Mostly… fixed income and cross product eTrading

May 8, 2007

Bloomberg and Reuters

Filed under: etrading, Nuts and Bolts — holky @ 2:12 pm

In the latest insidemarketdata awards –

  • Bloomberg; best data provider for equities, best data provider for fixed income
  • Reuters; best data provider for foreign exchange, best research provider
  • Dow Jones Newswires; best news provider
  • Bloomberg also scooped best data provider (vendor) , though Reuters won best low latency data vendor

of course the answer always depends on who you ask and what the question is.  While I’m making the assumption that their etrading offerings [will] capitalise on their position in terms of market data, with Bloomberg and Reuters between them appearing to dominate fixed income, equity, forex – and now having liquidity hub dealers’ commitment for IRS and US Treasury and then Euro govy and whatever comes next… do we see a clear indication of Bloomberg+Reuters being the two key participants in terms of secondary markets landscape over the next (say) couple of years?  

Whether the Thomson/Reuters discussion does put Tradeweb somewhere into the picture above or not, what does this all mean for Marketaxess?



  1. Depends Holky…MA need a saviour IMO. Preferably someone like an ICAP but that rumour has gone a bit cold.

    As I said here:

    I’m not convinced that a Bloomberg/Reuters (incl. TW) duopoly in FI e-Trading is a good thing.

    Comment by waratah — May 8, 2007 @ 3:21 pm

  2. [a bit off topic]

    What about a slightly tongue-in-cheek award – “Worst helpdesk” It’s a running joke in pretty much every sell side I have work for that the guy who answers a phone at Reuters or Bloomberg or X has never heard of that request before. My favourite was someone at Bloomberg who was amazed at a request to get a time series of closing prices…

    Back on topic – a Reuters/Bloomberg duopoly in anything is a very bad thing as far as I can see…

    Comment by John Greenan — May 9, 2007 @ 11:54 am

  3. AGREED! A duopoly ANYWHERE is a BAD thing. Bad for buy side, and bad for sell side. Competition benefits all. If one thinks Bberg/RT-TW will be where it starts and ends, as soon as that is established a smart little guy will come up with something cheaper and better. In the age of Web 2.0 and insanely inexpensive bandwidth and computing cycles, this duopoloy is folly for the short term traders to cash in on and that sucker “investor” to get stuck with one of 2 747’s. These facts alone is what is bringing Reuters and Thompson together. Just as it brought NYSE to Arca, NASDAQ to Inet, RBS to ABN, etc etc etc… Competition and market force is necessary, good, and inevitable. Inevitable except and unless temporarily hindered by regulation.

    Comment by lacidar — May 11, 2007 @ 1:50 am

  4. Industry figures released in April, estimated that Bloomberg had a 33% share of the terminal market, with Reuters controlling 23% and Thomson 11% –

    Comment by holky — May 15, 2007 @ 6:48 am

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at

%d bloggers like this: