which “seem to be insurmountable”.

Blockchain is a ledger of transactions that is spread across the internet. Many financial institutions are investing resources in it, in the hope that it can be developed to make clearing and settlement faster and cheaper. The aim would be to settle a share trade on the day it is executed — known as T+0 — rather than two or three days later as now.

While Tabb recognized the benefits of blockchain for capital-markets processes, he listed substantial incompatibilities between the current consensus-based bitcoin blockchain and current market practices. These issues are:

1. Securities lending

Tabb noted that any move to a blockchain-based, real-time clearing environment would create significant problems with the way the practice of securities lending currently works.

Most institutional investors allow their custodians or prime brokers to lend their “idle” securities to investors that need to cover short positions. When the investor who owns the loaned securities decides to sell them, the lending process needs to unwind, meaning that the securities must be returned to the investor’s account before the sale is settled. Since the current settlement is T+2 in Europe and T+3 in the US, the custodian or prime broker effectively has that amount of time to return the securities to the investor.

Moving to a blockchain-based T+0 system would mean that the loaned security would have to return to the investor in real time, or before the sale was executed, notes Tabb.

If that doesn’t happen, then investors could get stuck having to hold a losing position until the lent securities effectively return into their account and they can conduct the trade which would then get settled instantly, Tabb noted.

On top of that, he said that this process could lead to information leakage that the investor who has lent the securities is looking to sell.

2. Ownership identification

In the U.S., financial instruments are not registered to their holders, but to the trade depository that holds them, such as the Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation. The depository does not know who owns each and every security it stores, but only knows which securities are held by custodians and brokers, who in turn know which of their clients owns them.

“It could be a significant issue for larger investors, as many investors do not like others to know they are taking the position.”

Moving to a blockchain-based system in which settlement is instant and the transaction cannot be changed means that the transaction must have the client’s name even before a trade is entered, Tabb believes.

This too could create a risk of leaks of information, according to Tabb. He notes that “it could be a significant issue for larger investors as many investors do not like others to know they are taking the position”. This would mean turning the currently anonymous market into a disclosed one, which Tabb believes would hurt liquidity.

3. Blocks

Tabb believes that a blockchain-based T+0 system would also complicate the way trades are normally executed on behalf of institutional investors. Traders normally aggregate orders in the same security, by different portfolio managers at the same institution, into one single block trade in the market, so as to minimise price movement and transaction costs.

Blockchain would make carrying out these block trades challenging, because it is a record of asset ownership, and the legal entity buying the security is technically not the portfolio manager’s institution but the single fund they manage.

Therefore, trades by each portfolio manager would have to be executed separately rather than in large blocks, meaning that portfolio managers of the same parent company making orders at the same time could be in effect competing for the same liquidity, according to Tabb. A large institutional investor could essentially be playing against itself in the market.

4. Netting

As pointed out by other analysts, Tabb noted that moving to a blockchain-based system would be problematic with regards to netting.

Post-trade service providers net and compress the thousands of trades in one particular asset that large brokers carry out every day, allowing positions to be offset against one another, which ultimately reduces clearing and settlement costs.

“One hiccup or outage could be devastating”

In a T+0 environment, every single trade would need to be settled instantly. This would increase the amount of transactions that the industry would need to process by 2.9 million per day in the U.S. equity markets alone, according to Tabb.

Furthermore, using the current public bitcoin blockchain, it would take more than one month to process one day’s worth of trades, according to Tabb, who suggested that a move to a private blockchain would make more sense.

Aside from the challenges in managing that many transactions, Tabb believes this change in processing would increase systemic risk factor where “one hiccup or outage could be devastating”.

5. Not a back-office panacea

While recognizing that moving to a blockchain-based system could help companies eliminate or revamp some of their stock records and reporting technologies, Tabb argued that blockchain cannot manage many other back-office processes as well as current systems.

He pointed out that the technology has a “much more limited ability” to manage other functions such as accounting and calculating risk, normally performed by core back office systems with powerful computing requirements.

Thus he predicted that “blockchain will become just another adjunct system that will need to be integrated into, and become part of, a firm’s massive and complex core processing infrastructure”.


用微信扫描可以分享至好友和朋友圈

扫描二维码或搜索微信号“iweiyangx”
关注未央网官方微信公众号,获取互联网金融领域前沿资讯。

评论

  • b
    bianlx在 2016/03/01 18:23回复

    交易速度越来越快,风险控制难度越来越大,技术性因素不可忽视

  • c
    cnwik在 2016/03/01 17:19回复

    区块链也并非灵丹妙药

  • 马天蕊在 2016/03/01 16:53回复

    说的有道理 值得借鉴。

  • 1
    1803109在 2016/03/01 11:19回复

    区域链技术不太懂,看了好像似懂非懂

  • 浩哥在 2016/03/01 10:35回复

    其实隐含的意思是 现有的交易制度不合理 需要针对新技术做出改变

发表评论

发表评论

您的评论提交后会进行审核,审核通过的留言会展示在下方留言区域,请耐心等待。

评论

您的个人信息不会被公开,请放心填写! 标记为的是必填项

取消

宋瑞彤

84
总文章数

TA还没写个人介绍。。。

区块链技术的应用对中央银行以及货币政策实施的影响

李虹含 6小时前

区块链,不是bad boy......

肖飒 | 大成律师事... 2天前

如何用区块链新技术来创新解决供应链金融中的问题?

张明裕 | 零壹财经 11-17

英国保险科技的借鉴

杨东 | 《上海保险... 11-16

数字资产价值评判三要素

张 烽 | 金诚同达 11-14

版权所有 © 清华大学五道口金融学院互联网金融实验室 | 京ICP备17044750号-1