Sign In

Thomas Dadmun

Founder & CEO Point Focal

Thomas Dadmun is the Founder and CEO of Point Focal, a company he started in January 2020.1 Point Focal focused on portfolio analytics using AI, NLP, and NLG technologies for active risk management and trade signaling.1 However, the company has recently been wound up.3

Prior to founding Point Focal, Dadmun had an extensive career in finance and technology:

  1. He worked at State Street from 2006 to 2017, holding positions such as Vice President of FX Sales, Trading & Business Management, Vice President of Portfolio Solutions, and Managing Director of Data Strategy.1

  2. Dadmun was a University Lecturer at Northeastern University College of Professional Studies from January 2018 to December 2020, teaching courses in the Masters of Analytics program.1

  3. Earlier in his career, he served as Director of Electronic Trading at Firefly Capital (2003-2005) and Vice President of NASDAQ Trading at Leerink Partners (1998-2002).1

Thomas Dadmun holds a Bachelor's Degree in Finance from the University of Maine.2 He is known for his expertise in data analytics, data strategy, portfolio solutions, electronic trading, and NASDAQ trading.2

Highlights

May 16 · linkedin

The BSTA: Wait, What?* Volume Two: Liquidity Waterfalls, Synthetic Blocks, and Trading Edge IntelligentCross at a Steakhouse with Shrimp in the Dining Room

Panel: Scott Graczyk, IntelligentCross; John Bright, Fidelity Investments; Jatin Suryawanshi, Jefferies

2024 is a reflection of 1986. Trade strategists are focused on finding and sourcing liquidity without market impact. The game changes, but the issues remain. Client service revolves around 3 categories: 1) systematic implementation and measurement calibrations, 2) finding liquidity across SDPs, ATSs, and Exchanges, and 3) the culture of surrounding teams with capabilities that encourage exploration and innovation.

Teasing out edge in the trading world is art and science, discretion and systematic automation. With 70% of volume being highly competitive, trading edge factors include midpoint executions, mark-outs (price improvements beyond prevailing quoted market prices), IEX D-Peg implications (non-displayed order type designed to minimize adverse selection), the tradeoff between execution speed and quality (slower speeds can avoid HFT), venue differentiation, queue management, and latency arbitrage.

Finding natural liquidity means solving micro market structure challenges to identify like-minded flow, true liquidity where passive and aggressive participants can match, and pockets of accessibility that include retail.

Every ATS has different tiering logic that must be understood: accessing internal liquidity, prioritizing retail, avoiding predatory behavior, interacting with block venues, managing lit-market imbalances, and the space between trades when nothing is happening.

While interacting with natural flow is important, the behavior of order flow is moving in the other direction. SIZE can come in small prints. Synthetic blocks.

A counter view: mark-outs are meaningless for long duration where there is low correlation between liquidity and price. Fills away (outside internal systems) can be stable and in your favor. Thus, liquidity randomization is desirable because 50% of your market share can come from a venue group with 10% market share.

Quotes and trades are not the same. Venues have many more orders than trades and the market is not evenly balanced for everyone. Popular-unpopular opinion: lit volume is most toxic. Off-exchange efficient price formation is a fallacy driving auction growth - note the PureStream Trading Technologies model of matching outside the market. 30% of Jefferies volume can be off-market. Fragmentation benefits have limits and eventually lead to stronger signals for market makers.

Trade strategy optimization: with experimental freedom, criteria for validating strategy A is better than strategy B must be defined BEFORE testing. Then identify your benchmark, collect data, measure, and make decisions.

  • This is the second of a two-part non-exclusive Boston Securities Traders Association non-investigative series of LinkedIn posts.

Image by Point Focal

Apr 29 · linkedin

The BSTA: Wait, What?* A two part exclusive Boston Securities Traders Association investigative series.

Volume One: T+1 Implications DTCC at the Langham Hotel with Croissants in the Ballroom

The T+1 Panel: Bob Stewart and David Kirby, The Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation (DTCC), Taryn Siglain, State Street, Eddie Doyle Amundi US, Stephen Miley, CFA, CAIA, CIPM, Eventide Asset Management

Seven years after shortening the U.S. equities settlement cycle from three days (T+3) to two days (T+2) we are approaching a further reduction to a single day (T+1) on May 28th. Industry views range from “shock and horror, why so fast” (Trad-Fi) to “pathetic, why so slow” (De-Fi).

Initial level setting clarified three key T+1 requirements: 1) brokers will be required to ensure allocation confirmation occurs on trade date, 2) registered investment managers will be required to keep records of allocations, confirms, and affirms, each with a date / time stamp and 3) DTCC will be required to anonymously report affirmation behavior of Investment Managers to the SEC.

A key workflow change will make affirmations mandatory by 21:00 EST. Current affirmation rates are 90% by T+1 in full and 70% by 21:00 EST. A new ratings regime will begin with brokers rating investment managers on affirmation quality. Initially there will not be consequences for failing to comply. Custodians are expecting higher failure rates due to market disequilibrium.

What does all this settlement jargon mean?

Disequilibrium has an impact. Here, the shorter cycle, or even the uncertainty it creates, may cause lenders to hold back supply. In turn, less liquidity could increase the scope of hard-to-borrow inventory, which drives lender profits. The first-order economic impact may be more profit opportunity for agent lenders. This will come at the expense of hedge funds, the largest borrowers, who will have to pay more for hard-to-borrow inventory.

Concerns were raised about second-order effects, particularly in foreign exchange where critical activity needs to be consummated immediately after the U.S. equities close. Further, inconsistent global settlement cycles may exacerbate the impact of U.S. securities failing to deliver.

The consensus view is there will be an increase in fail-to-deliver securities. But as equity traders know, the consensus is not always right. Maybe FTD doomers have overlooked industry preparation. Or maybe T+1 necessity will be the mother of delivery invention.

A concluding question. If the consensus is right we know who will benefit and who will suffer. The extent of which will be a function of how great the fail rate increases. What solutions will surface to help the sufferers?

Many thanks to the BSTA, DTCC, and the panelists. Stay tuned for Volume Two: Systematic Trading Performance. IntelligentCross at a Steakhouse with Shrimp in the Dining Room.

  • This is not exclusive, or investigative, or a volume. It’s a LinkedIn post of my thoughts on BSTA events.

Related Questions

What inspired Thomas Dadmun to start Point Focal?
How does Point Focal's technology integrate AI, NLP, and NLG?
What challenges did Thomas Dadmun face while building Point Focal?
How has Thomas Dadmun's experience at State Street influenced his work at Point Focal?
What are some key achievements of Thomas Dadmun in his career?
Thomas Dadmun
Thomas Dadmun, photo 1
Thomas Dadmun, photo 2
Add to my network

Location

Greater Boston