2012 E/CTRM Vendor Perception Study

Transcription

2012
E/CTRM Vendor Perception
Study
April 2012
Sponsored by
2012 CTRM Software Perceptions Study
Contents
Executive Summary..................................................................................................................................... 5
Preamble ..................................................................................................................................................... 7
Methodology and Demographics ............................................................................................................... 7
Survey Demographics ............................................................................................................................. 8
Respondents Installed Base .................................................................................................................... 9
CTRM Vendor Perceptions ........................................................................................................................ 13
Brand Awareness .................................................................................................................................. 13
Market Leadership ................................................................................................................................ 18
Market Leadership by Commodity/Functional Coverage..................................................................... 21
Overall Energy Commodities ............................................................................................................ 22
Crude Oil and Crude Products Trading ............................................................................................. 24
Natural Gas Trading .......................................................................................................................... 25
Power Trading ................................................................................................................................... 25
Coal Trading ...................................................................................................................................... 26
Agricultural Commodities Trading .................................................................................................... 27
Metals Trading – Precious and Base ................................................................................................. 28
Freight Rates Trading ........................................................................................................................ 30
Shipping............................................................................................................................................. 31
Summary ............................................................................................................................................... 32
CTRM Technical and Product Attribute Perceptions ............................................................................ 33
SaaS or Hosted Delivery .................................................................................................................... 33
Overall Architecture .......................................................................................................................... 34
Market Perception Trends .................................................................................................................... 36
North America ................................................................................................................................... 36
Europe ............................................................................................................................................... 38
Overall Comparison with 2008 Proprietary Survey .......................................................................... 39
Purchase Plans and Buying Criteria .......................................................................................................... 41
Required Commodity Coverage ............................................................................................................ 43
2
© UtiliPoint International, Inc. 2012
No portion of this report may be reproduced
without the written permission of UtiliPoint International Inc.
Ranking Functional Requirements and Attributes................................................................................ 44
What Vendor Attributes are most important? ..................................................................................... 45
About CommodityPoint ............................................................................................................................ 47
About the Report Author .......................................................................................................................... 48
Study Sponsors
ASPECT Enterprise................................................................................................................................. 50
Brady ..................................................................................................................................................... 52
capSpire................................................................................................................................................. 54
iRely ....................................................................................................................................................... 56
3
Advertisement
4
Executive Summary
Market perceptions of leadership in various aspects of E/CTRM are useful indicators as to which
product companies have developed strong brand awareness and a reputation for producing products
that can meet generalized or specific needs of various market participants. However, for companies
seeking to purchase a new technology solution, these perceptions should be but an element of a
comprehensive selection process that takes into consideration the ability of any vendor to meet the
multitude of requirements that one might have when operating in a very complex marketplace such as
energy and commodities trading.
The results of our survey of 60 total respondents, representing 58 different companies around the
world, shows five companies are most often recognized as being providers of software in E/CTRM.
Those five include OpenLink Financials (OpenLink), Triple Point Technology (Triple Point), Allegro
Development (Allegro), SunGard Energy and Commodities (SunGard) and Solarc (which was acquired
by OpenLink during the data collection phase of this research). Other companies also received
numerous mentions in overall market awareness, including Ventyx/ABB, Navita (recently acquired by
Brady), Murex, Amphora, Brady, Contigo and Encompass.
OpenLink was most often noted by our respondents as the overall leader in E/CTRM, followed by Triple
Point and Allegro. Leadership views for specific commodities or functional areas are summarized in
the following table:
Commodity
Leading Vendor
Second Vendor
Third Vendor
Energy Commodities
Overall
OpenLink
Triple Point
Allegro
Electric Power Trading
OpenLink
SunGard
Triple Point
Natural Gas Trading
OpenLink
Triple Point & Allegro
N/A
Crude and Crude Products
Trading
SolArc
Triple Point
Allegro & OpenLink
Coal Trading
SolArc
Allegro
Triple Point
5
Agricultural Commodities
Triple Point
OpenLink
EKA
Base Metals
Brady
OpenLink
SunGard
Precious Metals
Brady
Murex
OpenLink & Triple Point
Freight Rates
Triple Point
Allegro, Open Link,
SunGard
N/A
Shipping
Triple Point
Allegro, OpenLink & SolArc
N/A
We asked our survey participants to score the necessity of various functional capabilities of CTRM
products on a scale that ranged from "Not Important" to "Critical". The results show that for our
respondent group, the ability to capture and manage physical commodity transactions was the most
critical attribute they would consider when seeking a new solution. Financial commodity transaction
management ranked second and risk management capabilities ranked third in overall importance to
the group. These capabilities were followed by multi-commodity capabilities and physical logistics
support (both evenly ranked).
We also measured our respondent group's views as to what they deem to be the most important
vendor attributes – those factors outside of features/functionality of the product itself. The tested
factors included: provision of quality support services, competitive product pricing, consider to status
as a "top vendor" and the availability of quality consulting resources for the product. Of those factors,
quality vendor supplied support ranked highest, ahead of both "availability of quality consulting
resources" and competitive pricing (essentially equally ranked). A vendor's status as a "Top Vendor"
was deemed to be significantly less critical than the other attributes when seeking a new product
supplier.
6
Preamble
The CommodityPoint CTRM/ETRM Vendor Perception Study, which has been repeated approximately
every two to three years, polls users and industry professionals regarding their views of the technology
vendors servicing the space. It should be noted that the results do represent perceptions and as such,
should not be relied upon as the sole determinate to judge any vendors' capabilities as they might
apply to any particular organization's needs. That being said, the results are useful to a wide variety of
groups who are tracking the CTRM software space as it establishes patterns regarding brand strength
and perceptions of market leadership. The results also allow us, as market analysts, to draw
conclusions (backed-up with other research) about the state of the CTRM market and the market
landscape. This report presents the results of the latest study and compares the data with other
perception studies undertaken by CommodityPoint/UtiliPoint in the past to provide a historical
perspective and analysis.
Methodology and Demographics
The CommodityPoint ETRM Vendor Perception study was undertaken primarily via a survey instrument
developed specifically for the study (appendix C). The survey received responses from 68 respondents
representing 63 companies. Of the total 68 responses, 8 were eliminated due to incompleteness,
invalid email addresses and contact names or they originated from a vendor in the space. The survey
was conducted from October 2011 until the end of January 2012 using both HTML email pushes along
with researcher calls to likely candidates. It therefore represents a snapshot of perceptions as of the
end of 2011.
During the data collection phase of this research, a couple of notable events occurred – OpenLink
Financials (OpenLink) announced the purchase of SolArc in late November 2011, and Brady PLC (Brady)
announced the acquisition of Navita and Syseca in early February 2012. Given the timing of these
events, we have not combined the results of the acquired entities with those of the acquiring
companies. Clearly there will be a shifts in brand recognition over time related to these mergers and
acquisitions; however, at the time of this writing, it's unclear how OpenLink and Brady will manage the
acquired brands – will they maintain these brand names for some period, or will they be rebranded in
order to harmonize the companies' marketing messages? In particular, the SolArc name does carry
7
significant awareness and market equity and it will be interesting to see what the future may hold for
that brand.
Survey Demographics
Of the 60 responses considered in our analysis, 58% originated with respondents based in North
America, 36% with respondents based in Europe and 7% from respondents based in other regions
(Figure 1). Given the concentration of responses from North America and Europe, the results are often
presented in total as well as those two geographies broken out separately.
Figure 1 - Respondent location demographics
Respondent Locations
2%
5%
36%
North America
58%
Europe
Asia Pacific
South America
The respondents represented a good mix of industry sectors with merchant trading firms (trading
energy and/or non-energy commodities), utilities, and consultants/systems integrators being the most
represented segments (Figure 2). The survey allowed consultants and systems integrators to
participate as they regularly engage with end-users and their experiences with the various vendors
provides valuable insights. Energy and non-energy producers and financial organizations including
funds and banks were also well represented. European respondents were primarily Utilities,
Consultants and Merchant/Trading Firms; while in North America, the mix was somewhat more diverse
8
with good numbers of Merchants/Trading Firms, Consultants, Producers, Banks/Hedge Funds, and
Utilities. In other parts of the world we saw participation from Consultants and Merchant/Traders in
Asia/Pacific and Producers in South America.
Figure 2 - Types of Respondent Company
Respondent Company Types
2%
12%
Merchant Trading Firm
5%
Consultant/System Integrator
34%
Utility/Generator
19%
Producer (Oil &
Gas, Mining, Ags, Softs, etc)
29%
Bank, Hedge Fund or other
Financial Institution
Refiner/ Chemical/ Petrochemical
Respondents Installed Base
The respondents were asked about their current installed ETRM software so as to provide possible
insights as to the basis for their perception responses, with those receiving multiple notes shown
below in Figure 3.
Of the respondent group, Allegro was most noted with 9% of the total user responses. SunGard Zainet,
OpenLink Endur, and SolArc RightAngle products were also often noted. In all, some 34 different
systems were noted, with 15 of those being used by more than one respondent. Interestingly, the
second most often cited system was "Home Grown" or "custom".
As in recent years, the large number of different vendor solutions installed demonstrates that ETRM
software is still a somewhat immature software category, with a significant number of providers
9
© UtiliPoint International, Inc 2012
servicing regional or functionally niche market segments. Despite that, this survey does suggest, and as
vendor M&A activity would indicate, that consolidation is under way and a small group of dominant
vendors are becoming increasingly even more dominant over time. Nonetheless, given the diverse
industry segments represented in the survey, the wide range of solutions in use should not be a
surprise.
It's important to also note that many respondents utilized several different solutions, supporting
previous CommodityPoint research showing that many firms utilize multiple systems, in some cases up
to five or more, to manage their energy and/or trading and risk management functions1.
Figure 3 - CTRM System in Use
Respondent System(s) in Use
Percent of all Respondents in all Regions
10%
9%
8%
7%
6%
5%
4%
3%
2%
1%
0%
There were also some intriguing differences in responses relative to installed systems between North
America and Europe. In Europe, OpenLink was noted as the respondents' installed system most often
on par with ComFin, Allegro, and "Home Grown"; and the company ranked at or near the top in most
1
Benchmarking of European ETRM Software Markets, UtiliPoint Report, 2007
10
of the leadership categories polled. In North America, few OpenLink users responded to our survey,
yet the perceptions of leadership for the company were very similar in both regions.
In both North America and Europe, the responses included a disproportionally large number of small
vendor solutions when compared to total number of installed systems for all vendors. In North
America (Figure 4), EnCompass and Woodlands Solutions users responded at a higher rate (relative to
total number of installs) than any other vendors' users. In Europe (Figure 5), Comfin and Contigo users
also participated in numbers that do not proportionally reflect their number of deployed systems
versus their competition.
The large number of "Home Grown" responses are not necessary reflective of the respondents having
developed fully capable custom CTRM systems. Based upon the responses provided and reinforced
with our experience in the market, it's clear that the majority of these "Home Grown" or custom
systems have been developed and deployed to manage a particular business function or enhance a
capability that a respondent's company felt was not sufficiently "covered" by commercial systems.
Figure 4 - Systems in Use – North America Only
Respondents System in Use - North America
Home Grown
Allegro
SunGard Zainet
EnCompass
Triple Point
Woodlands Solutions - Phoenix
TransEnergy
SunGard Fuelworx
SunGard Aligne
Solarc
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
Percent of Total Respondents in Region
11
Figure 5 - Systems in Use – Europe Only
Respondents System in Use - Europe
TheBulldog by Comfin
OpenLink Endur
Home Grown
Allegro
SunGard Zainet
Solarc
Contigo EnTrader
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
Percent of Total Respondents in Region
Respondents in this 2011 version of our perception study indicate a higher level of satisfaction with
their installed system than we have seen in previous studies, with a large majority of users now
indicating they are either "Satisfied" or "Very Satisfied" with their current system (Figure 6). In past
years, the rankings tended to be more skewed toward a higher level of dissatisfaction with the
installed systems.
Figure 6 - Satisfaction Rankings with Installed Solution
Satisfaction Levels with Current System
50%
45%
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Dissatisfied
12
Somewhat Satisfied
Satisfied
Very Satisfied
CTRM Vendor Perceptions
Brand Awareness
CommodityPoint utilizes a number of questions to help determine vendor perceptions. As we've done
in the past, one of the areas that we tested was the market's familiarity and awareness of those
vendors. This was done by asking the respondents to name all the vendors that they know of that
provide CTRM software, without utilizing any aides – relying solely on their memory.
As in recent years, the most commonly mentioned CTRM software vendors remain the same, albeit
with a slight shuffling in order. In this current study, OpenLink (including DBC and IRM) is most
commonly mentioned, with Triple Point a very close second and Allegro third within a few percentage
points of the top positions. These top three are followed by SunGard and SolArc, with a fairly
significant drop in awareness down to the rest of the vendors on the list. As OpenLink's acquisition of
SolArc occurred in the middle of our data collection efforts, we did list them separately for this year's
report. As the OpenLink brand is introduced across SolArc's customers, the company should expect
some additional increased brand awareness though it will clearly not be fully additive as many in the
industry are very familiar with both companies (Figure 7).
Figure 7 on the following page shows the vendors who gained multiple mentions from respondents.
Advertisement
13
Figure 7 - First to Mind Brand Recognition
Unprompted Vendor Recognition All Regions
OLF (incl. IRM & DBC)
Triple Point Technology
Allegro
SunGard
SolArc
Ventyx\ABB
Navita
Murex
Amphora
Contigo
Brady
EnCompass
Woodland Solutions
SAS
EKA
OATI
Pioneer Solutions
Comfin
Quorum
Entero
Aspect
Abacus
TradePaq
Ensyte
Energeya
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Brady, already seeing increased awareness in this study versus 2009 (Figure 8), is likely to see a
significant boost with their recent acquisitions of Navita and Syseca, particularly given that Navita was
tied for 6th in the results this year. We would expect to see the company emerging in our next report
in the top 4 or 5 in brand awareness given their newly established status as the number four CTRM
vendor in terms of revenues and their increasingly rapid expansion into energy commodity trading.
14
Figure 8 – Unprompted Vendor Awareness – 2009 vs. 2011
Unprompted Vendor Awareness - 2009 vs. 2011
OpenLink (inc. IRM & DBC)
Triple Point Technology
Allegro
SunGard
SolArc
Ventyx\ABB
Navita
Murex
Amphora
Brady
Contigo
EnCompass
Woodland Solutions
SAS
EKA
OATI
Pioneer Solutions
Comfin
Quorum
Entero
Aspect
Abacus
TradePaq
Ensyte
Energeya
2009
2011
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
Percent of Respondent Mentions
In this year's survey, we also saw a significant number of companies increasing their awareness or
emerging for the first time into the upper echelon of the list, including Contigo, Encompass, Woodlands
Solutions, SAS and EKA.
Again, the differences between North American and European respondents provide interesting
insights. In North America (Figure 9), OpenLink, despite the low number of respondents that actually
utilize the product, shares an equal number of "first to mind" mentions to Allegro and Triple Point from
15
our respondent group, with SunGard and SolArc again filling out the top 5. New entrants to our list in
this year's study are Encompass and Woodland Solutions, companies which have relatively small install
bases as compared to those for the top 5 vendors.
Figure 9 - First to Mind Brand Recognition – North America Only
Unprompted Brand Recognition North America
Allegro
Triple Point
SunGard
Solarc
Ventyx/ABB
EnCompass
WoodLand Solutions
Amphora
EMA
EKA
Quorum
OATI
SAS RiskAdvisory
Murex
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
Percent of Respondent Mentions in Region
In Europe (Figure 10), OpenLink has a small lead in unprompted recognition over Triple Point and a
slightly larger lead over Allegro. The gap between the top 5 versus the rest of the pack is much
narrower in Europe. This is consistent with what we have observed in the past - the European market
is less operationally homogenous, and regional or niche vendors occupy a larger percentage of the
market and therefore a larger percentage of the unprompted mind share. For instance Contigo and
Navita are well established players in those areas in which they originated initially as regional solutions
– Navita in the NordPool and Contigo in the UK power and gas markets.
16
Figure 10 - First to Mind Brand Recognition – Europe Only
Unprompted Brand Recognition Europe
Triple Point
Allegro
SunGard
Solarc
Contigo
Navita
Murex
Brady
Amphora
ComFin
SAS RiskAdvisory
Energeya
Abacus
Pioneer Solutions
OATI
Ventyx/ABB
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
Percent of Mentions by Respondents in Region
When the results from the two largest market areas are combined (Figure 10), the results indicate a
clear "top 5" in brand awareness which coincides with the 5 largest ETRM/CTRM companies in terms of
revenues (prior to the OLF acquisition of SolArc and the acquisitions by Brady in early 2012).
17
Figure 11 - First to Mind Brand Recognition – Europe and North America Combined
Unprompted Brand Recognition Europe and North America
Percentage Mentions by Respondents in Those Regions
Triple Point
Allegro
SunGard
Solarc
Ventyx/ABB
Murex
Navita
Contigo
Amphora
EnCompass
Brady
WoodLand Solutions
SAS RiskAdvisory
OATI
EKA
Pioneer Solutions
EMA
ComFin
North America
Europe
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
Percent of Mentions by Respondents in Regions
Market Leadership
In terms of respondent’s views about overall market leadership, OpenLink is most commonly viewed as
the market leader by over 30% of the respondents in all geographies combined. Triple Point ranked
second being noted by 20%. Allegro was noted as being the leader by 10% of the group with SunGard
and SolArc also receiving multiple mentions as the overall leader (Figure 12).
18
Figure 12 - Overall Market Leadership Perceptions
Perceived Overall Market Leader - All Respondents
OpenLink
Triple Point
Don't Know
Allegro
None
SunGard
Solarc
Encompass
Navita
Contigo
Brady
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
Percent of Mentions by Respondents
Those that didn't know or felt there is no overall market leader in CTRM show up quite strongly;
however, those responses are a lower percentage of total responses than in previous surveys and show
a coalescing of opinion around the largest vendors.
OpenLink’s perceived market leadership was very strong in Europe where it was cited more than twice
as often as its nearest competitor, Triple Point. In North America, OpenLink also maintained a leading
position; however that lead over its nearest rival, Triple Point, was not as great as that in Europe.
Allegro ranked fairly consistently in both geographies, noted by around 10% in both regions as being
the market leader (Figures 13 thru 15).
19
Figure 13 - Overall Market Leadership Perceptions – North America
Overall Market Leadership - North America
OpenLink
Triple Point
Don't Know
Allegro
Solarc
SunGard
None
Encompass
Brady
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
30%
35%
Percent Mentions by Respondents in Region
Figure 14 - Overall Market Leadership Perceptions – Europe
Overall Market Leadership - Europe
OpenLink
Don't Know
Triple Point
None
Allegro
SunGard
Navita
Contigo
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
Percent Mentions by Respondents in Region
20
Figure 15 - Overall Market Leadership Perceptions – Combined Europe and North America
Overall Market Leadership - Eruope vs. North America
OpenLink
Triple Point
Don't Know
Allegro
None
Europe
SunGard
Solarc
North America
Navita
Contigo
Encompass
Brady
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Percent Mentions by Respondents in Regions
Market Leadership by Commodity/Functional Coverage
Market leadership by commodity or functional coverage was assessed through a series of questions
that asked respondents to identify the market leader in categories such as "Physical Transaction
Management for Crude Oil". As has been the case in previous CommodityPoint perception studies,
many respondents did not answer these questions as they either had no particular opinion or did not
feel qualified to volunteer an opinion. There is obviously a correlation between the number of nonresponses for each category and the entity type indicated by the respondents (i.e. Utilities do not
generally trade agricultural commodities).
In each of the categories listed on the following pages, those that did not volunteer an answer were
excluded from the results and the denominator for the percentage calculations were adjusted
accordingly. However, respondents that answered with the choices “Don’t Know” and “None” were
included as a valid response as those responses could be seen as an indicator of market maturity or as
21
an indicator of the relative strength of leadership role for those vendors that were named in that
particular category.
As has been observed in past market perception surveys, in almost every area of functional coverage
the same 4-6 vendors were deemed to be the market leader by the bulk of respondents with other
vendors only breaking into the top 5 for very specific functional areas. This suggests that the top 4-6
vendors have developed a reputation for having very broad functional coverage that is often
considered to be adequate to meet users’ requirements. We also observe that this gap between the
top 4-6 vendors and the rest the market is broadening over time.
The results from the various categories indicate OpenLink and Triple Point have both developed a
strong market position in multiple functional areas and geographies. OpenLink, with its high rank in
terms of overall market leadership perception, was also noted as the Leader in four
commodity/functional categories (including ties), with high ranks (a rank of second, third, or fourth) in
six others. Triple Point scored almost as equally well, being perceived as leader in three categories and
highly ranked in nine others. Allegro was ranked as the leader in one category (tied with OpenLink in
"Overall Architecture") and highly ranked in nine others. SunGard (including Kiodex) ranked as the
category leader once, with high ranks in 5 other categories. SolArc was mentioned as the leader in two
categories and received high ranks in one other. Brady received leadership nods in two metals related
categories, Base Metals and Precious Metals.
Specifically, OpenLink ranked first in Overall Energy, Electric Power, Natural Gas and in Overall
Architecture (tied with Allegro). Triple Point was ranked first in Agricultural Commodities, Freight
Rates, and Shipping. Allegro was tied with OpenLink in Overall Architecture. SunGard's Kiodex product
was noted as the leader in SaaS delivery and SolArc received category leader nods in Crude/Crude
Products and Coal. As previously noted, Brady was the category leader in both Precious Metals and
Base Metals.
Overall Energy Commodities
It would appear that much of OpenLink's overall perceived leadership position in CTRM can be
attributed in large part to the market's view of their leadership in energy commodities. In all, 37% of
22
the respondents ranked OpenLink as the leader in "Energy Commodities Overall", nearly tripling the
score of their closest rival Triple Point. Interestingly, Triple Point's ranking in this category was below
their score in perceived leadership in overall CTRM. Allegro was at near parity with their score in
overall CTRM, with around 9% of our respondents noting them as the leader in this category.
Encompass entered the ranks of the leaders in this category as well, demonstrating solid brand support
from their clients who participated in this research.
As one might expect given the maturity of the ETRM markets, the levels of "Don't Know" or "None"
responses were much lower relative to the other non-energy related categories which have only with
the last several years become an area of focus for the larger solutions vendors.
Figure 16 – Energy Commodities Overall
Perceived Leadership Energy Commodities Overall
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Europe
North America
South America
Asia/Pac
Advertisement
23
Crude Oil and Crude Products Trading
While SolArc and Triple Point were perceived to be the top two in this category by those who named a
particular vendor, it should be noted that the results indicate that SolArc has a more dominant position
in North America than in Europe in this category, while Triple Point enjoys a significant advantage in
the European market perception for crude and crude products trading. The rankings in Europe are a
change from our last perception survey which had placed OpenLink in the second position overall
based upon a strong showing from European respondents. This latest survey now places OpenLink in
parity with Allegro, with the two companies sharing similar perceptions levels across all geographies.
Also in a change from our last market survey, four vendors now rank above the "None" responses,
whereas in our 2008 survey, only SolArc and OLF received more ‘votes’ than those respondents who
felt that there is no market leader in the category.
Figure 17 - Crude and Crude Products Trading
Perceived Leadership Crude and Crude Products Trading
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
24
Europe
North America
South America
Asia/Pac
Natural Gas Trading
While "Do not Know" was the most common response in many other categories, in the "Natural Gas
Trading" category, OpenLink, as in the "Overall Energy Commodities", was the only vendor to place
ahead of the response "Do Not Know". Boosted by North American respondents, it placed well ahead
of its closest rivals, Allegro and Triple Point. Interestingly, Allegro was the most noted as the leader by
the European respondents, gaining more mentions than all the other named vendors combined.
However, it did not fare as well as OpenLink and Triple Point in North America; and in fact, trailed a
total of four companies in that geography. There were few “No Answers” in this category, indicating
its relative maturity as a market place.
Figure 18 - Natural Gas Trading
Perceived Leadership Natural Gas Trading
25%
20%
Europe
15%
North America
10%
South America
5%
Asia/Pac
0%
Power Trading
In Electric Power Trading, OpenLink is again perceived as the market leader, tripling the result of their
nearest competitors SunGard, Triple Point and Allegro. And again, much of OpenLink's lead can be
attributed to their commanding position with the North American respondents, as opposed to those in
Europe, who rank the company on par with, or slightly lower than, Triple Point, SunGard and Contigo.
25
The results in this category are fairly consistent with previous years, though one of the leading
companies in our earlier surveys in North America, OATI, did not receive a mention in this category in
this latest iteration of the survey.
Figure 19 – Electric Power Trading
Perceived Leadership Electric Power Trading
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Europe
North America
South America
Asia/Pac
Coal Trading
Overall, market leadership perceptions in this functional area are much weaker, as "Do Not Know"
responses dominated those of any vendor response. However, among the vendors, SolArc was most
often noted and almost equally by both European and North American respondents. Allegro ranked
second among the vendors, doubling the responses received by Triple Point in the third vendor
position. Interestingly, each of the top three in this category received very similar ranking from North
Americans, whereas SolArc was a clear leader in Europe. Allegro also did well in that geography, while
Triple Point received very few from respondents in Europe. Also of note, OpenLink ranked first in this
category in previous surveys, but was well down the list in this current version.
26
Figure 20 – Coal Trading
Perceived Leadership Coal Trading
50%
40%
Europe
North America
South America
Asia/Pac
30%
20%
10%
0%
Do not
know
SolArc
Allegro
None
Triple
Point
Contigo
OpenLink SunGard
Agricultural Commodities Trading
Triple Point, as with previous surveys, was the highest ranked vendor in this category. However in this
survey, their ranking in North America increased while decreasing somewhat in Europe. OpenLink was
the second ranking vendor in all geographies, but was slightly ahead of the competition in Europe. EKA
was the third ranked vendor with support coming equally from North America, Europe, and Asia/Pac.
Allegro was fourth overall and third in the North American market.
Figure 21 – Agricultural Commodity Trading
Perceived Leadership Ag Commodity Trading
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
27
Europe
North America
South America
Asia/Pac
Metals Trading – Precious and Base
In the metals trading categories, the bulk of the responses were "Do Not Know". However, of the
vendors mentioned, Brady was most often cited with about 10% of the respondents in both the
"precious" and "base" categories noting the company as the leader. In the "Precious Metals Trading"
category, Murex also ranked well, with OpenLink and Triple Point close behind.
Figure 22: Precious Metals Trading
Perceived Leadership Precious Metals Trading
60%
50%
North America
North America
South America
Asia/Pac
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Do not
know
Brady
None
Murex
OpenLink
Triple
Point
SunGard
Allegro
In Perceived Leadership in Base Metals Trading, Brady was followed by OpenLink, SunGard, Allegro,
Triple Point and Murex. While all those companies received mentions from North American based
respondents, only Brady and SunGard were noted by the Europeans as leaders in this category. Again
though, given the high levels of "Do not know" and "None" responses, leadership perceptions appear
to be weak in this category.
28
Figure 23 – Base Metals Trading
Perceived Leadership Base Metals Trading
60%
50%
40%
Europe
North America
South America
Asia/Pac
30%
20%
10%
0%
Advertisement
29
Freight Rates Trading
While freight rates have been traded for a number of years, the respondents to our survey indicated a
lack of familiarity, or at least strong views, of the capabilities of the vendors in this space. Only Triple
Point received more than a couple of mentions by respondents.
Figure 24 – Freight Rates Trading
Perceived Leadership Freight Rates Trading
60%
50%
40%
Europe
30%
North America
South America
20%
Asia/Pac
10%
0%
Do not
know
30
None
Triple Point
Allegro
OpenLink
Sungard
Amphora
Shipping
Shipping logistics is a relatively new category for CTRM vendors, with many having entered the market
place within the last 5 years or so. Given that relative immaturity of many solutions in this space, it's
not surprising that more than 50% of the responds were "Do Not Know". However, with Triple Point's
acquisition of Softmar, a historical leader in shipping solutions, the company was a clear leader in this
category for those respondents in both North America and Europe that were familiar with the market.
Figure 25 – Shipping
Perceived Leadership Shipping
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Europe
North America
South America
Asia/Pac
Advertisement
31
Summary
The preceding narrative relies purely on the respondent’s perception of market leadership and in
essence, is a reflection of two characteristics - vendor brand awareness and strength, and maturity of
the market.
This means that even in commodities or functional areas that remain somewhat immature,
respondents might choose a vendor simply based on its overall brand strength as opposed to having
true knowledge and experience with that particular vendor’s actual capabilities.
Table 1 – Leadership Perceptions by Category
Commodity
Leading Vendor
Second Vendor
Third Vendor
Energy Commodities
Overall
OpenLink
Triple Point
Allegro
Electric Power Trading
OpenLink
SunGard Energy &
Commodities
Triple Point
Natural Gas Trading
OpenLink
Triple Point & Allegro
N/A
Crude and Crude
Products Trading
SolArc
Triple Point
Allegro & OpenLink
Coal Trading
SolArc
Allegro
Triple Point
Agricultural Commodities
Triple Point
OpenLink
EKA
Base Metals
Brady
OpenLink
SunGard Energy and
Commodities
Precious Metals
Brady
Murex
OpenLink & Triple Point
Freight Rates
Triple Point
Allegro, Open Link,
SunGard Energy &
Commodities
N/A
Shipping
Triple Point
Allegro, OpenLink &
SolArc
N/A
32
CTRM Technical and Product Attribute Perceptions
In addition to reviewing perceptions by commodity trading function, we also sought out market
opinion on two technical categories that are becoming an increasing factor in purchase decisions –
SaaS or Hosted delivery and Overall Technical Architecture.
SaaS or Hosted Delivery
SaaS delivered or hosted solutions have been increasingly finding acceptance in the CTRM markets,
particularly in the mid and lower tiers within the last five years or so. Recently though, just within the
last couple of years, we've have seen some larger organizations that have traditionally installed CTRM
products starting to bring onboard SaaS delivered or hosted products to provide relatively quick
coverage to a newly established business unit or commodity function within that larger business.
Within this category, the respondents that noted a vendor cited SunGard's Kiodex product most often
as the leader, with Aspect Enterprise, Allegro and EKA also receiving multiple votes. Again, though,
with high response rates in "Do Not Know" and "None", it appears that market knowledge of SaaS or
Hosted delivery methods is still limited
.
Advertisement
33
Figure 26 – SaaS or Hosted Delivery
Perceived Leadership SaaS or Hosted Delivery
50%
45%
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Europe
North America
South America
Asia/Pac
Overall Architecture
The technical underpinning of a CTRM system is a factor in many purchase decisions. A solid data
model with modern technology components provides a platform around which additional capabilities
can be added. As such, buyers seeking a traditionally installed CTRM system will necessarily include
architectural factors as a critical factor in their product vetting process.
Though the responses of "Do Not Know" and "None" were relatively high in this category, Allegro and
OpenLink were clearly cited as leaders approximately five times more often than the next nearest
competitors. Notably, the answer "None" was given more in this category than any other. This is
perhaps due to the very complex nature of CTRM solutions and the inherent difficulty in creating
interfaces to, or extracting data from, those systems.
34
Figure 27 – Overall Architecture
Perceived Leadership Overall Architecture
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Europe
North America
South America
Asia/Pac
Advertisement
35
Market Perception Trends
CommodityPoint/UtiliPoint has conducted a number of similar studies in the past that allow some
historical market perception trends to be analyzed. In particular, UtiliPoint completed perception
studies in North America in 2006 and Europe in 2007 as well as a proprietary market perception study
in 2008. These research projects allow us to compare to the latest data and note trends over this
period.
North America
The North American vendor perception study was issued in August 2006 and 47 complete responses
were obtained. The sample set represents a range of types of company/entity including marketers,
IOU’s, Municipal Utilities, Cooperatives, Consultants, Retail Marketers and Hedge Funds but is
weighted more towards electric power as a traded commodity with a high proportion of utility-type
entities included. Note that we have combined market perceptions for companies that acquired others
during the period reflected in the rankings.
The ETRM/CTRM space in 2006 was noted as a maturing market in North America, with a large number
of vendors servicing the market, though many of those were relatively young and the market was not
yet fully informed as to the breadth of offerings available. In fact, in the 2006 research project,
SunGard Energy and Commodities, noted by 25% of the respondents, was the only company to be
cited as the market leader by more than 5% of the respondent group. Fully 58% of the respondents at
that time said there was no real overall market leader.
With the price run-up in commodity prices in 2007 and early 2008, sales of ETRM/CTRM system
increased dramatically as these systems were purchased by new market entrants and existing
companies seeking to improve their transaction and position management capabilities in the face of a
highly volatile market. In light of this new awareness of ETRM/CTRM solutions, the leadership
perceptions changed dramatically during the period. OpenLink emerged as the perceived leader,
though SunGard was also often noted. Triple Point ranked slightly behind the two leaders and was
followed by Allegro and SolArc. Though not shown on the graph, the number of respondents that
indicated they felt there was no market leader has continued to decline significantly from 2006.
36
Moving forward to the 2011 results, SunGard Energy and Commodities has fallen behind the other 4
large vendors in leadership perceptions. CommodityPoint's view is this decline can be best attributed
to the companies shift in strategy from supporting multiple, sometimes competing products; to having
developed the Aligne strategy which integrates many of those products down to a singular solution.
This new strategy has prompted the company to focus their sales and marketing efforts over the last 2
to 3 years toward their existing clients in order to secure those clients and move them forward to the
Aligne platform. We anticipate that given SunGard's scope and the number of clients using their
products, should they continue to see success in implementing Aligne with those clients, the market's
perception of overall leadership will rebound to some degree.
The other four leading companies at the time of this research, OpenLink, Triple Point, Allegro and
SolArc all noted increased perceptions of leadership in North America, with OpenLink extending their
overall percentage though maintaining a consistent margin over Triple Point from 2009 – 2011.
Advertisement
37
Figure 28 - Comparison of Overall Market Leader Perception in North America 2006 -2011
North America Overall Leadership 2006 - 2011
60.0%
50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
2006
20.0%
2009
10.0%
2011
0.0%
OpenLink
Triple Point
Allegro
Solarc
SunGard
Energy &
Commodities
incl. Kiodex
Others
Europe
UtiliPoint conducted a first of its kind perception survey of European users of Energy Trading,
Transaction and Risk Management (ETRM) software during November and December, 2006 and
January 2007, with fifty valid responses to the survey instrument being collected. These responses
included a variety of ETRM users and consulting firms (those that recommend solutions to their clients)
across the broader European Union. This 2007 sample has been combined with similar global effort in
2009 and this current analysis to look at the trend in leadership perception for the European
ETRM/CTRM markets.
Four of the vendors that received notes as the overall leader in 2007 and 2009 (Ventyx, Murex,
Amphora/TradeCapture and SolArc) did not receive any such acknowledgment in 2011. As such, the
top 5 perceived leaders in Europe for 2011 were OpenLink, Triple Point, Allegro and Navita (which was
recently acquired by Brady). Of that leadership group, OLF was most often noted as the overall leader,
receiving notice from 32% of the respondents and significantly increasing their lead over the other in
the field during that period 2009 to 2011. Triple Point also saw solid gains in leadership perception as
did Allegro. Similar to North America, SunGard saw a decline which can be attributed to the factors
previously discussed.
38
Figure 29 - Market Leadership Perception Comparison 2007 and 2009
Europe Overall Leadership 2007 - 2011
35.0%
30.0%
25.0%
20.0%
15.0%
10.0%
2007
5.0%
2009
0.0%
2011
Overall Comparison with 2008 Proprietary Survey
In the summer of 2008, UtiliPoint conducted a proprietary perception survey receiving 67 valid
responses; 50 from North America and 11 from Europe and the remainder from the rest of the world.
A comparison is also useful with the results of that survey in terms of the various respondents' views of
overall market leadership for the largest ETRM/CTRM vendors over the period from 2008 to 2011
(Figure 30).
The results for four of the top five vendors, OpenLink, Triple Point, Allegro and SolArc were fairly
consistent from 2009 to 2011, with a slight decrease noted for OpenLink and a corresponding increase
for Allegro and SolArc combined. The one significant difference from 2009 to 2011 was noted by
SunGard Energy and Commodities (combined for this comparison with their Kiodex product) where
market perceptions of leadership declined by almost 15%.
Again as previously discussed,
CommodityPoint feels this drop can generally be ascribed to the company's sales and marketing efforts
being directed toward efforts to convert their clients from the company's legacy products to their new
Aligne solution.
39
Figure 30 - Overall Market Leader Perceptions Comparison
All Regions - Perceived Overall Leadership 2008-2011
40.0%
35.0%
30.0%
25.0%
20.0%
2008
15.0%
2009
10.0%
2011
5.0%
0.0%
OpenLink
Triple Point
SunGard
Energy and
Commodities
(including
Kiodex)
Allegro
Solarc
Other
Advertisement
40
Purchase Plans and Buying Criteria
A component of vendor perception is to establish the rate of turnover among the participants. The
survey asked the respondents (consultants have been eliminated from this analysis) about their
purchase plans over the next 24-months (Figure 31). Overall, 20% indicated that they anticipated
procuring a new solution during that period, with 11% indicating a purchase within the next 12
months.
In Europe as many respondents expect to procure new software as those that did not
(excluding those that did not know). In North America, about half as many respondents indicated they
were currently in the market for a new system as compared to those that said they were not
anticipating a purchase in the near future.
Figure 31 - Purchase Plans in Next 24-Months
Purchase Plans by Region
50%
45%
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Europe
North America
South America
Asia/Pac
Yes - Next 12
Months
Yes - Next 12-24
Months
No
Don’t Know
These numbers do align with the results when asked how long it's been since the last system
procurement; with more than 60% indicating they had purchased a new system within the last 3 years
(Figure 32).
41
Figure 32 - Last System Purchase Date
Time Since Last Procurement by Region
40%
35%
30%
North America
25%
Europe
20%
South America
15%
Asia/Pac
10%
5%
0%
In the Last 12
Months
Between 12 36 Months
Between 36 60 Months
More than 60
Months
Don’t Know
For all respondents, regardless of procurement plans, we asked their views of the importance of the
method of deployment for newly purchased systems (Figure 33). Not surprisingly, having a service
oriented architecture, one that facilitates improved integration and data throughput, was perceived to
be of fairly high importance with 60% noting it as "Critical" or "Important" when making a purchase
decision. An additional 25% ranked SOA as being "Somewhat Important".
Figure 33 - Deployment Preferences
Preferred Deployment Method
Critical
Service Oriented Architecture
Important
Somewhat Important
Minor Factor
Ability to Deploy on a Hosted or SaaS Basis
Not Important
0%
42
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Deployment via the internet, either as a hosted system or a full SaaS solution was noted by only 20% or
our respondents as being either "Critical" or "Important", with less than 50% noting web delivery as
having any importance.
Though web delivered software is finding growing acceptance in the CTRM market place, that
acceptance is not yet widespread and results from deal activity indicates that the mid and low tiers of
the market are the most likely to embrace such solutions due to their lower initial costs and generally
quicker implementation times.
Required Commodity Coverage
Given the general profile of our respondent group, it is perhaps not surprising that when asked about
the importance of a new system providing coverage for various classes of commodities, support for
energy commodities ranked the highest of the group which also included Ags/Softs and Metals (Figure
34). In fact, about 88% of our respondents noted that energy commodity coverage was at least
"somewhat important", with 58% indicating such coverage was "critical"; an additional 20% indicated it
was "important".
"Agricultural/Softs Commodities" and "Metals" support were similarly ranked although ags/softs
support was noted as being somewhat more critical when procuring a new system.
Figure 34 – Required Commodity Coverage
Required Commodity Support
Critical
Energy Commodity Support
Important
Somewhat Important
Agriculture/Softs Commodity Support
Minor Factor
Metals Support
Not Important
0%
43
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Ranking Functional Requirements and Attributes
In this research of market perceptions, we also wanted to examine what functional attributes are of
most importance to buyers looking for a new CTRM system.
We asked our survey participants to provide score various functional capabilities of CTRM products on
a scale that ranged from "Not Important" to "Critical". The tested capabilities included:
•
Product Support for Physical Commodities
•
Product Support for Financial Commodities
•
Product Support for Comprehensive Market and Price Risk Management
•
Support for Physical Commodity Logistics
•
Support for Managing Transactions in Multiple Currencies
•
Support for Comprehensive Credit Risk Management
The results show that for our respondent group, the ability to capture and manage physical commodity
transactions was the most critical attribute they would consider when seeking a new solution. In fact,
95% of the respondents indicated that physical commodity support was either "Critical" or "Important"
in that decision process, with the "Critical" ranking making up over 75% of that mark. Financial
commodity transaction management ranked second with a "Critical" ranking of 70% and combined
"Critical" or "Important" ranking of slightly less than 90%. Risk management, both market and price
risk, had a "Critical" ranking of slightly more than 55%, and a combined "Critical" and "Important"
ranking of around 90%. Multi-commodity capabilities and physical logistics support were ranked very
similarly, with multi-commodity being ranked slightly higher in terms of "Critical" rankings, but lower in
terms of a combined score including "Critical", "Important", and "Somewhat Important".
Multi-Currency and Comprehensive Credit Risk support ranked somewhat lower than the others in
term of criticality, both nonetheless received an 80%+ rankings that included some level of importance.
44
Figure 35 - Functional Criteria and Attributes
Functional Attributes
Physical Commodity Support
Critical
Financial Commodity Support
Important
Comprehensive Market/Price Risk
Support
Somewhat Important
Multi-Commodity Capabilities
Minor Factor
Physical Logistics Support
Not Important
Multi-Currency Capabilities
Comprehensive Credit Risk Support
0%
50%
100%
Again, as many of our respondents were representative of the "traditional" segments of the CTRM
industry (i.e. utilities and merchant businesses), the ability to support both physical and financial
products is clearly of importance. At first glance, it may be surprising that comprehensive credit risk
support is ranked last of the tested attributes; however, given the availability and acceptance of "stand
alone" credit risk solutions, our respondents may feel that capability can be well managed outside of
the core CTRM and is therefore a less critical capability for these types of solutions.
What Vendor Attributes are most important?
We also wanted to examine our respondent group's views as to what they deem to be the most
important vendor attributes – those factors outside of features/functionality of the product itself. We
asked them to rank from "Not Important" to "Critical" four vendor attributes commonly considered
when procuring a new CTRM/ETRM system:
1. The provision of quality product support from the vendor
2. Competitive Pricing
45
3. The market positioning of the vendor – Are they a "Top" vendor?
4. The availability of quality consulting resources for the product
As can be seen by the results shown in Figure 36, quality vendor supplied support services is
considered to be the most important vendor criteria with almost 70% of our respondents indicating it
as "Critical" with the remaining responses saying "Important".
Figure 36 - Vendor Criteria
Vendor Attributes
Quality Support Available from the Vendor
Critical
Quality Consulting Support Available
Important
Somewhat Important
Available at a Competitive Price
Minor Factor
Not Important
Supplied by a "Top Vendor"
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
The availability of quality consulting resources and competitive pricing were essentially equally ranked,
with 90%+ of the respondents indicating those as being at least "Somewhat Important" and within that
ranking, more than 40% ranked each as "Critical". A vendor's status as a "Top Vendor" was deemed to
be critical by slightly less 20% of the respondents and "Important" by about 40%. This result does
indicate a willingness by many market participants to examine all potential solutions; though it does
also indicate a market advantage for the larger established vendors.
While price is clearly an important factor, market participants view quality support as being more
important; an attribute for which they may potentially be willing to pay a higher price.
46
About CommodityPoint
CommodityPoint is the industry leader in providing Commodity Trading & Risk Management (CTRM)
research, analysis and advisory services. Our services bring insight into business issues, trends,
processes and technology, to utilities, energy companies, banks, brokers, funds, investors and vendors
that enhance their competitive position and support critical business decisions around the wholesale
commodity trading markets. Our team provides expert analysis of market trends and, in particular, the
technologies and applications supporting those that participate in regional or global commodity
markets.
With offices in Europe and the US, and backed by an experienced research team, our organization
provides an unparalleled view of the marketplace. CommodityPoint is a division of leading energy and
utilities analyst and consulting firm, UtiliPoint International, Inc.
Other Resources
The CTRM Blog – http://www.ctrmblog.com
CommodityPoint – http://www.CommodityPoint.com
TRM Products and Services Online Directory – http://www.trmdirectory.com
Other CommodityPoint Reports
CommodityPoint research reports are available at http://www.Commodity-Point.com
For Additional Information regarding this report or any CommodityPoint product or service, please
contact Patrick Reames at [email protected] or Mark Tredway at [email protected].
CommodityPoint Locations
The Americas
19901 Southwest Freeway, Suite 121
Sugar Land, Texas 77479 USA
Phone: 281-207-5440
Europe & Asia/Pacific
International Business Center
Prikop 4
602 00 Brno
Czech Republic
Tel: +42 0 533 433 658
47
UtiliPoint International is a wholly owned
subsidiary of
Midas Medici Group Holdings, Inc.
(OTCBB:MMED).
About the Report Author
Patrick Reames
Managing Director, CommodityPoint
Mr. Reames has more than 30 years of energy industry experience. He has a deep understanding,
developed through hands-on experience and managerial oversight, of upstream and midstream oil and
gas operations including exploration, production, gathering, gas plant operations and pipeline
operations. Additionally, he has 5 years of energy commodity trading, transportation, and risk
management experience with Hess Corp. (formally known as Amerada Hess), a Fortune 100 integrated
energy marketing company. Over the last twelve years, he has been focused primarily on information
technology serving energy trading, marketing, and risk management. Prior to joining UtiliPoint, Patrick
served as an executive for several technology companies (including TransEnergy Management, Altra
Energy, and TradeWell systems) providing products and services to gas and power marketing
organizations. In these roles, his focus was on the creation and delivery of high value service products
designed to ensure the successful implementation and on-going use of technology solutions.
Patrick is a frequent speaker at industry conferences and events. He has published numerous articles in
industry publications and contributes regularly to the UtiliPoint's IssueAlert and CommodityPoint's
CommodityAlert series. Patrick is the primary author of the CTRMblog.com website and is the coauthor and editor of the books “Selecting and Implementing Energy Trading, Transaction and Risk
Management Software – A Primer” and "Trends in Energy Trading, Transaction and Risk Management,
2009-2010". Patrick holds a B.S. in Business Administration – Finance from Oklahoma State University.
48
Study Sponsors
CommodityPoint™ appreciates the financial support of those companies that sponsored and
supported this research project, enabling us to provide this report at no cost to its readers.
49
ASPECT Enterprise
www.aspectenterprise.com
/ [email protected]
The World’s #1 Cloud-Computing Multi-Commodity Trading, Risk & Market Data Enterprise.
One Platform. One Password. Free Trials & Affordable Monthly Subscriptions.
Aspect Enterprise Solutions is the world’s leading multi-commodity market data, trading, risk and physical
operations management enterprise fully delivered Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) in the Cloud. Our rich
functionality, competitive advantages and Web-based benefits are proven winners used by more than 500
organizations and thousands of users in over 90 countries across the globe. We also offer hosted trading and risk
solutions on client premises with a range of local installation options.
The advantages of Web-based solutions are unrivaled by traditional software, especially in a world where
budgets are tighter and total-cost-of-ownership and ROI are critical. Web-based means you have instant access
to the full range of functionality from your Web browser. There are no long costly installations or expensive
servers and databases to buy and support. Rapid deployment is provided by Aspect out of the box, with
customized configurations depending on the complexity of your requirements. Our solutions scale from single
users to thousands at multiple locations across global businesses, all backed up with professional support and
disaster recovery built into the solution. No longer is a professional solution out of reach for smaller companies.
Your capital can now be invested into the business, and not tied up in expensive, risky implementation projects
with traditional vendors.
Our powerful commodity trading, risk and operations management solution, AspectCTRM, is used by a wide
range of companies from small trading, supply and end user organizations to the world’s largest global
enterprises. AspectCTRM is flexible and scales to the functional and budget needs of its users. It begins with the
out-of-the-box, front-office Lite Edition (LE) designed for small firms, and expands to its Standard Edition and
Enterprise Edition (EE) with front, middle and back office functions with integration to other systems such as SAP
and Oracle Financials. As companies grow and requirements become more complex, AspectCTRM easily expands
to meet those demands without the costs and hassles associated with software installations and replacements.
AspectDSC is our Decision Support Center for traders with portals for Oil, Metals & Agriculture delivering realtime and historical news, spot and futures prices, and analytical charting tools on desktop and mobile devices
including Apple iPhone, iPad and BlackBerry. Leading sources include Platts, Dow Jones, NYMEX, ICE, London
Metal Exchange, Marine Bunker Exchange and more.
AspectPM is our Price Manager solution which provides consolidation and support for the global oil price
forecasting process and forward curve management.
All Aspect solutions are accessible via the same online password providing seamless, user-friendly collaboration
for global teams from one platform. Aspect clients produce, refine, market, ship and trade globally and rely on
our expertise in these key physical and financial markets: Oil, Metals, Steel, Coal, Marine Fuels, Biofuels, Freight,
Natural Gas, Emissions and Agriculture/Softs.
The Only CTRM/ETRM System That Delivers Real-Time P&L And Cash Flow Reports
Monitor the value of marked-to-market, cash positions and profits and losses simultaneously with market
fluctuations and as deals are entered and updated. This empowering capability is surprisingly still out of reach
for many companies using older technology or spreadsheets.
50
Fast Action Closing Reports
Never again start your trading day without an accurate view of your positions. Many companies spend the
overnight hours running systems to roll up data for morning access. Produce fast-action intraday and closing
reports in seconds. No other system can do this.
Real-Time, Accessible, Collaborative Solutions
The importance of capturing and managing trades and monitoring positions in a professional, collaborative
system is no different. It’s vital for success. Aspect delivers a collaborative enterprise that helps you achieve
dramatic improvements in business processes by integrating customers, suppliers, and employees. Collaborative
enterprises use real-time, in-sync, standardized information to improve coordination of planning, decisions and
actions to increase trade performance and profitability and reduce costs and risks to your business.
•
•
•
Trading and marketing professionals gain the tools needed to take advantage of opportunities from
real-time, actionable data.
Operations professionals are prepared with knowledge of the transaction status and history of the
customer, sales and contractual information, fulfillment history, credit history, contact information.
Management is able to effectively manage processes and staff due to visibility of workflow status,
becoming more accountable to expectations by corporate.
Smart, Flexible, Component Applications
Aspect’s technology is flexible and solutions are developed as components allowing companies to incrementally
integrate solutions as problems arise, add new functionality as needed, and maintain investments in current
systems.
The Trade, Risk, Physical Operations and Financial Operations components of AspectCTRM create a powerful
solution for today’s commodity traders, risk managers, operations staff and back-office personnel. Its
components are deployed individually and as an integrated group to provide the solution you need tailored to
meet your specific needs for all physical and financial trading operations and risk management. AspectCTRM is
also delivered on the same platform as AspectDSC, the market data and analytics center, creating an integrated,
single platform approach unlike any other vendor solution on the market.
Join Us For Intelligent Trade In The Cloud
51
Brady
Head Office
281Cambridge Science Park
Milton Road
Cambridge CB4 0WE
Tel: +44(0)1223 479 479
Fax: +44(0)1223 472 510
Email: [email protected]
London Office
60 Cannon Street
London EC4N 6NP
Tel: +44(0)20 7002 1613
Fax: +44(0)20 7002 1100
Nearest Tube Station: Cannon Street or Mansion House
Brady also has offices in Amsterdam, Bergen, Edinburgh, Geneva, Halden, New York, Oslo, Paris, Philadelphia,
Singapore and Toronto.
________________________________
To prosper in today‘s increasingly complex marketplace, physical trading companies and financial institutions
rely on specialist solutions and sophisticated analysis to maintain a competitive edge in the global commodity
markets. The latest generation of Brady‘s market leading solutions provides integrated trading, risk and
settlement systems. With comprehensive audit, compliance and regulatory functions, businesses can now
combine sophisticated management techniques with highly efficient throughput to drive down costs. The
straight-through processing capability of an open service oriented architecture which facilitates ease of
integration into the clients environment, thus enabling an enterprise to quickly achieve a lower cost per trade
and provides a proven foundation for effective risk management and a streamlined, efficient business process.
Brady is the largest European-headquartered provider of trading and risk management solutions for the energy
and commodities industries and is a well-funded public company, backed by leading institutional investors. With
25 years’ experience of developing leading technology, Brady is now used by over 250 companies on 5
continents, including some of the largest trading companies, financial institutions, producers, mining
corporations, energy generators and hedge funds in the world. By working closely with our clients in the metals
& minerals, energy & softs markets we continue to lead the way in trade capture and risk management,
increasing productivity and operational & regulatory efficiencies in a changing landscape.
The global commodities markets are becoming more volatile and complicated; growing regulatory, legal and
corporate governance requirements are adding even more pressure. Brady‘s transaction and risk management
applications are designed to help our clients manage all their commodity transactions in a single integrated
solution – including pre-deal analysis, trade capture, foreign exchange, market and credit risk, logistics, cash
management, physical operations, back office financials, settlement, freight, regulatory reporting and more.
52
A fundamental market driver in recent times has been the significant increase in electronic trading - across all
asset classes. Increased market volumes, volatile markets and continuing pressure on market-makers to offer
complete & competitive services to clients have seen a dramatic increase in the availability of both order- and
execution-management systems across the industry.
Brady’s Trading and Risk Management solutions are designed to offer highly efficient and optimised system and
trade processing and risk reporting: from the on-boarding of new clients; through exchange connectivity for
transaction processing and post-execution processes such as confirmations and client statements; to advanced
real-time risk analysis and monitors across exchange-traded and OTC contracts.
Technical innovation is very much at the fore-front of Brady’s latest generation of solution offerings, utilising the
very latest Microsoft standards, such as Silverlight and C#, and service-based architectures to offer new levels of
scalability and performance to its solutions in order to enhance the user experience and increase data
performance
Brady is a proven market leader and provides solutions for all sizes of operation. Whether the requirement is for
hundreds of users across the entire process – from point of production to end-user – or for just a few users who
are targeting one aspect of the supply chain, we have a solution. Brady's products can be fully integrated with
3rd party systems and applications, whether internal or external.
The goals are the same for everyone – to be competitive, profitable, fast, manage risk, streamline operations,
and meet regulatory requirements.
For further information visit: www.bradyplc.com
53
capSpire
capSpire, a CTRM Consultancy with a Different Approach
Envision a new order in CTRM consulting. Gone are the days of over staffed projects that exceed budgetary
estimates and run twice as long as planned. Nor should any client settle for a second rate consulting team that
lacks the training and expertise to accomplish the objectives of the client. On the other hand, imagine a team of
consultants that always consider the client’s interests first, that is constantly searching for the “best way”, not
just the status quo approach to solutions due to a lack of creativity. What if there was a consultancy that made it
standard practice to think “outside the box”, rather than rely on the same solutions to the many complex
problems faced in this industry. Fortunately, you don’t have to imagine anymore, you simply contact the true
new order consultancy in the CTRM space, capSpire.
Formed in 2009, capSpire was fashioned to challenge the status quo. The founders did not form a company with
profit as the main goal, rather they take an approach that profit is the result of putting clients interests first.
Tremendous value is built into each and every job for which capSpire is the lead consultancy. To be specific, one
of the primary keys to our success is we analyze the client’s needs and then assemble the right team. In fact,
over the last three years the recruiting efforts at capSpire have focused on bringing strategically needed skill sets
with each and every addition to the team. capSpire leadership realized quickly that it is impossible to market a
single individual consultant as an expert in all areas of any CTRM system. Such front to back experts do not exist
and anyone claiming otherwise is overstating their abilities. Furthermore, as previously mentioned capSpire
does not bloat projects just to fill seats at a client thereby gouging budgets with an inexperienced group
incapable of meeting the client’s needs. On the contrary, capSpire begins with a complete functional analysis
and then will staff projects with the right group of our consultants best able to manage the client’s stated
deliverables. The result is projects that run on time and on budget, a rare but welcome outcome in the CTRM
consulting world. With capSpire, the key end feature is value in our offerings far beyond what any other
consultancy could even hope to offer, yet capSpire accomplishes this day in and day out.
With our diverse and well-trained team of experts we are skilled across a wide variety of disciplines including,
but not limited to:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
54
Project Management
Risk and P & L Management
Credit Management
Accounting, Taxes and Monthly Closings
Cross-system Interfaces
Inventory Valuation
Physical Scheduling
Trade Capture and Contract Administration
Hedging
Technical Architecture and Development
As for our range of expertise, it runs the gamut from Crude, Refined Products, Gas, NGL, Coal, Ethanol, Asphalt
and the Grains, among others. We have a history of dozens of implementations, including vendor selection,
project management, functional leads and technical developers. In addition, we provide consulting for business
processes such as volume and cash forecasting, P & L management, credit, risk, inventory, and VaR, just to name
a few. We also provide support for multiple CTRM clients on an ongoing basis for critical path issues, functional
analysis, business process refinement and technical development.
With capSpire, the bottom-line is you hire a team with:
•
•
•
•
Deep and broad expertise that is unrivaled in the industry
A unique, non-bloating philosophy of fairness that results in unsurpassed value for our clients
Complete dedication to CTRM consulting and only CTRM consulting
A pool of talent available for our client’s benefit that is the best in the industry from top to bottom
Contact us at:
[email protected]
55
iRely
iRely, LLC is a leading provider of intuitive, innovative, and affordable enterprise software solutions for the
commodities markets. From origin to trading to manufacturing to distribution, iRely is transforming the way its
customers do business. iRely products leverage the latest technology and fuse it with user-friendly flexibility.
Never before have businesses had such powerful tools that allow them to glean more insight and apply more
creative methods to reduce risk, increase revenues, and realize efficiencies.
Commodities Served by iRely
• Coffee
• Sugar
• Cocoa
•
•
•
Spices
Cotton
Grains
•
•
•
Edible Oils
Dairy
Petroleum
iRelyAdvantages
Comprehensive – A growing trend in commodities is that many processors are reaching back into the supply
chain to ensure supplies, and many originators and traders are moving into processing where they perceive the
margins to be higher. But how do these entities manage these new activities in a tightly coordinated manner
with their traditional business? iRely fills this gap by providing solutions at every level of the supply chain
including a general financials package. With iRely, efficiencies are gleaned from elimination of double entry work
and increased oversight due to centralization of data.
Intuitive – iRely allows companies to leverage the benefits of automation sooner through its intuitive, userfriendly interface. Organizations are able to get up and running more quickly with less extensive and expensive
training programs; spend less time training and more time using. This eliminates office frustrations about
software usability that often pollute the work environment. Instead, these organizations are able to provide
their highly-valued talent with tools they both want and need to live up to their potential.
Customer Centric – iRely prides itself on being a company that values its customers, their time, and their input.
The result is a product that addresses the actual needs of its users. Switching vendors can be costly and time
consuming. Therefore, it’s important for organizations to align themselves with vendors, such as iRely, who are
poised to meet their needs both now and in the future.
IRely is privately owned and held. They are debt free and have no exit plan. They will be your partner for years
and years to come.
Innovative – iRely is committed to bringing its customers new features and technology on a regular basis. This
innovation breeds efficiencies that save money. By focusing on innovation, iRely has become known as the
ideal long-term business partner. Its customers are confident that iRely will continue to provide the technology
they need to continually improve the way they operate their businesses. Additionally, this has given those
organizations the tools they need to be innovative in the way they interact with their vendors and customers.
56
Key Industries Served by iRely
Trading & Risk Management - iRely combines both the physical supply chain and hedging aspects of commodity
businesses into a single, integrated solution. Real time reporting enables iRely customers to manage operational
and financial risk to ensure superior customer service while managing the market risks inherent in the business.
Always know your exposure not only to the physical markets, but to the futures markets as well considering
physical exposure, futures position, and other derivative instruments on a delta-equivalent basis. Run mark to
market daily to avoid end of month profitability surprises.
Process Manufacturing – iRely provides process manufacturers the flexibility, efficiency, quality control, and
traceability that is critical in today’s world. iRely offers a flexible core called “Process Modeling Engine” which
can be easily configured to model the material flow in a plant. This core is designed to improve inventory
tracking and traceability, withoutrequiring heavy customization during implementation.This makes the software
highly responsive to any changes made to the production line. Automate the flow of information from office to
plant floor and back. View the status of production runs in real time (with green/yellow/red alerts) which link
directly to customer orders. Know where every lot of raw material was used and shipped to, and know the
components by lot of every finished goods item produced.
Agri-Business – iRely agri-business solutions automate organizations that cater to the farming industry. Grain
merchandisers, feed manufacturers, agronomists, seed dealers, rural retail establishments, convenience stores,
fuel distributors, and cooperatives around the world use iRely to centralize their A/R, improve inventory
tracking, and increase their customer service offerings.
Petroleum Distribution – iRely addresses the needs of petroleum distributors from direct delivery to onsite
fueling, from cardlock to lubricants and everything in between. iRely’s software solutions incorporate all the
aspects of managing accounts receivables, inventory, taxes, pricing, and contracts. iRely also offers an
innovative in-truck billing application that allows metered fuel distributors to invoice customers directly from
the truck.
57

2012 E/CTRM Vendor Perception Study

Transcription

Similar documents

journey 1st edition of 2008

youth participation in national agenda through new media

KERFORD INVESTMENTS (UK) LTD KERFORD INVESTMENTS

Survey Solutions with a Human Touch

News File

The Final Reckoning

Council Rock-eSchoolPLUS-IEPPLUS-PerformancePLUS

our Alpha API Brochure

Casino Slot Machine Gratuit Quarter Jeux Casino Gratuit Sans

Corporate Presentation

Detroit Symphony Orchestra