Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 4 Next »

Table of Contents

Date/Time

2019-1-10 12:00pm US-EDT

Attendees

NameOrganization
Hammad AkbarCiti
Will Quan JPM
Johan Sandersson FactSet
Mirajana PanticUBS
Tony ChauUBS
Rob Underwood FINOS
Tosha Ellison FINOS
Alexandra Stratigos FINOS (scribe)

Outstanding Action Items

Task report

Looking good, no incomplete tasks.

Agenda

Time
WhoNotes from the Meeting
5 min

Convene & roll call


15 min

Introduction of Equity OTC Use Case


Mira Pantic

Presented: Trade objects use case - Mutations of Trade Object EQ OTC (see screenshot)

Scenarios are one of Mira’s projects for replatforming at UBS.

Currently in proof of concept stage. Not in production stage

Scenario 1

Single block trade that is then allocated (to 2 accounts) and one of the allocations is subject to a trade explosion

Challenge was to make sure there was robust model that could accommodate event use cases

Trade = block trade then allocated to two different accounts

Core requirements is to enable different needs - ledger, risk, etc.  

Determine transactional lineage & be able to link things and enable different user views.

Link between trade/trade

Scenario 2

A leg in an allocation group matches an open trade, subsequent increase, amend and closure should recognize that is the new instrument (see screenshot)

10 min

Update on new Use Cases from FDC3 program

People now starting to implement based on instrument.  Johan changed the Content Data group is happy the way they are.  Should FO stick with format that final votes come from FO? Or is FO at that stage and if so, how will this be done?

Rob:

  1. Ratify objects themselves
  2. Discussed at OSSF - if and how to make object definitions available from FO
  3. FO group needs to formally accept definitions and ratify them.

Johan:

Group should come together and manually vote/approve.  Currently 4 or 5 ready for this process.

10 minRFQ Working Group Status Update and Feedback on RFQ and Order Objects

Will:

Tooling - (left off before holiday) - what’s outstanding?  Is there a proposal?

Rob:

Getting there.  Mao working on it using Protobuff.  Getting helpful feedback from AQR (they wrote something similar to what Protobuff does but ultimately abandoned this).  Mao not ready to share but we are looking for modeling tool that’s useable for business analysts but not necessarily people who write code.  Create initial blueprint that can be used to produce code similar to that which Rob wrote in typescript. Progress made but maybe in 2-4 wks ready to demo.  

Will:

Methodology or anything else FINOS wants feedback on in the meantime

10 min

Object Repository - Update


Rob Underwood (Deactivated)

Rob asked group:

Does what he put together conceptually this make sense (mostly for Joahn)? Does names spacing, import, etc make sense?  

Johan:

Not trained enough to determine.  

Just wants simple documentation page where people can go and read standard names they should be using. 

5 minAOB & adjourn

Hammad Akbar



Decisions Made

Approved Johan to go forward with ratification process.  

Action Items

  • Mira happy to present other trade attributes if group would be interested.   Either add to next meeting or separate meeting
  • Discuss further next session - Mira to start adding examples into FO Confluence page for others to see, discuss, debate
  • Rob ask:
  1. Group to check out if anyone is using  Protobuff
  2. Or, what other similar tools are banks currently using?
  3. Will check with Mao on status (may be after Jan 23 board meeting)
  • Rob will send email to PMCs in prep for board meeting asking for status reporting - red, yellow, green.  Will focus on red programs only and programs FINOS intends to put resources towards
  • No labels