Tag: blockchain

Innovation at a turning point: How tokenisation, AI and new investor expectations are reshaping Asset Management

Posted on by Melanie Lopes

At Reseo, we know that not everyone has the time to listen to every podcast episode in full. That’s why, alongside each conversation in our State of the Art series, we publish a clear, concise written summary — capturing the most important ideas, themes and insights for readers across our industry.

In this edition, we distil the key messages from our conversation with John Allan, Head of Innovation and Operations at the Investment Association, about the forces redefining investment management today — from tokenisation and AI to fund modernisation, ESG data and the expectations of a new generation of investors.

Tokenisation Enters the Mainstream

 Tokenisation has long been discussed as a theoretical possibility, but the past year marked a decisive shift toward real adoption. Several tokenised funds have now launched in the UK, demonstrating that distributed ledger technology (DLT) can serve as the shareholder register for investment funds — a development the Investment Association refers to as investment fund tokenisation.

This momentum will accelerate further as the UK prepares to issue its first digital gilt, lending legitimacy to tokenised assets within capital markets and strengthening the bridge between government issuance and the buy side.

AI: Incremental Gains Today, Transformational Potential Tomorrow

AI now touches nearly every part of the investment value chain. The gains currently visible are incremental — automating tasks, improving accuracy, speeding up processes — but the longer-term potential is far more significant. Firms recognise they must experiment proactively, even as they navigate varying regulatory approaches across the EU, US and UK. The UK’s principles-based stance creates uncertainty but also offers the freedom needed to innovate.

ESG and the Data Challenge

While enthusiasm for ESG remains strong, inconsistent measurement frameworks and data reliability issues continue to challenge the industry. With multiple methodologies and definitions competing in the market, firms still struggle to translate ESG information into decision-useful insights. More standardisation is needed before ESG data can fully support long-term investment strategies.

The Rise of the Digital Investor

A generational shift is also reshaping innovation priorities. Digital-native investors expect immediacy, transparency and intuitive digital experiences, often comparing the ease of buying crypto with the friction of investing in regulated funds. To respond, the Investment Association’s Investment Fund 3.0 initiative aims to modernise fund structures by improving liquidity, accelerating settlement, removing paper and making fund interactions more intuitive.

Where Firms Should Focus Next

As innovation accelerates — from quantum technologies to satellite-derived data — firms must be selective about where they invest their resources. Successful organisations will treat innovation as a strategic pillar rather than an optional add-on, embedding technology awareness across the entire board rather than relying on a single specialist. They will allocate meaningful budget to experimentation, accept that some initiatives will fail, and learn quickly from those that succeed. And they will increasingly look beyond their own walls, partnering with fintechs and external innovators to solve operational challenges faster and more efficiently. In a landscape where the pace of change is accelerating, firms that adopt this mindset will be best positioned to navigate what comes next.

Click here to listen to the full recording regarding this article.

Beyond AML: Innovation Drives Shaping the Future of Investment

Posted on by Melanie Lopes

The festive season is behind us, and we hope the year has started well for you, spent with family and friends.

Over the past few episodes, we have explored a wide range of topics across financial crime, regulation, onboarding, and documentation trust. In our most recent episode, we focused on documentation trust and examined the growing role of AI — discussing both its opportunities and its limitations, and how these may shape the investment industry in the years ahead.

In this new episode, we are joined by John Allan, Head of Innovation and Operations at The Investment Association, and a leading voice in shaping how the UK investment industry adapts to emerging technologies and regulatory change.

 

John is in conversation with Pierre-Yves Rahari, Co-Founder of Reseo, for a deep-dive into innovation in the investment management industry. Together, they explore the major forces currently reshaping the sector — from tokenisation and AI to operational resistance, fund modernisation, and the accelerating pace of change.

The discussion looks beyond theory to address how firms can navigate these shifts in practice, and what it really takes to apply innovation in real time.

Guest
• John Allan, Head of Innovation & Operations, The Investment Association

Host
• Pierre-Yves Rahari, Co-Founder, Reseo

Producer & Editor
• Melanie Lopes, Sales & Marketing Associate, Reseo

Thanks for listening to the Reseo State of the Art podcast – you can find us here and on Spotify.

Financial Crime Goes Global: How Europe Is Fighting Back

Posted on by Melanie Lopes

In the latest episode of “State of the Art,” Reseo’s podcast on innovation, regulation and trust in investment management, host Pierre-Yves Rahari sat down with Giles Swan, Public Policy and Regulatory Consultant, to explore how financial crime is evolving and how Europe is responding.

In this article, we look at how financial crime has become a truly global and technology-driven phenomenon, how the EU’s new Anti-Money Laundering Authority (AMLA) and AMLD6 directive aim to tackle it, and how technology is reshaping compliance and supervision across the investment industry.

The Globalisation of Financial Crime

Financial crime has long been part of the financial landscape, but its scale and sophistication have changed dramatically. According to the UN Office on Drugs and Crime, money laundering alone accounts for an estimated 2–5% of global GDP — between USD 2 trillion and 4.5 trillion annually.

“Those are huge numbers,” said Giles Swan. “They represent a significant issue not only for governments and regulators, but also commercially for firms that want to remain viable in a fast-evolving landscape.”

What’s new is the globalisation of financial crime. Enabled by technology, perpetrators now operate across jurisdictions, using digital networks to obscure ownership and move funds instantaneously. “We are not just dealing with local actors anymore,” Swan explained. “Technology has turned financial crime into an inherently cross-border challenge — involving both state and private actors with far greater sophistication than before.”

Europe’s Coordinated Response: AMLA and AMLD6

In response to this expanding threat, Europe is reshaping its anti-money-laundering (AML) and counter-terrorist-financing (CTF) framework. The creation of AMLA — the new European Anti-Money Laundering Authority, headquartered in Frankfurt — marks a major shift toward a coordinated, supranational model.

Historically, EU member states managed financial crime at the national level, resulting in divergent rules and supervision. AMLA’s mandate is to harmonise oversight and directly supervise certain high-risk, cross-border entities. “This is about joining up the dots,” said Swan. “The idea is to ensure that regulation keeps pace with the cross-border nature of financial crime, rather than being fragmented by national boundaries.”

Alongside AMLA, the sixth Anti-Money Laundering Directive (AMLD6) and accompanying AML Regulation aim to strengthen consistency across the EU. A key feature is the Ultimate Beneficial Ownership register, designed to improve transparency by requiring firms to identify and verify the individuals behind corporate structures — a move that will have deep implications for investment managers, fund administrators, and service providers.

“These rules demand greater use of technology,” Swan noted. “Manual processes that were once sufficient under earlier directives won’t be enough. Firms will need systems that can handle complex ownership structures efficiently.”

Collaboration, Technology, and Compliance in Practice

As regulations tighten, investment firms are re-evaluating their compliance frameworks. The focus is shifting from reactive reporting to proactive data analysis and technology-driven detection.

“The landscape is inherently technological now,” Swan said. “In the crypto-asset sector, for example, blockchain analytics tools like chain analysis are being used directly to track and prevent financial crime. That’s a model from which the traditional asset management industry can learn.”

He points to a convergence between RegTech (for firms) and SupTech (for regulators). Both sides are exploring how AI, distributed ledger technology, and real-time data can improve risk identification and reduce false positives. “There’s an exciting partnership potential here,” Swan added. “Regulators don’t need to reinvent the wheel — they can build on what the industry has already developed.” 

The Road Ahead: A Smarter Regulatory Future

As enforcement becomes more coordinated, firms can expect more cross-border actions and deeper scrutiny of control frameworks. Yet the shift also presents an opportunity: greater regulatory convergence across the EU could reduce friction for compliant firms and enhance trust with clients and counterparties.

Swan emphasised that boards have a central role to play. “Every board should ask two questions,” he advised. “First, how are our financial crime policies being implemented in practice? Second, what is our weakest link? That’s where the greatest exposure lies — whether in a management company, fund structure, or service provider.”

Ultimately, fighting financial crime requires a balance of vigilance, collaboration, and technological innovation. “The good news,” Swan concluded, “is that regulators and industry are finally moving in the same direction.”

Click here to listen to the full podcast based on this article.

Industry conferences: Where innovation meets trust

Posted on by Luuk Jacobs

We’ve been attending several high-profile industry conferences recently and have noted some clear trends emerge, namely in the discussion around data, products and services. The Financial Services industry is looking at how it can harvest the value of all the data it holds and equally how new insights of these data, and the data itself can, or should be used to create the new products and services of the coming decade.

With data comes great responsibility and the need for trust.

New technologies often claim that their objectives are to reduce the need for trusted intermediators, arbitration costs, and fraud losses, as well as the reduction of malicious and accidental exceptions.

Not only do we believe that trust remains critical to ensure users’ funds and personal information are secure but equally that the technology proves that they can be trusted in replacing the intermediaries.

Here are three examples of where innovation meets trust;

Tokenisation

Tokenisation is a huge opportunity which relies on trust. It is important as an aid to the wider adoption of alternative assets by broadening the accessibility and appeal of alternative asset classes. This means they can be brought to a broader group of investors and even to the retail sector. What is currently holding it back from adoption is not so much the technology, but the regulation around investor suitability and ability to trade as well as liquidity requirements.

Alternative assets often have long term capital and investment horizons (>5 years) and therefore need an aligned commitment of the investors. Tokenisation can (partly) compensate for the capital commitment ie a £100 million building can be tokenised into smaller parts to invest in. Equally the tokens will be easier to trade if and only if regular valuation is trusted and reliable.

Smart contracts

A smart contract is, despite its name, not a legal agreement but instead a series of transactions which are automatically self-executed by a computer programme, according to the terms of a contract or an agreement.

The smart contract runs autonomously, requires no need for manipulation by humans, as is the case with paper contracts, and there are no intermediaries. According to this definition, trust is not a requirement because the blockchain automatically executes the contract once terms are met.

We beg to differ. It most certainly can be argued that if the smart contract does not deliver the expected outcome, the trust is quickly lost.

As comparison is often made between a smart contract and a vending machine in which you put a certain amount of money and choose a certain product with a push on a button. If the smart contract would not execute in line with the price indicated and choice of product, the vending machine (smart contract) would not be trusted.

Another example often used for comparison of a smart contract is that of currency exchange. High street banks were known for charging significant exchange fees and tried to compete with neo banks by incorporating these fees within the exchange rate offered. The “smart” contract was quickly seen for what it was and trust in the process was lost.

Blockchain, Distributed Ledger Technology (DLT)

Blockchain is another technology which is boosting the shift towards digitalisation in finance. Often associated with crypto currencies, the use goes well beyond that.

Blockchain is not a single-player game it is a team sport. Therefore, organisations that insist on forging ahead to create their own blockchain solutions are likely to be disappointed. There is little value to be had from a blockchain that only has one participant. The value of a blockchain lies in its participants and the extent to which they commit to the platform.

The original purpose of blockchain technology was to enable the transfer of value within trust-less networks, where the different parties did not have to trust each other to conduct transactions involving the exchange of value1.

However today, blockchain solutions require a network of parties to agree to use the network, agree on the underlying business processes that will govern the network, and then to integrate their systems with the network. Without trust between the parties, in the processes and governance of it the willingness to integrate the party’s system within the blockchain network are unlikely to happen. Equally, the processes need to be fit for blockchain purpose and need to fulfil the requirements of reliable, repeatable and at speed.

Innovation and trust as equal partners

In today’s world, the distribution chain consists still of processes that are paper based, convoluted and do not actively involve all parties. Innovation and digitalisation are more than often initiated from an efficiency point of view and less so from the perspective of effectiveness of the overall chain.

Although all of the above examples of innovative technologies may claim trust is not a requirement because the technology automatically executes the transaction once terms are met, it is clear trust in the technology itself is paramount.

Crypto currencies over the past decade have suffered significantly from the lack of trust in its technology or the companies executing it.

We therefore believe that innovation only thrives when it is coupled with a foundation of trust, ensuring the new ideas are accepted, adopted, and sustained over time.

Industry conferences: Innovation is also about taking a different perspective

Posted on by Pierre-Yves Rahari

I have just returned from a short Summer break. Disconnecting from my emails and app notifications, even for only a few days, has given me the space to look at a few things with a slightly different perspective. After all, this is the bedrock of new discoveries and the innovation we profess and encourage at Reseo. I am taking this approach to think about the Investment Management conferences I have attended this year and reflect on a nagging feeling that something is missing in the conversations held by and with my peers.

Secular and cyclical topics

On that basis, I perused through the agendas of several conferences and observed that most conversations in our industry evolve around two main pillars, one that I would call the industry “core” or secular concerns, and the other one, the more cyclical questions. “Core” or secular concerns include a review of the fundamentals affecting the industry; investment trends; product development; macroeconomic and geopolitical issues; and of course, the ongoing regulatory updates. On the other hand, cyclical questions – at least for the most recent conferences – include conversations about private markets (and “retailisation” of thereof) and alternative asset classes; anything and everything technology, innovation, blockchain and AI; and of course, anything ESG[1] (with a marked decrease in the volume of conversations on this topic lately). Besides these secular and cyclical topics, space is made for a few conversations on governance and leadership, and more sporadically on people and talent.

All these topics are interesting and relevant, but I can’t help but notice that most of our industry conferences are designed on the same model, bar a few exceptions. Which often leaves me with a feeling of déja-vu or repetition, despite the high professionalism of most events, and the fantastic learning and networking opportunity they offer.

My wish list

With that in mind, what innovation would I like to see in our industry conferences?

  • Diverse speakers: For once, I would very much promote a greater diversity in the pool of speakers. The pay-to-play model that now prevails in most industry conferences tends to favour established corporations and exclude smaller start-ups[2] from panel conversations. Established corporations offer extremely valuable insight from their experience, yet I firmly believe that the industry would strongly benefit from alternative, equally innovative voices which deserve to participate in the public debate.
  • Focus on people: Then, I would very much table more topics on people, talent and leadership, which includes looking at these questions not only within the organisations within our industry, but also from an external viewpoint. For example looking into the demographics and motivations of our investors; understanding the perspective of our stakeholders and so on.
  • Macro and systemic analysis: My bias is that understanding people and talent cannot be divorced from looking at the organisations within which they operate, and even further, from an examination of the macro systems within which our organisations operate. I would encourage more of these conversations within our industry conferences. These would offer more opportunities to compare and contrast our industry with others as well, and allow us to engage in more societal and sense-making conversations[3].

From an innovation perspective, I see great benefits in these gentle questioning of our industry, in contrast to the too often self-congratulatory tone of our conversations.

Call for action

What other topics or questions would you like addressed in our industry conferences? Please share your thoughts at reseo@reseo.global , which we will compile and publish in our next article.

 

 

[1] ESG: Environmental, Social and Governance

[2] With limited marketing budgets to participate in conferences

[3] CogX comes to mind, as a model of cross-systems conference

 

Get in touch

We’d like to hear from you

Contact us

Join our mailing list

To receive news from Reseo

Subscribe
document.addEventListener("DOMContentLoaded", function () { alert("JS is running"); });