2006issue C021
Manual after-hours routing and open-outcry fill risk
Venue choice is an order-routing filter on a seconds-to-lifecycle clock. When metal and energy matching still sat in a pit, or overnight tickets had to be rekeyed into a closed terminal, delayed fill confirmation and clerk handling were implementation cost.
- When metal and energy pits were busy, floor brokers could be overloaded with paper and delay fill confirmation, so traders did not always know promptly whether they were filled or at what price.
- Because the after-hours platform had no open interface, overnight metal and energy orders had to print at the desk and be keyed by clerks, and staff had to search the system manually because fills were not reported or alerted.
- Other electronic venues already let brokers route orders and receive fill confirmations with no human intervention.
- Editorial view: choose the venue as an order-routing filter and treat pit handling and overnight rekeying as implementation cost.
Regular hours still meant the pit
While other futures markets were shifting to electronic matching, NYMEX flagship metal and energy futures still traded in open-outcry pits during regular hours. Open outcry is pit matching in which floor brokers handle paper flow during regular hours and can become overloaded when volume and volatility spike.
When those metal and energy pits were busy and moving quickly, floor brokers could be overloaded with paper, delaying fill confirmations so traders sometimes did not know promptly whether they were filled or at what price.
Members who earned their living on the NYMEX floor, and who effectively controlled the exchange, were not eager to replace open outcry with electronic matching. A new NYMEX open-outcry floor in London, intended to compete with an all-electronic rival, was described as unsuccessful from launch.
Overnight tickets still needed a clerk
NYMEX ACCESS was the after-hours platform for metals and energy, an electronic session used when the pit was closed. It offered no open interface for brokers to connect their systems and pass orders and fills automatically.
An open interface lets orders and fill confirmations move electronically with no manual rekeying or human search. Because that interface was missing, overnight metal and energy orders had to print at a brokerage desk and be keyed by clerks into ACCESS.
ACCESS neither reported executions nor alerted the broker when an overnight order filled, so staff had to search the system continuously and manually for completed orders. Fill confirmation is the post-trade signal that tells a trader whether an order executed and at what price; delayed or missing reports raise implementation cost.
Other venues already returned the fill
Other electronic venues, including CME Globex and the Chicago Board of Trade electronic platform, allowed brokers to route orders and receive fill confirmations electronically with no human intervention.
A possible open interface to ACCESS then under discussion was expected to cover energy futures but not metals. A newer ClearPort platform already used for e-miNY energy contracts was described in early reviews as far from perfect. Reported CME interest in a NYMEX stake raised the prospect that energy and metal futures might later trade on Globex.
All readings on this track · 30 readings
- 1988Why instant basket routing overwhelms specialist liquidity
- 2004Retail forex tickets as implementation-cost contracts
- 2005A two-gate liquidity filter for futures order routing
- 2006Manual after-hours routing and open-outcry fill risk
- 2010A futures brokerage quote is an execution specification
- 2011Smart order routing, maker-taker, and midpoint execution costs
- 2012Compare equivalent listings before routing
- 2012Rebate-aware routing and execution cost
- 2012Platform routing, fees, and server-side stops
- 2013Compare equivalent listings, then route the order
- 2013Confirm routing, margin, and fill cost before a live forex order
- 2013Brokerage choice as an execution-cost and routing filter
- 2014Order routing, pass-through rebates, and liquidity choice
- 2014Comparing exchange venues before routing the order
- 2014Selecting a futures broker as an execution-architecture problem
- 2014Commission shopping is the wrong first filter for a futures order
- 2015Routing orders when equivalent products trade on multiple venues
- 2015Forex venue checks for speed, margin, and implementation cost
- 2015Backup venues and symbol splits in futures routing
- 2016Route orders across competing exchange venues
- 2016Filter exchange venues before routing orders
- 2017Venue choice as an order-routing filter
- 2017Venue routing for equivalent listed contracts
- 2017Forex broker checks for fill speed, quote honor, and margin
- 2017Brokerage choice as an execution-speed and commission filter
- 2018Routing equivalent contracts across competing venues
- 2018Forex venue selection by fill speed, margin terms, and price honor
- 2019Forex execution filters for routing, cost, and liquidity
- 2020Routing equivalent listings across competing exchanges
- 2020Brokerage filters for routing, commissions, and liquidity