Tag Archive: APX


Does Your Investment Firm Need APX?

Filed under: APX, Axys, Data Conversion, Portfolio Management Systems — 1 Comment
June 29, 2012

In 2005, Advent released the first version of Advent Portfolio Exchange (APX). This paved the way for enterprise users to take Advent more seriously, while reassuring rapidly growing firms that APX would service their future needs and provide support for legacy requirements. Initially, this change was fine with many of the Axys users that have historically comprised Advent’s established userbase, but after years of baseline Axys updates and Advent’s predominant emphasis on APX, the patience of some Axys users has worn thin.

Today Axys users likely fit into one of four camps:

  1. They are planning to move to APX in the near future.
  2. They understand their options well enough, but don’t think the benefits of moving to APX outweigh the costs.
  3. They simply don’t care about APX or competing products – just as long as Axys keeps doing what they need, everything is fine.
  4. They are frustrated by Advent’s perceived abandonment of their business segment and are either actively seeking a replacement to Axys or in the process of converting to a new system.

I have repeatedly been told that owning a self-hosted version of APX is 2-3 times more expensive than Axys, but don’t take my word for it.  Advent’s pricing changes regularly.  Call Advent and get a quote.   Early on, APX conversions were very expensive, and some firms were quoted six-figure conversion costs.  Although these costs have been reduced substantially, APX is still significantly more expensive than Axys.

In the past, conversions were much more complex and time-consuming.  The primary issue seemed to be the normalization of a wide variety of Axys data.  As APX has evolved, Advent and the conversion utility within APX have created efficiencies in the conversion process.  In a recent conversation with a client, who is now considering the move from Axys to APX, I learned that Advent took copies of their Axys files and was able to demo APX 4.x with representative data from their firm in about a week.

In addition to the difference in the software cost, Advent recommends that APX users host the app in a traditional database server and application server configuration.  Some users may opt to host IIS on a separate server as well.  Currently, many small and medium businesses (SMBs) simply host Axys on their primary file server.

Why would a firm running Axys want to pay the premium for APX?

The answer is improved security, infrastructure, and functionality that meets the expectations of those with higher technological standards – historically enterprise users, not SMBs.  APX promised this from day one, but APX v1 was, well, version 1.  I sat in on a couple dog and pony shows for APX when it was first introduced.  In one, the presenter abruptly but politely disconnected a conference call with one of their early “testimonial” users when the conversation went in an unexpected direction.  At Advent’s conference in Orlando, more time than Advent would have liked was spent on the topic of APX latency, but these types of issues can be experienced with any v1 product covering as much ground as APX.

One of the most valuable benefits of Advent’s portfolio accounting systems is the maturity of their products.  This maturity is the primary reason why so many things in Axys and APX work the way they should.  Though much has changed at the core of Axys and APX, both of these systems can potentially run a report created on The Professional Portfolio (the precursor to Axys and APX) 25 years ago.  Due to the continuity of Advent’s portfolio management systems, users of The Professional Portfolio and Axys have been able to jump into APX without a lot of training.

Last year, when I attended the Advent conference in Boston, a panelist from the Advent Users Group touched upon the issue of APX owners using APX like Axys.  Her point was that you should use the newer features of APX v3, but as she mentioned it, I couldn’t help thinking how much the earlier versions of APX were like Axys.  Aside from the SQL backend and other related platform benefits, it felt like you were still using Axys, only it was more complicated and clunky.

Even now, we see that the heart of Axys continues to beat inside APX, playing a critical role with respect to backward compatibility and legacy reporting.  Over the course of its first five years, APX has matured significantly.  That initial awkward period is behind Advent APX.

In the past 18 months, Advent has made significant strides towards fulfilling the promise of APX, introducing additional SSRS reports in APX 3.x and the ability to create dashboards in APX 4.x.  I have finally heard mention of an API.  Yes, APX is more complex than Axys, but now that more of the infrastructure has been built out, you can feel better about it.  With these improvements, APX should make sense for a larger number of investment firms.

APX is a logical upgrade for Axys clients who:

  1. Want to minimize the need to retrain staff on a new portfolio accounting system.
  2. Understand that additional features, such as SSRS reporting and dashboards, come hand in hand with incremental complexity and the costs of an enterprise solution.

Those that don’t want to take on as much overhead may find solace in moving to APX on Demand (a SAAS offering), but in doing so they will have to sacrifice some of the flexibility and functionality available to self-hosted users of APX.

 

Final Score: APX 4, Axys 0

Looking at version releases of APX and Axys over the past seven years, it is easy to understand the focus of Advent’s primary resources.  Though four minor releases of Axys have been made since APX came out, there have been no major releases.  A major release implies a major change to the software, and at this point it doesn’t appear that a major Axys release is coming from Advent.

Last year’s acquisition of Black Diamond provides Axys users with another choice under the Advent umbrella, but I haven’t seen many users go from Axys to Black Diamond. While Axys improvements have stalled out, Advent’s full-throttle APX development has many of its Axys users feeling disenfranchised.  From my own perspective, Advent appears to be losing some valuable clients through a failure to more actively communicate with their SMB client base.

If Advent wants to keep Axys clients as Advent clients, they should connect with their users and reassure them that they want to work with them. Still, Advent should also understand that for some, it may make more sense to move on.

About the Author: Kevin Shea is President of InfoSystems Integrated, Inc. (ISI); ISI provides a wide variety of outsourced IT solutions to investment advisors nationwide. For details, please visit isitc.com or contact Kevin Shea via phone at 617-720-3400 x202 or e-mail at kshea@isitc.com.

Tags: , , , , ,
Comment

Escalating Investment Industry Product Pricing Continues to Mystify Some Advisors

Filed under: APX, Axys, Portfolio Management Systems — Leave a comment
August 18, 2011

If you saw $500 on the ground, would you pick it up?

In late 2008, most investment firms were focused on getting lean and surviving a heretofore unprecedented economic downturn. Because we specialize in working with these firms, we wanted to use our core expertise to help create efficiencies and save them money. We ran an ad in the Advent User Group (AUG) newsletter offering two free hours of consulting. It wasn’t a completely altruistic idea; we figured we would gain some long-term clients for the effort.

The ad was run, and I honestly thought we’d get some calls. Surely there were investment firms that would want FREE consulting, right?  We typically receive calls from investment professionals across the nation inquiring about our products and services, but not one person called to inquire about the two hours of free consulting.

It is possible that users were so busy that they weren’t reading the newsletter.  Perhaps the ad, which was kind of ugly, didn’t inspire firms to call us.  In all likelihood, this ad failed to generate interest because of its target market: investment advisors and their trusted professionals.

I have worked with these folks for over twenty years and understand who they are, so perhaps I should have known better. The typical investment advisor is a conservative skeptic who believes you get what you pay for. In their view, our offer of free consulting must have appeared hollow or even insincere. Investment firms are stereotypically risk-averse regarding their back office operations. For these reasons, many investment advisors are victims of a negative feedback loop. 

Software companies are able to continually increase fees without making dramatic technology improvements because, by and large, investment advisors are resistant to change and afraid to try anything else. This inertia obstructs new firms from competing with the established firms since the market share they need to capture is engaged in agreements that investment advisors may not think entirely reasonable, but acceptable for now.

Advent Software, for example, consistently raises the cost of Axys support and focuses on compatibility and bug fixes without implementing large-scale feature additions to further merit such sustained cost increases. Advent could change this with a little effort, but historically it hasn’t been part of their agenda. Nevertheless, I still believe that Axys is the most cost-efficient and feature-rich portfolio management system available to investment advisors today.

Axys users need to remember that the name of the company is Advent Software, not Axys Software. They are a for-profit business, and that is a good thing for their customers in the long-term. From my limited knowledge and perspective, it does seem like a grossly disproportionate amount of Advent’s research and development efforts go into things that are not related to Axys. For an Axys user paying annual maintenance fees which hypothetically go to support, research and development of their product, this is problematic – especially if they rarely call Advent for support.

Advent has invested significant resources in APX, an enterprise product offering which is a possible upgrade for Axys users. In reality, APX currently doesn’t make sense for the vast majority of non-enterprise Axys users. In May, Advent finalized a deal to buy Black Diamond for $73M. Three months later, just how or whether Black Diamond will be integrated into Advent’s other product offerings remains to be seen.

Advent is not alone. Earlier this year I had a call from a prospective customer that was frustrated by Satuit’s pricing plan. After paying roughly $2K per year to use Packman to package their reports and host statements on their portal, they were told that pricing would increase 300% over the next three years. If I made that announcement, I know what would happen to my clients.

To be fair to Satuit, they gave their client a year’s notice of the increase – enough time for them to find and implement a suitable alternative. We have experience selling competing products, and we feel that Satuit’s product, originally from Lync Consulting, had been underpriced at $2K per year.  Unfortunately, their client got used to paying $2K a year and didn’t feel like they could stomach more than $6K per year, even though the cost was scheduled to increase gradually.  Regardless, my advice to this prospective client was to stick with Satuit for now, because the cost of switching from their solution to our solution would outweigh any benefit in terms of cost over three years.

Rational product pricing takes competition, expectations, value, ongoing support and profitability into account, but don’t expect to make any sense of pricing in the industry where “greed is good.” Investment advisors that really want to change the status quo should follow Gandhi’s advice: “Be the change you want to see in the world.” In order to make it happen, they need to be willing to take on a certain level of risk. If the last twenty years is any indication of what we can expect, don’t hold your breath on this one.

Most investment advisors will continue to get what they pay for in the foreseeable future.

About the Author:
Kevin Shea is President of InfoSystems Integrated, Inc. (ISI); ISI provides a wide variety of outsourced IT solutions to investment advisors nationwide. For details, please visit isitc.com or contact Kevin Shea via phone at 617-720-3400 x202 or e-mail atkshea@isitc.com.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,
Comment

Start Working on Your Next Generation of Client Reports Today

Filed under: APX, Axys, Best Practices, Custom Reporting, Portfolio Management Systems — Leave a comment
July 6, 2011

In an earlier blog I emphasized the importance of mainstream client reporting.  As investment professionals once again turn to the dreaded task of busily cranking out their quarterly reports, it is relevant to share the process we have established to help many of them transition from tired, stale reports to a new generation of client reports. 

In this article, I’ll take you through our process for overhauling client reporting drawing upon specific references to a recent project. Whether you opt to utilize a third-party service provider like us, request Report Writing services from Advent, or produce your next generation client reports internally, you should find the following information useful.  Those that want to implement new reports for Q3 or Q4 of 2011 need to start the process now.

Our Process for Improving Client Reporting

Our fundamental approach addresses the most difficult reporting issues first, identifying any show-stopping problems as early in the process as possible.  We are able to create reports using a number of techniques.  If one way doesn’t work, we can always fall back on another, but our goal is to select the right method from the get-go.

1. Review

In the review stage, advisors need to appraise their current client reporting packages with a critical eye in order to identify what is good and bad about them.  In a nutshell, investors must preserve what is highly valued by clients and remove what is superfluous. The ultimate goal should be to create concise, comprehensive reports that are easily understood, allowing clients to view as little or as much detail as they desire.  Many advisors want to create visually crisp and professional reporting packages.  We understand the importance of this;  however, in the area of client reporting, meaningful content should trump form.

Though we are available and qualified to review client reports and make recommendations for new ones, most firms prefer to do this internally. 

2. Mock-up

A new report always starts with an idea.  Oftentimes, this is shown with a mock-up expressing the look of the desired end product.  In some cases, our customers produce mockups in Excel, but others cut and paste pictures together, or simply sketch them freehand.  Any of these options are fine.  As they say, a picture says a thousand words:  the more detailed the pictures, the less you will have to explain to those writing the reports. 

Most clients have a strong preference as to whether reports appear in landscape or portrait. This aspect of your reports will be more expensive to change as you progress further into the project.  We understand that this decision may have more to do with aesthetic presentation issues, but some report layouts simply require more vertical space or horizontal space than others.  If you are dead-set on a certain orientation, you may need to be more flexible about report content.

Over the years, we have created a wide variety of quarterly reporting packages for clients. Some samples of our work that may help you with your mockup appear on our website under the menu titled “Custom Reports for Axys/APX.”  They fall into three categories:

1 – samples of reports produced by extracting data from Axys/APX and generating reports through traditional report writers like Crystal Reports and SSRS

2 – samples generated directly from Axys/APX through the use of compound report macros

3 – older samples of reports that were generated through a variety of methods

While browsing these above samples, click on any report to view it in larger size.

After viewing all of our online samples and PDF documents, our client produced the following mock-ups for us:

3. Draft

The draft process, as we define it, is one where the reports’ framework is established in the chosen environment.  Roughing out the reports helps determine their feasibility. In the attached example, we started by spending a day onsite, drafting the four account summary-type reports that were requested.   We used a combination of REPLANG, Report Writer Pro, and compound report macros. During this phase of the process, we are not overly concerned about individual details. Instead, we focus on the big picture. Is it possible to create the reports requested? What type of challenges will we face? What tools will be required? What resources, including time, will be required?

There are two possible outcomes to this stage:

  • Validation that the reports can be produced in the selected environment, as well as a better understanding of what they will look like and how much time they will take
  • A recommendation for another methodology, such as SSRS or Crystal Reports, based on the difficulties encountered in attempts to draft the basic report framework

After drafting the four requested summary reports, we were in a better position to estimate the amount of time necessary for development, knew what features would be difficult to implement, and were confident that we could deliver the reports on time.  Our client was also included in the process.  As we drafted each report, we sought their feedback to determine whether things were taking shape as intended.

4. Design

A significant amount of time needs to be spent in the design phase, selecting fonts, styles, colors, chart details, and other elements of presentation related to the reports.   Our client preferred to use the traditional Times New Roman font, but this font choice is one of the reasons most Axys and APX reports look so similar. We selected title bars rather than title boxes to give added flexibility regarding the placement and size of report elements.  Colors are very important. In the past, I have seen clients struggle to pick a palette of colors for charts and graphs. Our client picked vibrant colors that complemented their logo. If you are not already familiar with it, Adobe has a very useful and free resource that you can use to select a color scheme for your reports:

 http://kuler.adobe.com

As a general rule, one should complete design of the master page or default style for all reports before moving on to the next phase.  Report writers and developers are not necessarily graphic designers.  You can save your staff or vendor a lot of grief by having your color schemes selected and logos produced by professional designers.  In particular, your designer should produce images of the proper size, format and quality required.

5. Build & Test

We minimize formatting and style changes by beginning work in this phase only when a client has committed to a design specification.  Ideally, we wouldn’t make any changes to design once we have begun the build phase, but some customers change their minds between the design and build phases.  We also occasionally run into difficulties with pieces of the implementation process or come up with a better way to design something in the process of its implementation.

No matter how a report is created, the formatting of the first in a series of client reports to match the design layout is the most difficult.  However, once the initial report is completed, the rest of the reports come together much faster. The bulk of the time on your project will likely be spent on implementation.  This time depends on the number and complexity of reports you plan to produce, and the resources available.  It will likely take days, if not weeks.

In initial testing, we run reports for a small control group that represents the client’s various types of accounts. We also do a number of report runs for the full group of reports that will be run at quarter end. We find that doing full-scale tests is the best way to identify exceptions and deal with them proactively. As we find issues with individual reports, we apply fixes to address them, and must test again to validate the fixes.

In the example below, our client did a great job illustrating exactly what they wanted and let us focus on producing the report.

Account Summary Mock-up

The final report that we created based on our client’s mock-up shown above follows:

To see other samples of the final reports click here.

It took roughly 30 days to produce the final versions of our customer’s four account summary reports.  The customer was very engaged in the process and highly motivated, facilitating progress by providing quick responses to our questions.   Similar projects take 4-6 weeks, but could take significantly less time if you are working from established reports that just need modification.  You may remember that our initial draft took a day; we spent the rest of the time working on the more difficult aspects of the project.  Our summary reports brought data that needed verification into focus.  Based on exception testing and other issues, we made our final modifications to the reports’ appearance.

The project referenced in this article included new custom reports, quarterly packaging automation, integration of new custom reports, and conversion of legacy packaging to our new report packaging environment.  The project’s total cost was about 20k, nearly double what it would have been with our preexisting custom reports, but the only recurring cost is maintenance.  Many of today’s alternatives feature a sizable implementation cost and significant monthly fees.

Improving your client reporting is one of the most important things you can do to communicate more effectively.  Your next generation of quarterly statements should make it clear to your clients that you are investing in a process that directly benefits them.  If you do it right, you are bound to receive positive feedback from your clients once they have your new reports in hand.

There is no time like the present to start working on your next generation of client reports.

About the Author:
Kevin Shea is President of InfoSystems Integrated, Inc. (ISI); ISI provides a wide variety of outsourced IT solutions to investment advisors nationwide. For details, please visit isitc.com or contact Kevin Shea via phone at 617-720-3400 x202 or e-mail at kshea@isitc.com.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Comment

Take APX and Axys Client Reporting to the Next Level

Filed under: Custom Reporting — Leave a comment
February 14, 2011

With January 2011 behind us, those responsible for generating statements at your firm are likely breathing a long-awaited sigh of relief –  thankful that the painful process of generating year-end reports for clients is behind them.  For many it is time to take a break until the next quarter is upon them, but for those determined to improve their reports and their process, it’s already time to get back to work.

 Changing your firm’s client statements can be a major undertaking, but it doesn’t have to be that way.  There are several different options available to those interested in overhauling the look and feel of quarterly report packages.  These options include: platform changes, outsourcing report production through the purchase of products that produce reports from data feeds and/or data extracts, engaging consultants to create custom reports, buying reports from vendors, or building custom reports yourself.

 The right solution for your firm depends on a number of factors.  Without the specifics it is tough to say what the most effective course of action is.  In my capacity as a consultant to many RIAs, I regularly see and hear about a variety of efforts that have failed to get RIAs the better-looking client reports they desire.

I have witnessed more than a couple of clients attempt to change their platform with the ultimate goal of improving the quality of reports.  This almost never ends well.  There are situations where it does make sense, but in most cases it is much more efficient and less costly to change your reporting than your portfolio management system.

Outsourcing your report production to a firm that specializes in that business can also be a good option, but the question is – do you really need to?  Given the choice of building or buying, what should you do?  When you build a custom report you have an initial sunk cost with little or no maintenance going forward.  When you outsource report production, you typically pay an initial implementation fee and an ongoing service fee that exceeds the ongoing maintenance cost of building reports.

Sometimes the solutions your firm needs are closer than you think.  Axys and APX were designed with clients like you in mind.  In fact, compound reporting exists on both Axys and APX platforms.  Today, compound report creation is still a viable alternative to creating reports using SSRS on APX 3.0 release 2. 

Due to the current limitations of APX’s scripting language related to SSRS, using compound reports may still be the best short-term choice for APX users that wish to automate their systems through the use of APX scripts.  However, APX users sophisticated enough to develop SSRS reports should be able to create stopgap automation to automate APX/SSRS report production.

The ability to combine report objects though compound report macros is adequate for many firms, but the learning curve to create Axys/APX compound report macros that produce the presentation-quality results desired is steep.  What isn’t readily available can usually be produced through utilization of REPLANG/Report Writer Pro/Excel VBA and a combination of chops, grit and perseverance.

Users and consultants experienced with the specifics of Advent’s compound macros know how robust this basic functionality can be and have a good chance of navigating the difficulties involved to produce visually pleasing reports in Axys/APX.

Tech-savvy developers familiar with newer technology like SSRS may experience frustration with what is considered by many to be legacy reporting, but this is a misnomer.  What others term legacy reporting, is actually backward compatibility.  It is not a liability;  it is an asset.  Advent has continued to support both REPLANG and compound reports through a number of iterations of their Axys and APX product lines.  Though it has some limitations, compound reporting is a valuable part of the Axys/APX infrastructure and continues to be an efficient way to quickly combine reports.

For those that would rather not wrestle with the complexities of Axys and APX reporting, our firm has several compound reporting templates available for resale and experience working with SSRS.  Even though the cost to purchase a preexisting custom report is a fraction ( ≈ $1,000) of what it usually costs to create an entirely new custom report ( ≈ $3,000), RIAs typically want new custom reports that are representative of their firm’s distinctive approach to reporting investments to clients.

About the Author:
Kevin Shea is President of InfoSystems Integrated, Inc. (ISI); ISI provides a wide variety of outsourced IT solutions to investment advisors nationwide. For details, please visit isitc.com or contact Kevin Shea via phone at 617-720-3400 x202 or e-mail at kshea@isitc.com.

Tags: , , ,
Comment