Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 29

Platinum Research Sponsors

Gold Research Sponsor


Commodity Technology Advisory LLC
Sugar Land TX and Prague CZ
ComTechAdvisory.com
CTRM Vendor Perceptions
June 2014
RESEARCH ANDREPORT
2014 ETRM / CTRM Vendor Perception Study Commodity Technology Advisory llc
2014 Commodity Technology Advisory, llc 2
2014 ETRM / CTRM Vendor Perception Study Commodity Technology Advisory llc
2014 Commodity Technology Advisory, llc 3
Contents
Why do perceptions matter? ...............................................................................................................................................................4
CTRM Executives Respond to Report Findings ................................................................................................................................... 5
Allegro ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 5
OpenLink .................................................................................................................................................................................. 5
Introduction & Demographics ............................................................................................................................................................ 5
Research Demographics ................................................................................................................................................................6
Market Awareness .............................................................................................................................................................................9
Experience with Vendors ................................................................................................................................................................. 10
Market Leadership Perceptions ....................................................................................................................................................... 11
Overall CTRM/ETRM Market Leader ....................................................................................................................................... 11
Overall Energy Commodities................................................................................................................................................... 11
Electric Power Trading ............................................................................................................................................................ 11
Natural Gas Trading ................................................................................................................................................................ 12
Oil and Oil Products Trading ................................................................................................................................................... 12
Coal Trading............................................................................................................................................................................ 12
Ags and Softs Trading ............................................................................................................................................................. 13
Cotton, Coffee, Cocoa and Sugar Trading ............................................................................................................................... 13
Grains Trading ........................................................................................................................................................................ 13
Edible Oils ............................................................................................................................................................................... 14
Base Metals Trading ................................................................................................................................................................ 14
Precious Metals Trading .......................................................................................................................................................... 14
Metals Recyclables Trading ..................................................................................................................................................... 14
Shipping and Freight Trading .................................................................................................................................................. 15
Cloud Delivery ......................................................................................................................................................................... 15
Overall Technical Architecture ................................................................................................................................................ 15
Summary of Leadership Perception Results ............................................................................................................................ 16
Critical Attributes in ETRM / CTRM Software ................................................................................................................................... 17
Trends and Analysis ......................................................................................................................................................................... 18
Installed Base and Geographic Differences .................................................................................................................................. 18
Market Maturity .......................................................................................................................................................................... 19
Focus on Consultants and Integrators .......................................................................................................................................... 20
Trends ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 23
About Allegro .................................................................................................................................................................................. 25
About OpenLink .............................................................................................................................................................................. 27
About JustCommodity ..................................................................................................................................................................... 28
About Commodity Technology Advisory llc ..................................................................................................................................... 29
2014 ETRM / CTRM Vendor Perception Study Commodity Technology Advisory llc
2014 Commodity Technology Advisory, llc 4
Why do perceptions matter?
This 2014 CTRM Vendor Perception Study has been developed to provide insights into how the users, buying decision
makers, and consultants that make-up the CTRM marketplace perceive the landscape of companies that produce and sell
CTRM/ETRM products.
But, why is this important?
Vendors spend significant sums creating brands and trying to familiarize potential buyers with their products and
capabilities; and via that process, work to establish a positive reputation in the market. Buyers will use their familiarity and
perceptions of those vendors when making decisions as to which vendors and products to include in a purchasing process.
Past research by the authors of this report indicate that buyers will initially use two sources of information when considering
which system to purchase: 1) their personal knowledge and experiences of having previously worked with a vendor or
software package, and 2) the knowledge, experiences and opinions of their peers in their industry.
Potential buyers who limit their search to those companies that they or their peers know are seeing only a relatively small
circle in the scheme of things. Depending on where a prospective buyer sits in the commodities market, there may be as
many as 15 or 20 potential solutions that could meet their needs and many of those will be missed if one simply relies on
friends or acquaintances to name them. Further, this method of identifying potential vendors simply reinforces the standing
of the companies that have been the most successful over time. It doesnt allow room for smaller companies or start-ups to
have an equal footing in the purchase decision process, potentially never getting an at bat as the market just doesnt have
the same history and familiarity with them as they do with the market leaders.
So, its important that buyers become familiar with all the potential vendors if they wish to find a solution that best fits their
needs. Its equally important that vendors help those market participants become familiar with them by investing in
marketing and sales - establishing themselves in the market as a company that should be considered for every opportunity
that falls within the functional and geographic scope of their products.
With that being said, this research is intended to address a number of objectives. First, it does provide those that are
contemplating purchasing a new system, the views of a wider peer group from which to get feedback. Second, it provides
vendors a measure a report card if you will - to determine their success in establishing and/or maintaining market
awareness and perceptions of leadership; or for the smaller and start-up companies, a gauge of how well theyve done in
establishing themselves as players in the game.
Beyond measuring familiarity and perceptions of leadership in specific categories of commodities, we have used this
research opportunity to look at a number of other factors that influence perceptions of leadership and impact user
experiences, including identifying what buyers look for when selecting a system, determining how happy users are with
their installed systems and measuring how many systems those users have installed to manage their business. The answers
to these questions give us a snapshot of the maturity of the software category, how active it is, how well the solutions meet
the requirements and much more.
By virtue of the fact that ComTech Advisorys predecessor organization CommodityPoint had performed a vendor
perception study more or less annually for almost a decade, we also have a historical perspective on how brands have
evolved, risen and fallen in tune to the cycles of commodity markets and issues. It makes for fascinating reading and
analysis.
ComTech Advisory is pleased to present the results of its 2014 vendor perception study. This years study had the largest
response rate of any survey we have done and we thank everyone who participated for their valuable feedback.
Additionally, we want to thank our sponsors and advertisers whose support enables us to make this research available for
free to the market.
2014 ETRM / CTRM Vendor Perception Study Commodity Technology Advisory llc
2014 Commodity Technology Advisory, llc 5
Introduction & Demographics
Commodity Technology Advisorys (ComTech) vendor perception
study was conducted to establish end-user perceptions of the
E/CTRM vendors and products and to determine market
leadership perceptions as well as buying criteria, demand levels,
and brand awareness of the different vendors. The research
comprised of a comprehensive set of questions that end users
and others were invited to answer as an internet survey using the
Survey Monkey
TM
online survey tool. The survey was open for
responses between January 24
th
and March 20
th
, 2014 and
collected some 234 responses.
The survey was promoted in numerous ways in order to attract
bone fide respondents. ComTech used email notification, blog
articles, banner advertising and verbal requests to encourage
responses. ComTech used a number of email lists and personal
contacts to promote the survey. E/CTRM vendors and service
providers promoted the survey of their own accord. ComTech
also used an incentive to gain responses with every fifth valid
respondent being provided with a small Amazon.com gift
certificate as well as the promise of a copy of the final report.
The number of responses gained represents a strong response
but ComTech were rigorous in validating these responses and in
the end, utilized 146 (62%) of them in the results presented
below. Reasons for rejecting responses included:
1. The respondent worked for a vendor. Despite instructions
to discourage vendor employee responses, ComTech
eliminated 12 such responses. These included responses
that were obviously by vendor staff using a vendor email
address and also those that we discerned to be vendor
responses using a private email address,
CTRM Executives Respond
to Report Findings
Allegro
http://youtu.be/FYmGqoMJk7k
Mr. Ray Hood, President and CEO,
Allegro Development
Mr. Hood discusses the results of the 2014
CTRM Vendor Perception Study.
Additionally, he reviews his companys
market position and future plans as Allegro
continues to grow and expand their reach
global across commodities.
OpenLink
http://youtu.be/oFtUaY2yd_4
Mr. Doug Wendler, MD of Americas
Energy, OpenLink
Mr. Wendler discusses the results of the
2014 CTRM Vendor Perception Study. He
also reviews his companys market position
and future plans to continue to grow their
market reach and maintain their leadership
position across multiple categories of
CTRM.
2014 ETRM / CTRM Vendor Perception Study Commodity Technology Advisory llc
2014 Commodity Technology Advisory, llc 6
2. Incomplete responses were also eliminated where the
respondent had answered less than 50% of the questions.
There were 64 incomplete responses eliminated,
3. Duplicate responses were also eliminated. There were two
duplicate responses,
4. Finally, suspicious responses were eliminated. These
included those with fictitious email addresses, names or
company names or those lacking such data. Some 9
suspicious responses were eliminated.
The results presented and discussed in this report were obtained
only using the 146 responses that we deemed to be valid and
usable.
Vendor perceptions are interesting both in terms of how well a
vendor is known in the market and as to how it is viewed by those
that are aware of it and its products. However, vendor
perceptions invariably lag current reality basically representing
what a vendor did or was to the end user in the past. This means
that it is equally important to look at trends in vendor perception
through time. ComTech has done this by utilizing similar
historical data collected and discussed by CommodityPoint over
the last decade or so and this trend data is also discussed below.
As perceptions lag, this report should be viewed as representing
vendor perceptions prior to 2014 and anyone looking for an
ETRM or CTRM software solution is strongly advised to research
the market effectively as things can and do change very rapidly in
this software category.
Research Demographics
We received a total of 234 responses to our survey; however, we
eliminated 87 of those responses that were provided by vendor
personnel, were incomplete, or were otherwise suspicious. After
this reduction, we were left with 146 valid responses (Figure 1).
The respondents locations reflected a very fair distribution of
experienced CTRM software users, with the majority of the
responses coming from North America (53%), followed by Europe
(39%), and Asia-Pacific (7%). We also received one response each
from South America and the Middle East.
The largest industry group represented in our research was the
Utility/Generator group (39%), followed by consultants/System
Integrators (20%) and Merchants/Traders/Brokers (18%). The
7%
39%
0%
53%
1%
Figure 1: Respondent Locations
Asia-Pacific Europe Middle East NAM SAM
2014 ETRM / CTRM Vendor Perception Study Commodity Technology Advisory llc
2014 Commodity Technology Advisory, llc 7
remaining company segments comprised less than 10% each.
(Figure 2).
It should be noted, however, that many of the respondents did
indicate that their company spanned multiple industry classes
and that many of the companies identified as traders and refiners
could also be representative of the oil and gas
exploration/production markets. That being said, based upon
ComTech research, it does appear that the oil and gas companies
are under-represented in our data.
Note: Responses from Consultants/Systems Integrators were not
solicited nor considered for inclusion in questions relating to
software systems in current use, commodities traded, or
satisfaction with current software solution in use.
When looking at the commodities traded by our respondents
(Figure 3), it is somewhat surprising at first glance to see the most
cited traded commodity is emission credits; however, considering
the single largest respondent group to our survey is the
Utility/Generator segment, it should not be all that surprising,
particularly given that more than 90% of those are located in
Europe and North America, region with established emissions
programs. In addition to emissions, we do see a good distribution
of commodity types traded by our respondent group, with all
commodities represented in almost all geographic regions.
When asked to identify the primary commodities traded, we do
see what would be a more normal distribution - one that is more
reflective of the current markets and installed base for CTRM
solutions. Energy was clearly the most commonly traded single
commodity class. A number of North American respondents
indicated they traded all the commodity classes in question, with
none being referred to as a primary commodity (Figure 4).
Interestingly, when comparing the primary commodities traded
by our respondent group, the results do correlate very well with
estimated market share of the commodity classes noted in
Commodity Technology Advisorys 2013 CTRM Market Sizing
Report (Figure 5). The respondents were asked to identify which
system they were currently using (Figure 6). Allegro was most
commonly cited system currently in use with our respondent
group, with 19% reporting its use. SunGard users accounted for
about 8%, OpenLink about 6%, and Triple Point accounted for
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Utility/Generator
Consultant/Systems
Merchant/Trader/Broker
Chemical/Petrochemical/R
Agricultural
Industrial Commodity
Hedge Fund/Investment
Mining/Metal Producer
Oil&Gas Exploration
Figure 2: Respondent Company Types
0% 5% 10% 15% 20%
Energy
Ags/Softs
Precious Metals
Base Metals
Freight Rates
Emission Credits
All Commodities
Figure 3: Types of Commodities Traded
SAM NAM Middle East Europe Asia-Pacific
0% 20% 40% 60%
Energy
Ags/Softs
Precious Metals
Base Metals
Freight Rates
Emission Credits
All Commodities
Figure 4: Primary Commodities Traded
Asia-Pacific Europe Middle East NAM SAM
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
Energy
Precious Metals
Other Metals and Ores
Ags/Softs
Other (Freight, Emissions,
Figure 5: 2013 Estimated CTRM Market
by Commodity Class
Source: 2013CTRM Market Size Report, Commodity
Technology Advisory
2014 ETRM / CTRM Vendor Perception Study Commodity Technology Advisory llc
2014 Commodity Technology Advisory, llc 8
about 5% of the respondents. The responses associated with the
various vendors are not necessarily reflective of the installed base
of those vendors. In these results, Allegro would appear to be
over-represented in terms of response rates within their client
base, with others, such as OpenLink and Triple Point, being
under-represented.
16% of the respondents indicated they were using Excel
spreadsheets for some or all of their ETRM / CTRM requirements.
A further 11% indicate that they are using some form of in-house
developed system. 8% of the respondents, companies who may
trade commodities as a non-core part of their wider businesses
are not utilizing any type of dedicated ETRM/CTRM solution.
When asked how satisfied they were with their current
solution(s), Figure 7, almost 90% of the respondents indicated
some level of
satisfaction, with
19% saying they
were very satisfied,
50% satisfied and
19% somewhat
satisfied. Only 9%
indicated they were
dissatisfied with
their current
product(s).
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
SAP
Utilisoft
VuePoint
Navita
Pricehub
Vedaris
eOpt
Siemens
Lacima
Ascend Analytics
Calvus Solutions
PCI
Amphora
ComFin
Trayport Contigo
IRM
Ventyx
Abacus
SolArc
Zainet
OATI
DBC Smartsoft
Brady
Generation 10
Triple Point
OpenLink
None
SunGard
In House
Excel
Allegro
Figure 6: Current System(s) in Use
Asia-Pacific Europe Middle East NAM SAM
50%
19%
19%
9%
2%
1%
Figure 7: How satisfied are you with your
current solution?
Satisfied Somewhat Satisfied
Very Satisfied Dissatisfied
No response Don't Know
2014 ETRM / CTRM Vendor Perception Study Commodity Technology Advisory llc
2014 Commodity Technology Advisory, llc 9
Market Awareness
We asked our respondents to identify all the vendors of CTRM
software of which they were aware (Figure 8). Both Allegro and
OpenLink were identified most often, with about 63% of the
respondents naming the two companies. SunGard and Triple
Point were also commonly cited, each being named by more than
50% of the respondents. Below those four, the recognition of
CTRM vendors drops off dramatically, with no other vendors
being named by more than 20% of the group, and only Brady
(19%), Murex (16%) and EKA (13%) were cited by more than 10%
of the respondents.
In all, our respondents noted 76 different vendors and/or
products, though it could be argued that several of those which
were cited would not be accurately described as CTRM suppliers.
In calculating this result, we did not combine named products, or
vendors which had been previously acquired by other vendors,
under the vendor of those products, meaning that Solarc or DBC
Smartsoft were not combined with OpenLink.
It should be noted that when asked about their knowledge of the
current market for ETRM or CTRM products (Figure 9), most of
our respondents noted that they rarely follow the market, with
more than a third saying they only research current vendors or
offerings when they are seeking to buy a new solution. This lack
of ongoing examination of the market would explain the inclusion
of vendors that have either been acquired by others (Solarc) or
others that have left the market for other reasons (Sakonnet).
The lack of regular or constant examination would also point to
the market lagging in their awareness of companies that have
rapidly grown in the last several years, such as Aspect, Brady or
EKA. In fact, the survey shows that brand awareness in this
market consistently lags both reality and vendor marketing
efforts.
The results also indicated that Consultants and System
Integrators, unsurprisingly, follow the CTRM market much more
avidly than the end users.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
ComFin
JustCommodity
Delta
Sakonnet
Woodlands
Quorum
Entero
DBC Smartsoft
iRisk
Agiboo
Trayport
SAS
Enuit
TradePaq
Navita
Lacima
Pioneer
Abacus
Generation 10
SAP
None
Aspect Enterprise
Ventyx
SolArc
OATI
Amphora
Contigo
EKA
Murex
Brady
Triple Point
SunGard
OpenLink
Allegro
Figure 8: Known Vendors - Total
0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
Only research when
buying
Occasionally
Avidly
No Answer
Dont follow
Figure 9: How closely do you follow the
E/ CTRM Market?
2014 ETRM / CTRM Vendor Perception Study Commodity Technology Advisory llc
2014 Commodity Technology Advisory, llc 10
Experience with Vendors
When asked what CTRM vendor or products our respondents had
previously used, Allegro (43%) was most noted, with OpenLink
Endur, Triple Point and SunGard also being commonly
mentioned. Beyond those
vendors cited in Figure 10,
an additional 38 other
vendors were also noted,
each with only one or two
citations each.
When asked which one
system of those they had
used, they were most
satisfied with (Figure 11),
Allegro was cited by 48 of
the respondents, followed
by OpenLink (20) and
SunGard (11). In all 34
vendors were noted by the
group, with 21 of those
being cited only once
(Figure 11).
0% 10% 20% 30%
IRM iOPT
Sakonnet Xenon
Murex
SunGard Altra
DBC Smartsoft
EKA
Vedaris
Contigo EnTrader
Generation 10
Navita
Amphora
None
Nucleus
OATI
Brady
Zainet
OpenLink Right Angle
SunGard
Triple Point
OpenLink Endur
Allegro
Figure 10: Which vendors/products
have you utilized previously?
Asia-Pacific Europe Middle East
NAM SAM
0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
Navita
Zainet
OATI
DBC Smartsoft
ComFin
Triple Point
Brady
Contigo
Generation 10
SolArc
SunGard
OpenLink
Allegro
Figure 11: Of the products you've
utilized previously, which one were
you most satisfied with?
Asia-Pacific Europe Middle East
NAM SAM
2014 ETRM / CTRM Vendor Perception Study Commodity Technology Advisory llc
2014 Commodity Technology Advisory, llc 11
Market Leadership Perceptions
Overall CTRM/ETRM Market Leader
When asked who they considered to be the leader in the
ETRM/CTRM markets, 27% of the survey respondents indicated
they didnt know who the leader would be. Of the vendors
named, 24% indicated OpenLinks Endur product as the leader in
the market, followed by Allegro with 18%. In Europe, OpenLinks
Endur was noted about twice as often as Allegro; however, in
North America, the two companies/products were noted equally
as market leaders (Figure 12).
Beyond OpenLink and Allegro, 11% of the respondents felt there
was no leader. Triple Point was noted by 5% and SunGard was
noted by 4%. OpenLinks DBC Smartsoft product was most
noted by Asia-Pacific respondents as the market leader.
Overall Energy Commodities
When asked to name a leader in the energy commodities space
(regardless of the type of energy), 24% indicated OpenLink was
the leader, with 18% noting Allegro. Those that felt there was no
singular leader comprised 9%, followed by SunGard with 6% and
Triple Point with 4% (Figure 13).
Much like the market leader in ETRM/CTRM, OpenLink was
named more often in Europe and equally so to Allegro in North
America.
Electric Power Trading
When asked to name a leader in managing electric power trading,
OpenLink was again the vendor named most often, and again
was followed by Allegro. However, though OpenLink was clearly
considered to be the leader in Europe, Allegro was considered the
leader in the North American market. Though 12% felt there was
no leader in the power trading space, SunGard was noted by 7%
of the respondents.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
Brady
SAP
OATI
Calvus
SolArc
Trayport Contigo
Triple Point
SunGard
None
Allegro
OpenLink
Don't Know
Figure 13: Leader - Overall Energy
Commodities
Asia-Pacific Europe Middle East
NAM SAM
0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
SolArc
Calvus
Ventyx
PCI
Brady
Triple Point
Contigo
OATI
SunGard
None
Allegro
OpenLink
Don't Know
Figure 14: Leader - Electric Power
Trading
Asia-Pacific Europe Middle East
NAM SAM
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%
OpenLink Right Angle
Brady
VuePoint
Amphora
Agris
OATI
SAP
Generation 10
Calvus Solutions
Affinity
ComFin Bulldog
EKA
DBC Smartsoft
SunGard
Triple Point
None
Allegro
OpenLink Endur
Don't Know
Figure 12: Considered to be Market
Leader in ETRM/CTRM
Asia-Pacific Europe Middle East
NAM SAM
2014 ETRM / CTRM Vendor Perception Study Commodity Technology Advisory llc
2014 Commodity Technology Advisory, llc 12
Natural Gas Trading
In the natural gas space, Allegro edged out OpenLink as the
leader in the category, driven particularly by their strength in the
North American market. Others noted included SunGard with
5%, Triple Point with 3% and Trayport Contigo with 2%. All other
vendors listed in Figure 15 were noted only once.
Oil and Oil Products Trading
In Oil and Oil Products Trading, OpenLink (18%) was again the
most noted vendors, again followed by Allegro (9%). Triple
Point, though trailing those that felt there was no leader in the
space, received notice by 7% of the respondents and was
followed by Solarc (which was acquired by OpenLink more than 2
years ago) with 5%. Amphora, with 3% was the only other vendor
to receive more than a single response.
Coal Trading
Coal trading is not a large market for ETRM/CTRM vendors, and
the responses we received bear that out. The two companies
most often cited, Allegro and OpenLink, each were noted by less
than 10% of our respondents, with the combination of Dont
Know and None making up about 70% of the total responses.
SunGard (5%), Triple Point (4%), Solarc (2%) and Trayport
Contigo (2%) were the only other companies to be noted more
than once by our respondents.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
ComFin
SunGard
Calvus
Amphora
SolArc
Triple Point
None
Allegro
OpenLink
Don't Know
Figure 16: Leader - Oil and Oil Products
Trading
Asia-Pacific Europe Middle East
NAM SAM
0% 20% 40% 60%
ICE
Amphora
Calvus
EKA
Trayport Contigo
SolArc
Triple Point
SunGard
OpenLink
Allegro
None
Don't Know
Figure 17: Leader - Coal Trading
Asia-Pacific Europe Middle East
NAM SAM
0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
Murex
Lacima
SolArc
SAP
EKA
Calvus
Trayport Contigo
Triple Point
SunGard
None
OpenLink
Allegro
Don't Know
Figure 15: Leader - Natural Gas
Trading
Asia-Pacific Europe Middle East
NAM SAM
2014 ETRM / CTRM Vendor Perception Study Commodity Technology Advisory llc
2014 Commodity Technology Advisory, llc 13
Ags and Softs Trading
Very few of our respondents could identify a leader in ags and
softs trading, with 65% indicating they didnt know and another
10% saying they felt there was no leader in this category. Of the
companies named as leaders, OpenLink was cited most often
(8%), followed by EKA (6%) and Allegro (3%). The other named
leaders were cited only a single time each by the respondents.
Cotton, Coffee, Cocoa and Sugar Trading
The category of leader for cotton, coffee, cocoa and sugar trading
was much like ags and softs trading, with 80% of the respondents
saying they didnt know who the leader would be and another 8%
saying there was no leader in this category. EKA was the most
cited vendor, though only with 4%, followed by Triple Point with
3% and OpenLink with 2%. The others, Solarc, Allegro, G10 and
Calvus Solutions were cited only a single time each.
Grains Trading
Much like the other Ag categories, our respondent group had
difficulty identifying a leader, with more than 80% saying they
either didnt know or felt there was none. Of the named vendors,
Triple Point and EKA were tied, each being noted by 5% of the
respondents, followed by OpenLink (4%) and Allegro (2%). The
others, iRely, Calvus Solutions and Agris were each noted one
time.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Calvus
G10
Allegro
SolArc
OpenLink
Triple Point
EKA
None
Don't Know
Figure 19: Leader - Cotton, Coffee,
Cocoa and Sugar Trading
Asia-Pacific Europe Middle East
NAM SAM
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
Agris
Calvus
iRely
Allegro
OpenLink
EKA
Triple Point
None
Don't Know
Figure 20: Leader - Grains Trading
Asia-Pacific Europe Middle East
NAM SAM
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
SolArc
Agiboo
Generation 10
iRely
Agris
Allegro
Triple Point
EKA
OpenLink
None
Don't Know
Figure 18: Leader - Ags and Softs
Trading
Asia-Pacific Europe Middle East
NAM SAM
2014 ETRM / CTRM Vendor Perception Study Commodity Technology Advisory llc
2014 Commodity Technology Advisory, llc 14
Edible Oils
The edible oils trading category was again much like the other
ags categories, with few of the respondents able to name a
leader. Of the named companies, OpenLink was noted by 4%,
Triple Point and Eka by 3%, and Allegro by 2%. The others that
named a single time were SunGard, Calvus Solutions, iRely and
JustCommodity.
Base Metals Trading
Much like the agricultural categories, our respondents were not
well acquainted with the metals trading markets. In leadership in
base metals, only Brady (5%), OpenLink (4%) and Triple Point
(3%) received more than a single notice by the respondents.
Precious Metals Trading
In precious metals leadership, OpenLink was most often cited
with 5%, followed by Brady with 3% and Triple Point, Allegro and
Murex, each with 2%. Calvus Solutions and SunGard were cited
by one respondent each.
Metals Recyclables Trading
Recyclable metals trading, though an important and growing
market, is a specialized market and is essentially unknown to
most commodities traders. This lack of awareness is borne out in
our results, with only OpenLink (3%) receiving more than one
notice from our respondents. Allegro, Brady and Calvus
Solutions each received a single mention.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
JustCommodity
iRely
Calvus
SunGard
Allegro
EKA
Triple Point
OpenLink
None
Don't Know
Figure 21: Leader - Edible Oils Trading
Asia-Pacific Europe Middle East
NAM SAM
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
Allegro
Calvus
Amphora
Triple Point
OpenLink
Brady
None
Don't Know
Figure 22: Leader - Base Metals
Trading
Asia-Pacific Europe Middle East
NAM SAM
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
SunGard
Calvus
Murex
Allegro
Triple Point
Brady
OpenLink
None
Don't Know
Figure 23: Leader - Precious Metals
Trading
Asia-Pacific Europe Middle East
NAM SAM
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Calvus
Brady
Allegro
OpenLink
None
Don't Know
Figure 24: Leader - Recyclables Trading
Asia-Pacific Europe Middle East
NAM SAM
2014 ETRM / CTRM Vendor Perception Study Commodity Technology Advisory llc
2014 Commodity Technology Advisory, llc 15
Shipping and Freight Trading
Shipping and freight trading is a market that has been in suffering
to a large degree since the start of the financial crisis and global
economic recession in 2008. As its not been a market of great
activity for some time, it is not surprising that 80% of our
respondents could not identify a leader in the space (Figure 26).
Of those that were cited as leaders, Triple Point was most often
noted (6%), followed by Allegro (5%), OpenLink (3%) and
Amphora (2%). Calvus Solutions, Solarc, Tanscore, Veson, and
Shipnet were each noted by a single respondent.
Cloud Delivery
Surprisingly, particularly given the growing interest by the
marketplace surrounding cloud delivery of CTRM solutions, very
few of our respondents could name a leader in the cloud delivery
category (Figure 27). Allegro, OpenLink and Aspect were noted
by 3% of our respondents each, followed by Amazing, EKA,
Woodlands, Calvus Solutions, Kiodex and VuePoint.
As a follow-on question to the leader in cloud delivery category,
we did ask our respondents how their CTRM solutions were
currently deployed (Figure 28). 75% of the group indicated their
products were traditionally installed, which would correspond to
the lack of knowledge of cloud solution vendors noted above.
That being said, 13% of our group did indicate they were utilizing
some type of cloud deployment, with 8% deployed in a multi-
tenanted cloud model and 5% using a single tenanted model (or
hosted) solution.
Overall Technical Architecture
Though the category of leader in overall technical architecture
(Figure 28) had a relatively high number of dont know
responses (59%), Allegro did emerge as the clear leader amongst
the named vendors with 17% of the respondents noting the
company as the overall technical architecture leader. OpenLink
was noted by 6% and EKA by 2%. The others, including Calvus
Solutions, Solarc, Triple Point, SunGard and Trayport Contigo,
were noted with a single response each.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
Shipnet
Veson
Transcore
Solarc
Calvus
Amphora
OpenLink
Allegro
Triple Point
None
Don't Know
Figure 25: Leader - Shipping and
Freight Trading
Asia-Pacific Europe
Middle East NAM
SAM
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
VuePoint
Kiodex
Calvus
Woodlands
EKA
Amazing
OATI
Aspect
OpenLink
Allegro
None
Don't Know
Figure 26: Leader - Cloud Delivery
Asia-Pacific Europe Middle East NAM SAM
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
Trayport Contigo
SunGard
Triple Point
SolArc
Calvus
EKA
OpenLink
None
Allegro
Don't Know
Figure 28: Leader - Overall Technical
Architecture
Asia-Pacific Europe Middle East NAM SAM
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
Traditional
Leased
Single Tenanted Cloud
Multi-tenanted Cloud
Don't Know
Figure 27: How is your current CTRM
Solution Deployed?
Asia-Pacific Europe Middle East
NAM SAM
2014 ETRM / CTRM Vendor Perception Study Commodity Technology Advisory llc
2014 Commodity Technology Advisory, llc 16
Summary of Leadership Perception Results
Following is a summary of the results of perceived market leadership:
Leadership Category Leader Runner Up Third
Overall ETRM/CTRM OpenLink Allegro Triple Point
Energy OpenLink Allegro SunGard
Electric Power OpenLink Allegro SunGard
Natural Gas Allegro OpenLink SunGard
Oil and Oil Products OpenLink Allegro Triple Point
Coal Allegro/OpenLink - SunGard
Ags and Softs OpenLink EKA Triple Point
Cotton, Sugar, Cocoa etc. EKA Triple Point -
Grains Triple Point EKA OpenLink
Edible Oils OpenLink Triple Point/EKA -
Base Metals Brady OpenLink Triple Point
Precious Metals OpenLink Brady Triple Point
Recyclables OpenLink - -
Shipping Triple Point Allegro OpenLink
Cloud Delivery Allegro/Aspect Enterprise/OpenLink - -
2014 ETRM / CTRM Vendor Perception Study Commodity Technology Advisory llc
2014 Commodity Technology Advisory, llc 17
Critical Attributes in ETRM / CTRM
Software
ComTech took advantage of this research effort to
examine the attributes that buyers and users of
CTRM software view as most critical to their
business.
We asked our respondents to rank numerous
attributes/capabilities/functions of CTRM products
by their view of the criticality of each, ranging from
Critical to Unimportant. The descriptions of
each attribute and its relative position in terms of
criticality are shown in Figure 29.
According to the survey respondents, the top three
critical capabilities they look for in a CTRM solution
are support for physical commodities, quality
support supplied by the vendor and support for
financial commodities. These results are not
necessarily surprising and are generally reflective
of the capabilities of the largest vendors in the
space those that service firms that trade and/or
otherwise manage both physical and financial
commodities, and whose ability to manage their
business is dependent upon a quality product that
is backed by quality support from their vendor.
Other critical or highly ranked attributes include
quality implementation services provided by the
software vendor, noted by 87% of the respondents
as being at least important, if not critical; support
for multiple commodities (80% noted as at least
important); and support for comprehensive
market/price risk management (81%).
Interestingly, price was noted highly, with a total
score of 86% combined critical and important,
but had a lower critical ranking than 8 other
functional or vendor attributes; implying that while
the price of the software is important, buyers are
willing to pay more for those systems that best
meet their needs.
While the largest vendors do still dominate the
market place, many of our respondents do indicate
that they would be open to purchasing a system
from a supplier that would not typically fall within
the category of a market leader - with 39% saying
it is less than important that their supplier be
considered a top vendor.
Interestingly, the ability to deploy the solution via
the cloud ranked as the least critical or important
attribute of all those tested, with less than a
quarter noting it as at least important (combined
critical and important), and only 5% saying cloud
was critical to their purchase decision process, and
another 18% indicating cloud deployment was
important. This result does reinforce ComTechs
outlook for sales of cloud based solutions in the
near term, with our current estimate being that
approximately one in ten systems sold in the next
several years will be cloud based; with that ratio
increasing over time.
0% 50% 100%
Ability to deploy in the cloud
Comprehensive treasury support
Modern Modular Architecture
Supplied by a top vendor
Graphical and drill-down
Quality support available by
Ability to personalize user
Comprehensive credit risk
Available at a competitive price
Multi Currency
Physical logisitics
Comprehensive market/price risk
Quality Implementation Service
Multi Commodity Capable
Financial Support
Quality support by vendor
Physical Support
Figure 29: CTRM Attributes
Critical Important Nice to Have
Not Essential Unimportant
Quality Implementation
Services Provided byVendor
Vendor
Ability to Personalize User
Interface
QualitySupport Available
from Consultants
Graphical and drill-down
analytics and reporting
2014 ETRM / CTRM Vendor Perception Study Commodity Technology Advisory llc
2014 Commodity Technology Advisory, llc 18
Trends and Analysis
Installed Base and Geographic Differences
When looking at brand recognition, it could be
assumed that the respondents know, and are most
familiar with, their own solution providers. In order
to eliminate a potential bias associated with this
familiarity, the indicated vendor installed bases
can be removed to provide an adjusted view of
brand recognition.
When the installed base is removed from the
unprompted brand recognition results, the overall
effect is not hugely significant except for a small
number of relatively minor changes (Figure 30).
Any vendor that had respondents from its installed
base in the sample will show a decline in
unprompted brand recognition depending on the
size of that installed base. One impact is that as a
result of Allegro having a larger number of clients
responding to the survey than its competitors, its
unprompted brand recognition falls from equal
first with OpenLink to fourth behind OpenLink,
Triple Point and SunGard respectively. Despite
this, the top 10 vendors remain the same either
way the data is reviewed. In Allegros case, it is the
relative size of its North American installed base in
our sample that has the most impact.
It is also interesting to look at geographic
recognition differences between the vendors
recognition levels. In North America (Figure 31),
the top 4 vendors are Allegro, OpenLink, SunGard
and Triple Point and in Europe (Figure 32), the
same 4 vendors are again top except that
OpenLink and Allegro have switched places.
Even accounting for installed base adjustments,
the same four vendors dominate in both regions
with just slight changes in pecking order. Below
the top 4 however, we observe regionally
dominant vendors. In North America, OATI, EKA,
Amphora and Ventyx are the next four best well-
known vendors whereas in Europe, it is Brady,
Murex, Trayport Contigo and EKA. Below these
vendors are smaller vendors such as Pioneer and
Abacus in North America and Agiboo and
TradePaq in Europe.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
OATI
Amphora
Trayport Contigo
EKA
Murex
Brady
Triple Point
SunGard
Allegro
OpenLink
Figure 30: Unprompted Brand Recognition - Total
Adjusted for Installed Base
Less Installed Base Unprompted
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
Woodlands
Quorum
Entero
SAS
Lacima
Aspect Enterprise
Enuit
Pioneer
Abacus
SAP
Murex
SolArc
Ventyx
Amphora
EKA
OATI
Triple Point
SunGard
OLF
Allegro
Figure 31: Unprompted Brand Recognition
- North America
Adjusted for Installed Base
Less Installed Base Unprompted
2014 ETRM / CTRM Vendor Perception Study Commodity Technology Advisory llc
2014 Commodity Technology Advisory, llc 19
The top four vendors are all well established
brands with global reach and these are also the top
4 vendors on an annual revenues basis. Below
them are the larger regional vendors that are
challenging the top 4 (e.g. Brady and EKA),
formerly well-known brands that no longer
independently exist as they have gone out of
business or have been acquired (e.g. SolArc and
Navita), vendors which seem to be fading in recent
years (e.g. Murex and Ventyx) in the commodities
trading software category, and then smaller
regional vendors that are well known in smaller
geographic markets or commodity verticals (e.g.
Trayport Contigo, Agiboo, OATI, Generation 10,
Delta).
Finally, in neither North America nor Europe is any
vendor absolutely dominant in terms of brand
recognition. The highest ranked vendor in both
markets is known by less than 7 out of 10
respondents in North America, the most mature
geography and by even fewer in the marginally
less mature European market. All is still to play for.
Market Maturity
One way of assessing market maturity is to look at
the virgin or replacement market ratios. The virgin
component of a market is that that utilizes
something other than a commercially available
software solution and the replacement market is
that which uses only commercially available
solutions. In the data collected by the 2014 survey,
the virgin component of the market is Europe and
North America is almost identical at 34.7% and
34.1% respectively and at 34.5% overall across all
of the data. Effectively then about 1/3
rd
of the
market is virgin and 2/3rds is replacement overall.
Plainly, this will vary significantly by commodity
but there is insufficient data to assess for specific
commodities.
The maturation of the CTRM market is further
indicated by looking at the ratios of those who
named a vendor solution as their market leader
versus those respondents that didnt know or
didnt think that there was an overall market
leader.
In this instance, 45% of European respondents and
35% of North American respondents did not or
could not name a vendor as overall market leader.
37% of all respondents could not name an overall
market leader. Essentially, only 1/3
rd
of
respondents could not identify a vendor as their
choice of overall market leader.
Another indicator of overall market maturity is the
relative percentage of respondents who can name
a vendor in each of the market leadership
categories. Of course, the nature of the
respondent impacts on this too, as an agricultural
trader is more likely to be able to name a solution
vendor for grains trading than an oil trading
respondents for example. Nonetheless, the more
mature the software category and industry the
more respondents should be aware of a vendor.
Figure 33 shows the results of this analysis.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
Delta
Amphora
Generation 10
Aspect Enterprise
iRisk
Agiboo
TradePaq
SolArc
Navita
EKA
Trayport Contigo
Murex
Brady
Triple Point
SunGard
Allegro
OpenLink
Figure 32: Unprompted Brand Recognition - Europe
Adjusted for Installed Base
Less Installed Base Unprompted
2014 ETRM / CTRM Vendor Perception Study Commodity Technology Advisory llc
2014 Commodity Technology Advisory, llc 20
As might be expected, the energy segments are
indicated to be the most mature and metals and
general ags and softs, along with recyclables
appear to be the least mature.
Focus on Consultants and Integrators
Consultants and Integrators are often influential in
selecting software and so their views are also
interesting. In the previous results, the consultants
and integrators are represented in most of the
responses (unless otherwise stated), but what do
the consultants and integrators responses tell us
and how do they compare to the general
responses?
Figure 34 (compare with Figure 8 on page 9) shows
the vendors that the consultants and integrators
indicated that they knew, including geographic
splits as well. In fact, the responses are almost
identical to the broader samples response with
OpenLink and Allegro neck and neck as the most
widely known vendors, and Triple Point and
SunGard rounding out the top four. The next group
is again Brady, EKA, Amphora, Trayport Contigo
and Murex with just a slight change in order.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Recyclables
Cotton/Coffee/Cocoa/Sugar
Precious Metals
Ediable Oils
Delivered in the Cloud
Base Metals
Grains
Shipping and Freight
Ags/Softs
Overall Architecture
Coal
Crude Oil/Products
Electric Power
Natural Gas
Energy Commodities Overall
Figure 33: Segment Relative Maturity
Named Leader Un-named Leader
0 5 10 15 20 25
Aspect
SolArc
Entero
SAP
Pioneer
OATI
Quorum
Abacus
Enuit
Murex
Trayport Contigo
Amphora
EKA
Brady
SunGard
Triple Point
Allegro
OLF
Figure 34: Known Vendors
Consultants and Systems Integrators Only
NAM Eur Asia
2014 ETRM / CTRM Vendor Perception Study Commodity Technology Advisory llc
2014 Commodity Technology Advisory, llc 21
There is little geographic variation except perhaps
for Trayport Contigo which is much better known
by European service companies.
In terms of market leadership perceptions, the
results are also similar (Figure 35). The Consultants
and Integrators favor OpenLink followed closely by
Allegro. Fewer of them proportionately dont
know who the market leader is and another small
proportion doubt that there is a market leader at
all. Other vendors obtained just a single response.
As perhaps might be expected, on average the
consultants and integrators do keep abreast of
developments among the vendors more diligently
than the broader sample, as shown in Figure 36.
In terms of market leadership perceptions across
the range of commodities, the table below
summarizes only the consultants and integrators
views of market leadership. By and large, the
results are the same but there are some subtle
differences outside of the energy commodities.
Category Leader All Respondents Leader Consultants/Sis only
Overall ETRM/CTRM OpenLink OpenLink
Energy OpenLink OpenLink
Electric Power OpenLink OpenLink
Natural Gas Allegro Allegro
Oil and Oil Products OpenLink Allegro
Coal Allegro/OpenLink Allegro
Ags and Softs OpenLink Allegro/Triple Point
Cotton, Sugar, Cocoa etc. EKA EKA
Grains Triple Point EKA
Edible Oils OpenLink Triple Point
Base Metals Brady Brady
Precious Metals OpenLink Triple Point
Recyclables OpenLink Brady/Triple Point
Shipping Triple Point Triple Point
Cloud Delivery Allegro/Aspect Enterprise/OpenLink SunGard Kiodex
0 5 10 15
Triple Point
EKA
SunGard
SAP
Generation 10
Varies
None
Don't know
Allegro
OLF
Figure 35: Overall Leadership
Consultants and Systems Integrators Only
NAM Eur Asia
71%
21%
8%
Figure 36: How closely do you follow the
ETRM/CTRM markets?
Consultants and System Integrators Only
Avidly Occasionally During Systems Selection Only
2014 ETRM / CTRM Vendor Perception Study Commodity Technology Advisory llc
2014 Commodity Technology Advisory, llc 22
When it comes to the features and functions of an
ETRM or CTRM that are important, the general
respondents and the Consultants/SIs generally
agree (Figure 37).
The issues are the same but the order vaguely
different.
However, there are one or two glaring differences
that are interesting. While Consultants and SIs
would rank Supplied by a top vendor very highly,
the general respondents do not. Similarly, the
Consultants and SIs rank modern modular
architecture and graphical and drill-down
analytics and reporting as much more important
than the general respondents. This suggests that
Consultants and SIs are more likely to look at
brand and technical architectures/UIs as buying
criteria where the general user might not
necessarily view that those factors as highly.
While overall, the differences between the general
responses and those of the SIs and consultants are
broadly similar, there are a number of small but
perhaps important differences that might be
useful for buyers to understand.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%100%
Available at a competitive price
Comprehensive treasury support
Physical logisitics
Quality support available by
Ability to deploy in the cloud
Comprehensive credit risk
Ability to personalize user interface
Comprehensive market/price risk
Graphical and drill-down
Modern Modular Architecture
Quality Implementation Service
Supplied by a top vendor
Multi Currency
Quality support by vendor
Physical Support
Financial Support
Multi Commodity Capable
Figure 37: CTRM Attributes
Consultants and Integrators Only
Critical Important Average Low Not Important
Quality Implementation
Services Provided byVendor
Vendor
Graphical and drill-down
analytics and reporting
QualitySupport Available
from Consultants
2014 ETRM / CTRM Vendor Perception Study Commodity Technology Advisory llc
2014 Commodity Technology Advisory, llc 23
Trends
By taking previous data from CommodityPoint
Vendor Perception studies, it is possible to
examine trends over the last several years in terms
of brand awareness and market leadership
perception development. Due to the differing
make-up of the samples both geographically and
by industry segment, there are some discrepancies
that are visible in the overall trends. For example,
since this latest survey is far more broader-based
both geographically and by industry segment than
the earlier CommodityPoint surveys, it would
appear that overall values have dropped. Values
for the top 4 vendors, as shown in Figure 38, have
all declined from the 2011 CommodityPoint
survey. However, that survey was highly energy-
centric and focused on North America and Europe
a more mature subset of the sample obtained by
ComTech.
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
2009 2011 2013
Figure 38: Brand Awareness Over Time
OpenLink Triple Point
Allegro SunGard
SolArc Ventyx/ABB
Navita Murex
Amphora Brady
Trayport Contigo EnCompass
Woodland Solutions SAS
EKA OATI
2014 ETRM / CTRM Vendor Perception Study Commodity Technology Advisory llc
2014 Commodity Technology Advisory, llc 24
It is interesting is to look at the broader trends.
Note that Triple Points brand recognition has
eroded significantly faster than that of OpenLink,
Allegro and SunGard from first to last in the group
of four with the major fall occurring since its
acquisition by ION, with Triple Points market
visibility having declined significantly since the
change of ownership. Additionally, Solarc was
building brand strength, but since its acquisition by
OpenLink, the Solarc brand has understandably
disappeared. On the other hand, OpenLinks brand
strength did not increase as a result of that
acquisition; given that companys relative market
strength, it would be assumed that those that were
aware of Solarc were also previously aware of
OpenLink.
Also showing declines are Ventyx, who, despite
having made numerous acquisitions to enter the
ETRM/CTRM space, has not been visibly active in
the space for the last couple of years. Another
company showing decline is OATI, but this may be
more likely due to the declining relative numbers
of North American Power responses in the samples
through time. Two vendors do show net gains over
the period Brady PLC and EKA. This is likely to be
partly due to the more diverse nature of the
sample; but, more importantly, it is also likely
reflective of their efforts to challenge the top 4
vendors.
Market leadership perception trends are also
interesting (Figure 39), but also must be viewed
cautiously for the same reasons as outlined
previously.
OpenLinks position has declined slightly over time
as the market has matured, with more vendors
continually challenging the company for market
share. Meanwhile, Allegro goes from strength to
strength and is indicated to be the current top
challenger. Triple Points position has eroded
considerably and even possibly collapsed since its
acquisition by ION, while SunGard has seen a
recovery from a few difficult years for the
company. That the gap between the top four
vendors and everyone else may even be increasing
in perceived market leadership terms is shown by
the fall of other vendors, although this may also
owe much to the broader-based sample.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
2008 2009 2011 2013
Figure 39: Leadership Perceptions over Time
OpenLink Triple Point Allegro
SunGard SolArc Other
2014 ETRM / CTRM Vendor Perception Study Commodity Technology Advisory llc
2014 Commodity Technology Advisory, llc 25
About Allegro
Allegro is a leading provider of commodity value chain and risk management (CVCRM) software for power and gas utilities, refiners,
producers, traders and commodity consumers. With more than 30 years of deep industry expertise, Allegro provides real-time
intelligence and decision-making capabilities, from the source of the commodity (ground), through transportation, to the
commodity consumer. Allegros software provides the global intelligence needed to manage physical and financial positions, and to
optimize their assets and portfolios using tools that quantify and mitigate risks. Headquartered in Dallas, Texas, Allegro has offices
in Calgary, Houston, London, Singapore, Sydney and Zurich, along with a global network of partners.
Allegro pioneered the energy trading and risk management (ETRM) industry as the first vendor to offer software for tracking
transactions and mitigating risks in commodity trading markets. The software provides enhanced visibility across trade books,
within a single system of record, allowing companies to leverage the power of real-time decision making. It provides accurate
downstream data to manage commodity acquisition, storage, transportation, optimization and sale. Further, it manages logistics
and the interplay between commodities and demand-side intelligence helping customers better monetize assets.
Solutions
Allegro designs and delivers the industrys leading multi-commodity trading, transaction and risk management software. Allegro
provides agile ETRM software solutions that deliver the fastest time to benefit with the least risk. Our advanced software
architecture and component based approach allow Allegro to rapidly deploy agile solutions to perfectly match customer priorities
and deliver a high return on investment.
Allegro solutions help companies:
Improve Position Analysis and Valuation - Make better business decisions with accurate and instantaneous views of
positions and valuation
Improve Trader Productivity - Streamline and automate trade processes to reduce the risk and cost of dual-entry and
manual processes to allow maximum attention to profitable opportunities
Manage Market Price Exposure - Mitigate exposure to volatile market prices with effective hedging and real-time updates,
comprehensive metrics, and simulation
Manage Counterparty Exposure - Mitigate exposure with credit and collateral management, and a flexible credit scoring
process
Achieve Hedge Accounting Compliance Manage compliance with accuracy and confidence
Manage Liquidity Exposure - Manage cash and capital adequacy with efficiency
Delivery
Allegro energy trading and risk management software delivers the fastest realization of business objectives and greatest flexibility
with minimal risk and disruption to our customers business. The key to this approach is that every effort centers around a specific
business objective. This focus minimizes the number of specific business processes involved in achieving the objective. It also
minimizes the number of technology changes required and minimizes the number of personnel affected. The result of all these
steps is a faster realization of business objectives for our customers, better cost/benefit alignment, and higher total benefits over
time.
Deployment
Allegro offers software delivery on premise or in the cloud through Amazon Web Services. Customers can manage the
implementation process or elect to have a turnkey project through Allegros Managed Services offering.
Customers
Allegro delivers solutions to power and gas utilities, refiners, producers, traders, and commodity consumers worldwide. Today
more than 3,000 users rely on Allegro to manage trading, risk management, physical logistics, and regulatory compliance across
their portfolios in gas, power, coal, crude, petroleum, emissions, and other commodity types.
2014 ETRM / CTRM Vendor Perception Study Commodity Technology Advisory llc
2014 Commodity Technology Advisory, llc 26
About Allegro (Contd)
Technology
Allegro business components are deployed as independent components in a Service Oriented Architecture under Microsoft .NET
technology. Allegros software architecture has been designed with six key areas of focus:
Standardization - Use of industry standards dramatically reduces the cost and time required for establishing network
infrastructure, developing interfaces, support personnel, and systems administration.
Usability - Ease of learning and ease of use are highly correlated to the proficiency of users. Highly proficient users will use
the software more productively, generating a significant increase in business benefits. Allegro adheres to Microsoft
Windows conventions for ease of learning and ease of use.
Reliability - When users trust the software to be available when needed and to provide consistent and accurate results, it
reduces reconciliation processes, support costs, and distractions from operational business processes.
Connectivity - Sharing data between systems eliminates the costs of redundant data capture, improves the accuracy of
information, and greatly accelerates the execution of critical business processes.
Adaptability - Software must be as dynamic as the business it serves. Adaptability to change creates the innovation and
continuous process improvement that organizations require. Allegro Software Extension technology allows Allegro 8 to be
adapted to your unique and new business processes.
Scalability - Rapid response to user requests facilitates multiple iterations and better decision making. As transactional
volumes grow and become increasingly complex, rapid response becomes even more important. Allegro Grid technology
is a key enabler of scalability and performance.
Foundation Methodology
The implementation of trading and risk management systems is inherently complex, and for more than two decades firms have
struggled with the difficulties. Today, the situation is dramatically different with the introduction of Allegros Foundation
Implementation Methodology. The Foundation approach relies on the most rigorous scope definition process in the industry to
deliver highly predictable project execution, and has an impressive string of successes. The methodology includes the systematic
configuration of Allegro 8 to meet each customers unique business or integration needs.
Support
Allegro provides a comprehensive customer support system to ensure customer success. Allegros support options range from
access during business hours, twenty-four hour support, or on-site support. Each customer chooses the level of support that meets
their unique needs. Highly trained, experienced technical support staff is available to respond quickly to ensure customers are
getting the most value from their Allegro solution.
Employees & Location
The Company employs over 250 professionals in North America, Europe, Asia and Australia. Allegro has a talented team of
seasoned industry experts with knowledge spanning the global energy and commodity markets. To ensure employees are current
with industry and technology trends, Allegro invests significantly in training, education, and research. Headquartered in Dallas,
Texas, Allegro has offices in Calgary, Houston, London, Singapore, Sydney and Zurich.
Partners
Allegro collaborates with a broad network of partners to provide leading solutions and services to address each customers unique
business needs. Our partners are classified into four main categories: Consulting Partners, Data Partners, Software Partners and
Exchange Partners. These partners provide the consulting and implementation services, connectivity, and integration that support
greater operational efficiency and competitive advantage of our customers.
Allegro U
A well trained user community is essential to maximize the business benefits that our customers can realize with Allegro 8.
Consequently, Allegro has made significant investments to develop Allegro U, which today offers more than 80 technical courses
across 8 industry and business tracks. Courses are offered both on line and on site. This education is also used extensively by Allegro
staff and our partners. Allegros commitment to education is unmatched in our industry.
To learn more visit: www.allegrodev.com.
2014 ETRM / CTRM Vendor Perception Study Commodity Technology Advisory llc
2014 Commodity Technology Advisory, llc 27
About OpenLink
The global leader in Transaction Lifecycle Management (TLM) software
For two decades, OpenLink has provided leading-edge technology solutions to an increasingly diverse client base. Building on our
pioneering development of cross-asset trading and risk management products for energy and financial services companies, we now
offer a suite of solutions designed to meet the specific needs of clients within three broad categories:
Financial Services
A barrage of regulatory initiatives is transforming the landscape in commodities and derivatives trading. New OTC
regulations will demand changes to the way financial institutions clear and report trades, and manage collateral. At the
same time, unprecedented pressure on operating costs is driving a renewed focus on costs and efficiency.
Banks, asset managers and other financial services institutions use OpenLink for trading, risk management and operations
processing, enabling them to better address the demands of all stakeholders.
Commodities
Globalization of operations and a proliferation of contract types mean processors and manufacturers face increased
complexity in managing inventory and forward commitment of commodities. Theres more risk of supplier default and
price volatility continues. At the same time, unprecedented pressure on operating costs is driving a renewed focus on costs
and efficiency.
For major energy and hydrocarbon consumers, rising fuel and feedstock costs, continued volatility, and thinning margins
mean companies face increased complexity in forecasting consumption, negotiating the best contracts and managing
price risk. OpenLink products provide these companies with the operational insights necessary to address risks and
optimize production.
Energy
OpenLink provides complete trade and risk management solutions for energy and power companies in all areas of the
supply chain, helping our customers effectively manage natural gas, power, coal, crude & refined products and NGLS.
Energy trading companies, utilities, generators, producers and processors around the globe rely on OpenLink solutions to
help minimize risks and maximize profitability in an uncertain and increasingly complex energy market place.
OpenLink provides these companies complete solutions for planning, procuring, processing, managing, moving and trading
commodities and energy, right along the workflow from trade capture to accounting, risk, reporting and compliance.
With hundreds of established clients, OpenLink technologies are the preferred solution among leading energy and commodity
companies, financial services firms, multinational corporations, public utilities, hedge funds and central banks.
Maybe your need is highly-focused on trading or derivatives, or optimization of physical assets, or logistics. Perhaps you are
seeking a Treasury Management System, or want to benefit from truly integrated firm-wide risk management. Or, your goal could
be to move your organization toward total margin and value chain management.
Whatever your particular objective, OpenLink provides a suite of integrated, configurable and extensible solutions that can help
organizations improve efficiency, make better use of capital and generate greater risk awareness around business decision making.
Technology is only part of the story
At OpenLink, we recognize that technological innovation and sophistication are only the beginning. Our software engineers and
business experts are committed to supporting our clients completely. This relationship enables us to constantly refine and adapt
our solutions as markets change and business needs evolve.
Our ability to understand clients and their businesses means that implementation - including full integration with internal systems -
can be achieved with unrivalled speed and rigor. What's more, training can be tailored to ensure you get the most out of your
investment in technology.
To find out more about OpenLink and our solutions, please visit www.olf.com
2014 ETRM / CTRM Vendor Perception Study Commodity Technology Advisory llc
2014 Commodity Technology Advisory, llc 28
About JustCommodity
JustCommodity is a leading software solutions provider catering to the commodity trading industry, particularly for the trading of
Soft Commodities. Our solution, ContraXcentral, is a web-based contract management and execution software suite specially
designed to support the needs of commodity trading houses. The proprietary solution provides the framework for commodity
trading companies to manage their trades, hedging, and risk management requirements.
Incorporated since 2002, JustCommodity has developed deep domain knowledge in the physical commodity markets, providing
industry-focused solutions that meet the real-world business challenges of its clients. Embedding industry best practices for
trading, logistics, and risk management into its product, ContraXcentral; coupled with dynamic real-time reporting tools, has
yielded one of the most powerful Commodity Trading & Risk Management solutions in the industry.
JustCommoditys CxC

used a robust architecture with a very thin, fast and efficient data transaction to handle multiple
commodities requirement ranging from physical information to financial settlement. The design of the core platform is to allow
drill-down information up to the source level to provide a flexible extraction for presentation layer to display its data efficiently.
Scalability of integration with various external sources had been assigned throughout multiple layered to ensure maximum
efficiency during data input/output.
The software does not only benefit traders but senior management as well by providing a birds eye view of the entire team, on a
real time basis, as it brings- trading, risk management and operations on a single platform.
We take pride in providing a holistic solution which helps streamline back office and logistics process resulting in cost savings and
operational efficiency by seamlessly getting rid of tedious excel sheets.
The aim is to continuously innovate and develop advanced trading and risk management solutions which incorporate industry best
practices and adhere to international compliance standards. These innovations are translated in to value for our clients through our
professional services and consulting arms, allowing them the freedom to trade profitably and with accountability anywhere in the
world.
Some of the features of the system are as follows:
A holistic solution which helps streamline your back office and logistics process resulting in cost savings and operational
efficiency by seamlessly getting rid of tedious Microsoft excel sheets.
Pro-active management of price, credit, currency, material and operational risks through consolidation of positions and real
time reporting
Visibility into Long Short Positions, Mark-To-Market , Trading Performance, Currency Exposures and Hedge Coverage
Increased efficiency of trade lifecycle by seamlessly integrating front, middle and back office processes from trade capture to
fulfilment to settlement all within a single and automated information environment.
Interface with physical and financial exchanges and market data sources like Bloomberg and Reuters for market visibility,
tracking and statutory reporting.
Automate Audit and regulatory reporting while seamlessly integrating with any ERP system.
To find out more about JustCommodity please visit usJustCommodity.com
2014 ETRM / CTRM Vendor Perception Study Commodity Technology Advisory llc
2014 Commodity Technology Advisory, llc 29
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
About Commodity Technology Advisory llc
Commodity Technology Advisory (ComTech) is the leading analyst organization covering the Energy and Commodity Trading and Risk
Management (E/CTRM) technology markets. We provide invaluable insights, backed by primary research and years of experience, into the
issues and trends affecting both the users and providers of the applications and services that are crucial for success in markets constantly
roiled by globalization, regulation and innovation.
Disclosures: At the time of this writing, many of the vendors mentioned in this report did have established commercial relationships with
ComTech, including the research sponsors and advertisers. None of these companies influenced, in any way, the authors analysis or
opinions; and all such analysis and opinions expressed in this report are solely those of the report authors.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
19901 Southwest Freeway
Sugar Land TX 77479
+1 281 207 5412
Prague, Czech Republic
+420 775 718 112
ComTechAdvisory.com
Email: info@comtechadvisory.com