A new report released by Crisil Coalition Greenwich, US Eq Broker Selection: It’s the Service, Stupid, reveals a major shift in how buy-side equity traders choose their brokers. The study, authored by Jesse Forster, Senior Analyst at Crisil Coalition Greenwich, shows that amid increasingly complex trading environments, traders are placing a premium on relationships, service, and expertise over traditional metrics like cost or capital commitment.
“Even as electronic execution becomes the norm, the human touch has emerged as the ultimate differentiator,” the report noted. “It’s no longer just about speed and efficiency—it’s about having a trusted counterparty offering tailored support, access to natural liquidity, and a steady supply of market intelligence throughout the trading day.”
More than two-thirds (68%) of surveyed traders cited customer service as the most important attribute in high-touch broker relationships, followed by sourcing natural liquidity (60%) and high-quality sales coverage (55%).
Capital commitment (10%) and commission management (5%) ranked near the bottom of the list, underscoring the declining relevance of balance sheet strength in equity trading decisions.
The report also highlights that buy-side traders are concentrating over half of their commission dollars among just five brokers. Traders continue to reevaluate what defines a successful broker relationship and what service gaps they are willing to tolerate. According to Forster, “the answer to both lies in one key area: customer service”.
In low-touch trading, priorities are similarly aligned. While execution quality tops the list at 46%, a combined 82% of respondents pointed to algo customization (41%) and execution consulting or strategy advice (41%) as equally critical.
Traders said they value brokers who provide not only algorithmic tools but also expert guidance in how to deploy them effectively, particularly as trading venues and order types evolve.
Other attributes in low-touch trading—including the ability to source natural liquidity (31%), add soft dollar commissions (31%), and pay for research (31%)—remain relevant, but take a back seat to execution performance and support. Commission rates, while still a point of contention between buy and sell sides, were ranked as a top priority by just 10% of traders.
Forster noted that while buy-side firms downplay the importance of commission rates, some brokers believe they are under pressure to offer execution-only pricing of 25 to 50 mils just to stay competitive. “The problem is brokers are putting their tail between their legs,” one broker said in the study. “If we’re good enough, clients will make sure the commission rate is aligned.”
The study also explores the major pain points that traders face in their day-to-day work. Nearly half (44%) of buy-side traders said they struggle to get proper coverage from brokers.
Managing commissions (41%) and dealing with operational and back-office issues (41%) were also cited as significant challenges—particularly in the context of the T+1 settlement cycle. “Fails can happen once, but not twice,” said one head trader. “If you can’t handle basic, we’re done.”
Other concerns include difficulties in gaining local market or order color (31%), capturing the spirit of best execution (26%), and incompatible workflow technologies (21%).
“The buy side is looking for partners, not just transactional relationships,” Forster concludes. “They want brokers who can help them navigate complexity, optimize their trading strategies, and achieve their investment objectives.
For brokers who can rise to this challenge, the rewards will be significant—including deeper client relationships, increased loyalty, and a competitive edge in a rapidly changing market.”
The findings are based on responses from 40 senior buy-side equity traders in the 2024 Market Structure and Trading Technology Study conducted by Coalition Greenwich.
