In the evolving world of fixed income, where asset classes, platforms, and data sources proliferate, creating a seamless, high-performance workflow is both a strategic necessity and a significant challenge.

The Workflow Panel at the Fixed Income Leaders Summit USA brought together a diverse group of experts to unpack this complexity, offering frank insights into the hurdles and advances in connected trading workflows.

Moderated by Dan Barnes of Markets Media, the session opened with a nod to the vast scope of modern trading. “We cover a wide range of instruments… everything that is traded in the fixed income market,” said Hong Gao of PGIM Fixed Income, who also highlighted the growing integration of private credit into workflows: “The data is not standardized and deals are bespoke.” That lack of standardization was echoed across the panel.

Debojyoti Ganguly of Schwab Asset Management drove the point further: “Each of the fixed income asset types behaves as if they are a subclass… so we take a best-of-breed approach and apply our own secret sauce.” For Schwab and others, this means layering internal innovation over vendor platforms to maintain agility and differentiation.

On the vendor side, Michael Loggia of VIRTU Financial emphasized the foundational need for normalization: “You have to be able to compile real-time and historical data… but everyone’s tagging is different. Being able to communicate across vendors is essential.” Stephen Murphy, CEO of Genesis Global, didn’t mince words either: “Everyone’s got a different data structure… it’s a huge waste of time.” He championed the creation of an industry utility to standardize reference data: “I don’t want to add value by defining a bond.”

The conversation turned to architecture and strategy, particularly around build-versus-buy decisions. Most panelists leaned toward hybrid models—those that blend vendor strengths with internal customization. “Some platforms are designed with openness in mind… but not all,” said Ganguly. “You need flexible architecture to adapt.”

Collaboration—both human and technological—emerged as a core enabler. Gao praised PGIM’s approach of embedding technologists within trading teams: “We have embedded tech teams that work with traders every day to build tools that align with how the market operates.” Others pointed to the rising importance of communication tools like Microsoft Teams in bridging inter-desk silos.

On the subject of AI, the panel was cautiously forward-looking. “AI will change how we interact with software… we’ll see hyper-personalized applications emerge,” predicted Adam De Rose of SS&C Eze. But he, like others, tempered optimism with realism: trust and explainability remain barriers to adoption.

Ultimately, the panel illuminated a dual transformation: one technological, the other cultural. Or as Murphy succinctly put it: “It’s not just the data. It’s all the workflow that can happen around that.”