Back to GetFilings.com
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
Form 10-K
|
|
|
(Mark One) |
|
|
þ
|
|
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT of 1934 |
|
|
|
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004 |
|
o
|
|
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 or 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
|
|
|
For the transition period
from to |
Commission File Number 0-50670
MARKETAXESS HOLDINGS INC.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
|
|
|
Delaware |
|
52-2230784 |
(State of incorporation) |
|
(IRS Employer Identification No.) |
|
140 Broadway, New York, New York |
|
10005 |
(Address of principal executive offices) |
|
(Zip Code) |
(212) 813-6000
(Registrants telephone number, including area code)
SECURITIES REGISTERED PURSUANT TO SECTION 12(b) OF THE
ACT:
None
SECURITIES REGISTERED PURSUANT TO SECTION 12(g) OF THE
ACT:
Common Stock, par value $0.003 per share
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed
all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding
12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant
was required to file such reports), and (2) has been
subject to such filing requirements for the past
90 days. Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers
pursuant to item 405 of Regulation S-K is not
contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of
registrants knowledge, in definitive proxy or information
statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this
form 10-K or any amendment to this
form 10-K. o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an accelerated
filer (as defined by Exchange Act
Rule 12b-2) Yes o No þ
The aggregate market value of the shares of common stock and
non-voting held by non-affiliates of the registrant was
approximately $436,820,049 at December 31, 2004, based upon
the closing price for shares of the registrants common
stock as reported by the National Market System of the NASDAQ
Stock Market on that date. For purposes of this calculation,
affiliates are considered to be officers, directors and holders
of 10% or more of the outstanding common stock of the registrant
on that date. At March 28, 2005, the number of shares of
the registrants common stock outstanding was 23,032,141.
DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
Portions of the registrants definitive proxy statement for
the 2005 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, to be filed hereafter,
are incorporated by reference into Items 10, 11, 12,
13 and 14 of Part III of this Form 10-K.
MARKETAXESS HOLDINGS INC.
2004 FORM 10-K ANNUAL REPORT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART I
Forward-Looking Statements
This report contains certain forward-looking
statements within the meaning of the Private Securities
Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements may be
identified by words such as expects,
intends, anticipates, plans,
believes, seeks, estimates,
will, or words of similar meaning and include, but
are not limited to, statements regarding the outlook for our
future business and financial performance. Forward-looking
statements are based on managements current expectations
and assumptions, which are subject to inherent uncertainties,
risks and changes in circumstances that are difficult to
predict. It is routine for our internal projections and
expectations to change as the year or each quarter in the year
progresses, and therefore it should be clearly understood that
the internal projections and beliefs upon which we base our
expectations may change prior to the end of each quarter or the
year. Although these expectations may change, we are under no
obligation to revise or update any forward-looking statements
contained in this report. Our company policy is generally to
provide our expectations only once per quarter, and not to
update that information until the next quarter. Actual future
events or results may differ materially from those contained in
the projections or forward-looking statements. Factors that
could cause or contribute to such differences include those
discussed below and elsewhere in this report, particularly in
the section captioned Managements Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations Risk Factors That May Affect Future
Results.
MarketAxess operates one of the leading platforms for the
electronic trading of corporate bonds and certain other types of
fixed-income securities. Our electronic trading platform is
accessed by our broker-dealer and institutional investor clients
either via a direct connection or over the Internet. Our 539
active institutional investor client firms (firms that executed
at least one trade through our electronic trading platform
between January 2004 and December 2004) can access the aggregate
liquidity provided by the collective interest of our 22
broker-dealer clients in buying or selling bonds through our
platform. We also provide data and analytical tools that help
our clients make trading decisions and we facilitate the trading
process by electronically communicating order information
between trading counterparties. Since our inception, the
majority of our revenues have been generated from the trading of
U.S. high-grade corporate bonds, although an increasing
percentage of our revenues has recently been derived from the
trading of European high-grade corporate bonds. With limited
exceptions, our commissions are generated from transactions
between a broker-dealer client and an institutional investor
client.
Our multi-dealer trading platform allows our institutional
investor clients to simultaneously request competing, executable
bids or offers from our broker-dealer clients and execute trades
with the broker-dealer of their choice from among those that
choose to respond. We offer our broker-dealer clients a solution
that enables them to efficiently reach our institutional
investor clients for the distribution and trading of bonds. In
addition to U.S. high-grade corporate bonds and European
high-grade corporate bonds, we also offer our clients the
ability to trade emerging markets bonds, which we define as
sovereign and corporate bonds issued by entities domiciled in a
developing country, including both high-grade and non-investment
grade debt. To date, however, emerging markets bonds do not
represent a significant component of our revenues.
We derive our revenues primarily from commissions paid by our
broker-dealer clients for trades executed on our platform (which
represented 89.9% of our revenues for the year ended
December 31, 2004) and, to a lesser extent, from license
fees for access to our trading platform charged to certain of
our broker-dealer clients (which represented 4.1% of our
revenues for the year ended December 31, 2004) and
information and user access fees charged to our clients (which
represented 3.6% of our revenues for the year ended
December 31, 2004).
Traditionally, bond trading has been a manual process, with
product and price discovery conducted over the telephone between
two or more parties. This traditional process, which is still
how most corporate bonds are traded, has a number of
shortcomings resulting primarily from the lack of a central
trading facility for
1
these securities, which creates difficulty matching buyers and
sellers for particular issues. In recent years, an increasing
number of corporate bond trading participants have utilized
e-mail and other electronic means of communication (including
proprietary, single-dealer systems) for trading corporate bonds.
While this has addressed some of the shortcomings associated
with traditional corporate bond trading, we believe that the
process is still hindered by limited liquidity, limited price
transparency, significant transaction costs, compliance and
regulatory challenges, and difficulty in executing numerous
trades at one time.
Through our electronic platform, our institutional investor
clients can determine prices available for a security, a process
called price discovery, as well as trade securities directly
with our broker-dealer clients. The price discovery process
includes the ability to view indicative prices from the
broker-dealer clients inventory available on our platform,
access to real-time pricing information and analytical tools
(including spread-to-Treasury data, search capabilities and
independent credit research) available on our Corporate
BondTickertm
service and the ability to request executable bids and offers
simultaneously from up to 18 of our broker-dealer clients during
the trade process. On average, institutional investor clients
receive several bids or offers from broker-dealer clients in
response to trade inquiries. However, some trade inquiries may
not receive any bids or offers. Our services relating to trade
execution include single- and multiple-dealer inquiries; list
trading, which is the ability to request bids and offers on
multiple bonds at the same time; and swap trading, which is the
ability to request an offer to purchase one bond and a bid to
sell another bond, in a manner such that the two trades will be
executed simultaneously, with payment based on the price
differential of the bonds. Once a trade is completed on our
platform, the broker-dealer client and institutional investor
client may settle the trade with the assistance of our automated
post-trade messaging, which facilitates the communication of
trade acknowledgment and allocation information between our
institutional investor and broker-dealer clients.
With limited exceptions, we are not a party to the actual trades
that occur on our platform and we do not at any time take title
to the traded securities or the proceeds from the sale of such
securities. Rather, we serve as an intermediary between
broker-dealers and institutional investors, enabling them to
meet, agree on a price, and then transact with each other.
Our client base includes 22 of the leading broker-dealers in
global fixed-income trading and 539 active institutional
investor firms (firms that executed at least one trade through
our electronic trading platform between January 2004 and
December 2004), including 80 of the top 100 global holders of
U.S. corporate bonds, as measured by Thomson Financial. Our
broker-dealer clients accounted for approximately 99% of the
underwriting of newly-issued U.S. high-grade corporate
bonds and in excess of 75% of the underwriting of newly-issued
European high-grade corporate bonds in 2004, and include 13 of
the top 15 broker-dealers as ranked by 2004 new-issue
underwriting volume of European high-grade corporate bonds. We
believe these broker-dealers also represent the principal source
of secondary market liquidity in such securities, as well as in
sovereign and corporate bonds issued by entities domiciled in an
emerging markets country. Secondary market liquidity refers to
the ability of market participants to buy or sell a security
quickly and in large volume subsequent to the original issuance
of the security, without substantially affecting the price of
the security. Our broker-dealer clients currently trade
fixed-income securities by traditional means including
telephone, e-mail and proprietary, single-dealer systems in
addition to our electronic trading platform and we expect them
to continue to do so in the future. While we have not identified
a reliable source of data relating to the total volume of
client-to-dealer trading in these markets and, therefore, are
unable to determine the portion of the trading that is taking
place on our platform, we believe that these traditional means
of trading corporate bonds remain the manner in which the
majority of corporate bonds are traded between institutional
investors and broker-dealers.
2
|
|
|
Results for Calendar Years 2004, 2003 and 2002 |
From January 2002 through the end of 2004, we experienced
significant growth in total trading volume, total commissions
and net income, as illustrated in the following table:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Total trading volume (in billions)
|
|
$ |
298.1 |
|
|
$ |
192.2 |
|
|
$ |
48.4 |
|
Total commissions (in millions)
|
|
|
68.2 |
|
|
|
52.8 |
|
|
|
15.6 |
|
Income (loss) before taxes (in millions)
|
|
|
17.3 |
|
|
|
4.4 |
|
|
|
(36.1 |
) |
For the year ended December 31, 2004, 61.5% of our trading
volume was in U.S. high-grade corporate bonds, 25.7% of our
trading volume was in European high-grade corporate bonds and
12.8% of our trading volume was in other bonds, most of which
are sovereign and corporate bonds issued by entities domiciled
in an emerging markets country.
Industry Background
Fixed-income securities are issued by corporations, governments
and other entities, and pay a pre-set absolute or relative rate
of return. The global fixed-income market is large and has
experienced significant growth in trading volume and amount of
debt outstanding over the last several years. For example, as of
December 31, 2004 in the U.S. fixed-income market,
there were approximately $23.6 trillion of fixed-income
securities outstanding, including $4.7 trillion of
U.S. corporate bonds. We are primarily active in three
segments of the global fixed-income securities market:
U.S. high-grade corporate bonds; European high-grade
corporate bonds; and sovereign and corporate bonds issued by
entities domiciled in an emerging markets country.
|
|
|
U.S. High-Grade Corporate Bond Market |
The total U.S. corporate bond market has experienced
significant growth over the past five years. The total amount of
U.S. corporate bonds outstanding has grown from $2.7
trillion as of December 31, 1998 to $4.7 trillion as of
December 31, 2004. The average daily trading volume of
U.S. corporate bonds also grew from $19.0 billion in
2002 (the first calendar year for which such data are available)
to $21.3 billion for the year ended December 31, 2004.
The U.S. corporate bond market consists of three broad
categories of securities: investment-grade debt (so-called
high-grade), which typically refers to debt rated
BBB or better by Standard & Poors, or
Baa3 or better by Moodys Investor Service; debt rated
below investment-grade (so-called high-yield), which
typically refers to debt rated lower than BBB- by
Standard & Poors or Baa3 by Moodys Investor
Service; and debt convertible into equity (so-called
convertible debt).
The U.S. high-grade corporate bond market, which represents
the largest subset of the U.S. corporate bond market, has
seen significant growth in trading volume over the last several
years. Several factors continue to drive growth in trading
volume in this market, including:
|
|
|
|
|
Improved price transparency In 2002, the
National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.
(NASD) adopted the Trade Reporting and Compliance
Engine (TRACE), which requires NASD members to
report secondary market transactions in certain fixed-income
securities to the NASD. The NASD began publicly disseminating
real-time price information on approximately 500 large (greater
than or equal to $1 billion in original issue amount)
corporate bond issues in July 2002. In March 2003, the NASD
expanded the list of corporate bonds for which prices are
disseminated to include over 4,000 unique securities,
representing over two-thirds of the daily trading volume of
high-grade corporate bonds. On October 1, 2004, the NASD
again expanded the list of corporate bonds for which prices are
disseminated to include 17,000 unique securities, representing
over 95% of the daily trading volume of high-grade corporate
bonds. In February 2005, the NASD further expanded the list |
3
|
|
|
|
|
of TRACE-eligible bonds to include 23,000 unique securities,
representing 99% of the daily trading volume of high-grade
corporate bonds. |
|
|
|
Introduction of electronic trading platforms
Electronic trading platforms, which are in the early stages of
adoption, act as central facilities to bring together buyers and
sellers. The actions of participants on these platforms are
facilitated by an electronic medium that improves some of the
manual processes that might otherwise be required, such as
searching for securities with specific characteristics, the
coordination of multiple bilateral telephone calls or electronic
communications, the sorting and analysis of competing offers,
and the entry of orders into the trading system after verbal or
e-mail trade agreement. As a result, these platforms typically
provide a lower-cost and more efficient means of enhanced
distribution and trade execution than previously possible. |
|
|
|
Growth in credit derivatives Credit
derivatives are contracts that transfer an assets risk and
return from one party to another without transferring ownership
of the underlying asset, allowing market participants to obtain
credit protection or assume credit exposure associated with a
broad range of issuers of fixed-income securities and other debt
obligations. They are often designed to reduce the probability
or severity of loss and can be tied to particular events, such
as a default, bankruptcy or ratings downgrade. Credit
derivatives provide increased flexibility and liquidity for
investors and lenders to diversify their credit exposures. The
appeal of these products is apparent in the growth in the total
notional amount of outstanding credit default swaps (agreements
that allow the transfer of third-party credit risk from one
party to another), which increased from approximately
$900 billion at December 31, 2001 to approximately
$8.4 trillion at December 31, 2004. |
|
|
|
Growth in the total amount of debt
outstanding The total size of the
U.S. high-grade corporate bond market has increased
significantly since 1998, when approximately $425 billion
gross amount of new bonds were issued, as compared to
approximately $603 billion during 2004. |
Factors similar to those described above also contributed to
significant growth in trading volume in the U.S. Treasury
market, which is recognized as the most liquid fixed-income
market in the world. These factors include availability of
real-time U.S. Treasury market prices (1982), introduction
of interest-rate derivatives (mid-1980s), advent of
electronic trading of U.S. Treasury securities
(1997) and an increase in the balance of outstanding
U.S. Treasury debt ($3.9 trillion as of December 31,
2004, up from $616.4 billion at December 31, 1980). As
a result, the average daily trading volume in the
U.S. Treasury market increased from $18.3 billion in
1980 to $497.9 billion for the year ended December 31,
2004, representing a compound annual growth rate, or CAGR, of
14.8%.
|
|
|
European High-Grade Corporate Bond Market |
The European high-grade corporate bond market consists of a
broad range of products, issuers and currencies. We define the
European high-grade corporate bond market generally to consist
of bonds intended to be distributed to European investors,
primarily bonds issued by European corporations, excluding bonds
that are issued by a corporation domiciled in an emerging
markets country and excluding most government bonds that trade
in Europe.
We believe that the average daily trading volume in the European
high-grade corporate bond market has grown significantly over
the past five years, driven by many of the same factors that
have driven growth in the U.S. high-grade corporate bond
market. In addition, we believe the following factors unique to
the European high-grade corporate bond market are also driving
growth in trading volume:
|
|
|
|
|
Adoption of the Euro The adoption of the Euro
as the common currency in most European Union countries has
reduced the importance of currency as an investment selection
criterion and elevated the importance of the credit risk of
particular issuers. As a result, institutional investors have
exhibited a greater interest in investing in a broader range of
bonds issued by entities domiciled outside of their home
countries. |
|
|
|
Regulatory environment Certain European Union
countries have eased restrictions that required institutional
investors to invest primarily in domestic securities. This has
provided European institu- |
4
|
|
|
|
|
tional investors with increased flexibility to invest in
securities issued by entities domiciled in other countries
within the European Union. |
|
|
|
Common liquidity pool The larger capital pool
created by the common currency and changes in the regulatory
environment have enabled European corporations to offer larger
issues, which has resulted in increases in the liquidity and
trading volumes of these issues. This has attracted even more
institutional investors, who prefer to invest in highly-liquid
markets. |
|
|
|
Emerging Markets Bond Market |
We define the emerging markets bond market generally to include
U.S. dollar- or Euro-denominated bonds issued by sovereign
entities or corporations domiciled in a developing country.
These issuers are typically located in Latin America, Asia, or
Central and Eastern Europe. Examples of countries we classify as
emerging markets include: Brazil, Colombia, Mexico, Peru, the
Philippines, Russia, Turkey and Venezuela.
The institutional investor base for sovereign and corporate
bonds issued by entities domiciled in an emerging markets
country has recently expanded to include many crossover
investors from the more mainstream high-yield and high-grade
investment areas. Institutional investors have been drawn to
sovereign and corporate bonds issued by entities domiciled in an
emerging markets country by their high returns and high growth
potential, as well as by a general trend toward positive
economic and political reforms and improving economic
performance in many emerging markets countries.
Our Competitive Strengths
Our electronic trading platform provides solutions to some of
the shortcomings of traditional bond trading methods. The
benefits of our solution are demonstrable throughout the trading
cycle:
|
|
|
|
|
Pre-trade gathering real-time and historical
pricing information, identifying interested buyers and sellers
in a particular security, and obtaining research and analysis; |
|
|
|
Trade single and multiple security trade
execution; and |
|
|
|
Post-trade trade detail matching, account
allocation and automated audit trail. |
We believe that we are well positioned to strengthen our market
position in electronic trading of U.S. and European high-grade
corporate bonds and sovereign and corporate bonds issued by
entities domiciled in an emerging markets country, and to extend
our presence into new products and services by capitalizing on
our competitive strengths, including:
|
|
|
Significant Trading Volumes with Participation by Leading
Broker-Dealers and Institutional Investors |
Our electronic trading platform provides access to the liquidity
provided through the participation on our platform of 22 of the
leading global securities broker-dealers and 539 active
institutional investor firms (firms that executed at least one
trade through our electronic trading platform between January
2004 and December 2004). We believe these broker-dealers
represent the principal source of secondary market liquidity for
U.S. high-grade corporate bonds, European high-grade
corporate bonds and sovereign and corporate bonds issued by
entities domiciled in an emerging markets country. Our
broker-dealer clients are motivated to continue to utilize our
platform due to the presence on the platform of our large
network of institutional investor clients, which includes 80 of
the top 100 global holders of U.S. corporate bonds, as
measured by Thomson Financial. We believe that if we continue to
grow the participation of our broker-dealer and institutional
investor clients on our electronic trading platform, the
benefits in liquidity on the platform to both broker-dealers and
institutional investors will be amplified, further motivating
them to use our platform. Currently, the majority of trading of
U.S. high-grade corporate bonds still occurs using
traditional bond trading methods, implying significant
opportunity for us to continue to grow our trading volume. Our
trading volume across all of our products increased from
$11.7 billion in 2001, to $48.4 billion in 2002, to
$192.2 billion in 2003 and to $298.1 billion in 2004.
We have not identified a reliable source of data relating to the
size of the bond markets we serve, specifically the
client-to-dealer market, and therefore we are unable to
5
accurately determine the total volume of secondary trading of
these bonds or the portion of such trading conducted on our
platform.
|
|
|
Execution Benefits to Clients |
|
|
|
Benefits to Institutional Investor Clients |
We believe we provide numerous benefits to our institutional
investor clients over traditional bond trading methods,
including:
Competitive Prices. By enabling institutional investors
to simultaneously request bids or offers from our broker-dealer
clients, we believe our electronic trading platform creates an
environment that motivates our broker-dealer clients to provide
competitive prices and gives institutional investors confidence
that they are obtaining a competitive price. For typical
MarketAxess multi-dealer corporate bond inquiries, the range of
competitive spread-to-Treasury responses is, on average,
approximately 10 basis points (a basis point is 1/100 of 1%
in yield). As an example of the potential cost savings to
institutional investors, a one basis point savings on a
$1 million face amount trade of a bond with 10 years
to maturity translates to aggregate savings of approximately
$750.00.
Transparent Pricing on a Range of Securities. The
commingled multi-dealer inventory of bonds posted by our
broker-dealer clients on our platform consists of a daily
average of more than $130 billion in indicative bids and
offers. Subject to applicable regulatory requirements,
institutional investors can search bonds in inventory based on
any combination of issuer, issue, rating, maturity,
spread-to-Treasury, size and dealer providing the listing, in a
fraction of the time it takes to do so manually. Institutional
investor clients can also request executable bids and offers on
our electronic trading platform on any debt security in a
database of U.S. and European corporate bonds, although there
can be no assurance as to the number of broker-dealers who will
choose to provide an executable price. Our platform transmits
bid and offer requests in real-time to broker-dealer clients,
who may respond with executable prices within a time period
specified by the investor.
Improved Cost Efficiency. We believe that we provide
improved efficiency by reducing the time and labor required to
conduct broad product and price discovery. Single-security and
multi-security (bid or offer lists) inquiries can be efficiently
conducted with multiple broker-dealers. In addition, our
Corporate BondTicker eliminates the need for manually-intensive
phone calls or e-mail communication to gather, sort and analyze
information concerning historical transaction prices.
|
|
|
Benefits to Broker-Dealer Clients |
We also provide substantial benefits to our broker-dealer
clients over traditional bond trading methods, including:
Greater Sales Efficiency. We offer our broker-dealer
clients broad connectivity with their institutional investor
clients. Through this connectivity, our broker-dealer clients
are able to efficiently display their indications of interest to
buy and sell various securities. We also enable broker-dealers
to broaden their distribution by participating in transactions
to which they otherwise may not have had access. In addition,
the ability to post prices and electronically execute on
straightforward trades enables bond sales professionals at
broker-dealer firms to focus their efforts on more profitable
activities, such as higher value-added trades and more complex
transactions.
More Efficient Inventory Management for Broker-Dealers.
The posting of inventory to, and the ability to respond to
inquiries from, a broad pool of institutional investors, creates
an increased opportunity for broker-dealers to identify demand
for their inventory, particularly in less liquid securities. As
a result, we believe they can achieve enhanced bond inventory
turnover, which may limit credit exposure.
6
|
|
|
Benefits to Both Institutional Investor and Broker-Dealer
Clients |
We offer additional benefits over traditional bond trading
methods that are shared by both institutional investor and
broker-dealer clients, including:
Greater Trading Accuracy. Our electronic trading platform
includes verification mechanisms at various stages of the
execution process which result in greater accuracy in the
processing, confirming and clearing of trades between
institutional investor and broker-dealer clients. These
verification mechanisms are designed to ensure that our
broker-dealer and institutional investor clients are sending
accurate trade messages by providing multiple opportunities to
verify they are trading the correct bond, at the agreed-upon
price and size. Our platform assists our institutional investor
clients in automating the transmittal of order tickets from the
portfolio manager to the trader, and from the trader to
back-office personnel. This automation provides more timely
execution and a reduction in the likelihood of errors that can
result from information being manually entered into different
systems.
Efficient Risk Monitoring and Compliance. Our electronic
trading platform offers both institutional investors and
broker-dealers an automated audit trail for each stage in the
trading cycle. This enables compliance personnel to review
information relating to trades more easily and with greater
reliability. Trade information including time, price and
spread-to-Treasury is stored securely and automatically on our
electronic trading platform. These data also represent a
valuable source of information for our clients compliance
personnel. Importantly, we believe the automated audit trail,
together with the competitive pricing that is a feature of our
electronic trading platform, gives fiduciaries the ability to
demonstrate that they have achieved best execution on behalf of
their clients.
In addition to services directly related to the execution of
trades, we offer our clients several other services, including:
Information Services. The information and analytical
tools we provide to our clients help them make investment and
trading decisions. Our Corporate BondTicker provides access to
real-time and historical price, yield and MarketAxess estimated
spread-to-Treasuries for publicly disseminated NASD
TRACE-eligible bonds. Corporate BondTicker combines
publicly-available TRACE data with the prices for trades
executed on our U.S. high-grade electronic trading
platform, integrating the two data sources and providing
real-time TRACE data with associated analytical tools that are
not otherwise available. In addition, Corporate BondTicker
provides indicative prices for secondary loans and credit
default swaps, through arrangements with certain of our
broker-dealer clients, and independent credit research. Our
electronic trading platform allows institutional investors to
compile, sort and use information to discover investment
opportunities that might have been difficult or impossible to
identify using a manual information gathering process or other
electronic services.
Straight-Through Processing. Straight-through processing
refers to the integration of systems and processes to automate
the trade process from end-to-end trade execution,
confirmation and settlement without the need for
manual intervention. Our electronic trading platform provides
broker-dealers and institutional investors with the ability to
automate portions of their transaction processing requirements,
improving accuracy and efficiency. Through post-trade messaging,
institutional investors receive electronic notices of execution
from MarketAxess in industry standard protocols, complete with
all relevant trade details. Institutional investors can download
trade messages, allocate trades to sub-accounts on whose behalf
the trades were made and send the allocations to broker-dealers
for confirmation.
|
|
|
Robust, Scalable Technology Platform |
We have developed proprietary technology that is highly secure,
fault-tolerant and provides adequate capacity for our current
operations, as well as for substantial growth. Our highly
scalable systems are designed to accommodate additional volume,
products and clients with relatively little modification and low
incremental costs.
7
|
|
|
Proven Innovator with an Experienced Management
Team |
Since our inception, we have been an innovator in the
fixed-income securities markets. Our management team is
comprised of executives with an average of more than
20 years experience in the securities industry. We
have consistently sought to benefit participants in the markets
we serve by attempting to replicate the essential features of
fixed-income trading, including the existing relationships
between broker-dealers and their institutional investor clients,
while applying technology to eliminate weaknesses in traditional
trading methods. Euromoney magazine recognized
MarketAxess as offering the best multi-dealer trading platform
for corporate bonds in 2004 and 2003.
Some of the innovations we have introduced to electronic trading
include:
|
|
|
|
|
2000 the first multi-dealer disclosed trading
platform for U.S. high-grade corporate bonds; |
|
|
|
2001 the first electronic Treasury benchmarking for
U.S. high-grade corporate bond trades; |
|
|
|
2002 Corporate BondTicker, our information services
product, combining NASD TRACE bond data with MarketAxess data
and analytical tools; |
|
|
|
2002 bid and offer list technology for corporate
bond trading, enabling institutional investors to request
executable prices for multiple securities simultaneously; |
|
|
|
2003 corporate bond swap trading on our European
platform, enabling the simultaneous purchase and sale of two
different corporate bonds based on the price differential
between the securities; and |
|
|
|
2004 corporate bond swap trading on our
U.S. trading platform, enabling the simultaneous purchase
and sale of two different corporate bonds based on the price
differential between the securities. |
Our Strategy
Our objective is to provide the leading global electronic
trading platform for fixed-income securities, connecting
broker-dealers and institutional investors more easily and
efficiently, while offering a broad array of services to market
participants across the trading cycle. The key elements of our
strategy are:
|
|
|
Enhance the Liquidity of Securities Traded on Our Platform
and Broaden Our Client Base in Our Existing Markets |
We intend to further enhance the liquidity of securities traded
on our leading electronic, multi-dealer to client platform for
U.S. and European high-grade corporate bond trading and for the
trading of sovereign and corporate bonds issued by entities
domiciled in an emerging markets country. Our ability to
innovate and efficiently add new functionality and product
offerings to the MarketAxess platform will help us deepen our
market share with our existing clients, as well as expand our
client base, which we believe will in turn lead to even further
increases in the liquidity of the securities provided by our
broker-dealer clients and available on our platform. We will
seek to make our current product offerings on our European
electronic trading platform available to our 363 active
U.S. institutional investor clients (firms that executed at
least one trade through our electronic trading platform between
January 2004 and December 2004) and to make our current product
offerings on our U.S. electronic trading platform available
to our 176 active European institutional investor clients (firms
that executed at least one trade through our electronic trading
platform between January 2004 and December 2004), in each case
subject to regulatory requirements.
|
|
|
Leverage our Existing Technology and Client Relationships
to Expand into New Segments of the Fixed-Income Securities
Market |
We intend to leverage our technology, as well as our strong
broker-dealer and institutional investor relationships, to
deploy our electronic trading platform into additional product
segments within the fixed-income securities market. In the
future, we intend to expand our product offerings to include,
among others, credit derivatives. Due in part to our highly
scalable systems, we believe we will be able to enter into new
markets with relatively little technology modification and low
incremental costs.
8
|
|
|
Continue to Strengthen and Expand our Trade-Related
Service Offerings |
We plan to continue building our existing service offerings so
that our electronic trading platform is fully integrated into
the workflow of our broker-dealer and institutional investor
clients. We also plan to continue to add functionality to allow
our clients to achieve a fully automated, end-to-end
straight-through processing solution (automation from trade
initiation to settlement). We are continually considering the
introduction of new trading techniques. As an example, we have
the technology necessary to offer anonymous trading of
fixed-income securities if and when the market opportunity for
such a product arises. We may also develop and expand our
technology platform in order to create single-dealer technology
solutions that we can offer to our broker-dealer clients for
internal order management and trade processing.
|
|
|
Expand our Data and Information Services Offerings |
We regularly add new content and analytical capabilities to
Corporate BondTicker in order to improve the value of the
information we provide to our clients. Examples of added content
include pricing for syndicated loans and credit derivatives, and
independent credit research. We intend to enter into
distribution partnerships with information and data services
companies in order to widen the user base of our data products
and to continue adding new content and analytical capabilities.
In July 2004, we entered into an agreement with Interactive Data
Corporation, through its subsidiary, FT Interactive Data, to
promote and market Corporate BondTicker. We expect this and
other distribution partnerships to broaden our presence in the
marketplace and increase our brand awareness. We intend to seek
out additional market leaders in various segments of the
securities industry and leverage their existing customer bases
and distribution channels to further our data services market
penetration.
As use of our electronic trading platform continues to grow, we
believe that the amount and value of our proprietary trading
data will also increase, further enhancing the value of our
information services offerings to our clients.
|
|
|
Pursue Strategic Alliances and Select Acquisitions |
We plan to continue to increase and supplement our internal
growth by entering into strategic alliances, or acquiring
businesses or technologies, that will enable us to enter new
markets, provide new products or services, or otherwise enhance
the value of our platform to our clients. As an example, during
2003, we entered into a strategic alliance with BrokerTec USA,
L.L.C. and BrokerTec Europe Ltd. (collectively,
BrokerTec) in order to provide our institutional
investor clients with an electronic system to buy and sell
U.S. Treasury securities. Although this strategic alliance
with BrokerTec terminated effective February 28, 2005, we
are working with our broker-dealer clients and others in order
to continue to provide our institutional investor clients with
an electronic system for the trading of U.S. Treasury
securities.
|
|
|
MarketAxess Electronic Trading Platform |
|
|
|
U.S. High-Grade Corporate Bonds |
Our U.S. high-grade corporate bond business consists of
U.S. dollar-denominated investment-grade debt issued by
corporations for distribution in the U.S. Institutional
investors based in the U.S., as well as institutional investors
located in the U.K., Germany, Belgium, Switzerland, Sweden,
Norway, Hong Kong and Singapore have access to
U.S. high-grade corporate bond trading on our electronic
trading platform. Investment-grade debt typically refers to debt
rated BBB- or better by Standard & Poors, or Baa3
or better by Moodys Investor Service. We use the terms
high-grade debt and investment-grade debt interchangeably in
this annual report on Form 10-K. Our trading volume in the
U.S. high-grade corporate bond market increased from
$10.0 billion in 2001 to $183.5 billion in 2004. We
have not identified a reliable source of data relating to the
total volume of client-to-dealer trading in the
U.S. high-grade corporate bond market and, therefore, we
are unable to determine the portion of this trading that is
taking place on our platform. The majority of trading in
U.S. high-grade corporate bonds presently is not conducted
on our platform.
9
We offer our institutional investor clients access to a broad
inventory of U.S. high-grade corporate bonds, which is
provided and updated daily by our broker-dealer clients. Our
electronic trading platform is a multi-dealer disclosed
counterparty model, which allows institutional investors to view
bids and offers from one or more of our broker-dealer clients
while permitting each party to know the identity of its
counter-party throughout the trading process. By disclosing the
counterparties, the inquiry system on which our trading platform
is based combines the strength of existing offline client/dealer
relationships with the efficiency and transparency of an
electronic trading platform. This enables institutional
investors to instantly direct trade inquiries and negotiations
to their traditional broker-dealer or to any of the overwhelming
majority of the worlds leading broker-dealers who provide
liquidity in these securities. Institutional investors have
access to the commingled inventory of our broker-dealer clients,
representing indicative bids and offers. Each line item of
inventory represents an indicative bid and/or offer on a
particular bond issue by a particular broker-dealer client.
Institutional investor clients are not restricted to trading
only the bonds posted as inventory, although many of the trades
conducted on our platform are made from the posted inventory. To
transact in a specific bond that does not appear in inventory,
institutional investors can easily search our database and
submit an online inquiry to their chosen broker-dealers, who can
respond with live, executable prices. In a single inquiry,
institutional investors can request bids or offers from up to
all 18 of our U.S. broker-dealer clients. While, on
average, institutional investor clients receive several bids or
offers from broker-dealers in response to trade inquiries, some
inquiries may not receive any bids or offers.
In the U.S. high-grade corporate bond market, 18
broker-dealers utilize our platform, including the top 10
broker-dealers as ranked by 2004 new-issue underwriting volume.
Three hundred sixty-three active institutional investor clients
(firms that executed at least one trade through our electronic
trading platform between January 2004 and December 2004) utilize
our electronic trading platform to trade U.S. high-grade
corporate bonds.
|
|
|
European High-Grade Corporate Bonds |
The European high-grade corporate bond market consists of a
broad range of products, issuers and currencies. We define the
European high-grade corporate bond market generally to consist
of bonds intended to be distributed to European investors,
primarily bonds issued by European corporations, excluding bonds
that are issued by a corporation domiciled in an emerging
markets country and most government bonds that trade in Europe.
Examples include:
|
|
|
|
|
bonds issued by European corporations, denominated in any
currency; |
|
|
|
bonds generally denominated in Euros, U.S. dollars or
Pounds Sterling, excluding bonds that are issued by a
corporation domiciled in an emerging market; |
|
|
|
bonds issued by supra-national organizations (entities, such as
the World Bank, which include a number of central banks or
government financial authorities), agencies and governments
located in Europe, generally denominated in Euros,
U.S. dollars or Pounds Sterling, provided that such
currency is not the currency of the country where the bond was
issued; and |
|
|
|
floating-rate notes issued by European corporations. |
MarketAxess Europe Limited, our wholly-owned U.K. subsidiary,
commenced operations in August 2001. MarketAxess Europe Limited
received Financial Services Authority
(FSA) regulatory approval and began to offer
European secondary trading functionality in U.S. dollar-
and Euro-denominated European corporate bonds to our
broker-dealer and institutional investor clients in September
2001. In 2002, we added trading in other European high-grade
corporate bonds, including bonds issued in Pounds Sterling and
floating rate notes. As on our U.S. electronic trading
platform, all trading on our European platform is done using a
multi-dealer disclosed counterparty model. We offered the first
platform in Europe with this capability for corporate bonds.
In the European high-grade credit market, 18 broker-dealers
utilize our platform, including 13 of the top 15 broker-dealers
as ranked by 2004 new-issue underwriting volume of European
corporate bonds. The 18 broker-dealers who utilize our European
platform are: ABN Amro, Banc of America Securities, Barclays,
10
Bear Stearns, BNP Paribas, Citigroup, Credit Suisse First
Boston, Deutsche Bank, DZ Bank AG, Goldman Sachs, HSBC,
JPMorgan, Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley, The
Royal Bank of Scotland, Société Générale and
UBS.
Our 176 active institutional investor clients (firms that
executed at least one trade through our electronic trading
platform between January 2004 and December 2004) are based
outside of the U.S. and utilize our platform for trading
European high-grade corporate bonds. On a typical day,
institutional investors on our European corporate bond trading
platform have access to approximately 18,000 line items of
commingled inventory, representing an aggregate of approximately
$90 billion of indicative bids and offers. In a single
inquiry, institutional investors can request bids or offers from
up to six of the broker-dealers who participate on the European
platform. While many of the trades conducted on our platform are
made from the posted inventory, institutional investor clients
are not restricted to trading only the bonds posted as
inventory. To transact in a specific bond that does not appear
in inventory, institutional investors can submit an online
inquiry to their chosen broker-dealers, who can respond with
live, executable prices. While, on average, institutional
investor clients receive several bids or offers from
broker-dealers in response to trade inquiries, some inquiries
may not receive any bids or offers. Our 2004 trading volume in
the European high-grade corporate bond market was
$76.5 billion. We have not identified a reliable source of
data relating to the total volume of client-to-dealer trading in
the European high-grade corporate bond market and, therefore, we
are unable to determine the portion of this trading that takes
place on our platform. The majority of trading in European
high-grade corporate bonds presently is not conducted on our
platform.
We define the emerging markets bond market generally to include
U.S. dollar- or Euro-denominated bonds issued by sovereign
entities or corporations domiciled in a developing country.
These issuers are typically located in Latin America, Asia, or
Central and Eastern Europe. The emerging markets countries whose
bonds were most frequently traded on our platform in 2004 were
Brazil, Colombia, Mexico, Peru, the Philippines, Russia, Turkey
and Venezuela.
Seventeen of our U.S. broker-dealer clients use our
platform to trade sovereign and corporate bonds issued by
entities domiciled in an emerging markets country. Many of our
institutional investor clients who have access to our
U.S. trading platform can trade sovereign and corporate
bonds issued by entities domiciled in an emerging markets
country. Institutional investor clients can direct an inquiry
simultaneously to up to six of the 17 participating
broker-dealer clients. While, on average, institutional investor
clients receive several bids or offers from broker-dealers in
response to trade inquiries, some inquiries may not receive any
bids or offers.
We have not identified a reliable source of data relating to the
total volume of client-to-dealer trading in sovereign and
corporate bonds issued by entities domiciled in an emerging
markets country and, therefore, we are unable to determine the
portion of this trading that is taking place on our platform.
The majority of trading in sovereign and corporate bonds issued
by entities domiciled in an emerging markets country presently
is not conducted on our platform.
For newly-issued U.S. high-grade corporate bonds and for
newly-issued sovereign and corporate bonds issued by entities
domiciled in an emerging markets country, we enable
U.S. institutional investors to submit indications of
interest on our electronic trading platform directly to the
underwriter syndicate desks of our broker-dealer clients.
Institutional investors can access the new-issue calendar,
prospectuses, transaction terms and online allocations on our
platform. Our broker-dealer clients add the indications of
interest for new issues submitted on our platform to the
indications of interest they receive through traditional offline
methods to build their order book for an offering. By making
U.S. high-grade new issues available on the MarketAxess
platform, issuers and broker-dealers are able to reach a broader
base of institutional investors and are able to leverage our
technology to efficiently and effectively communicate with
institutional investors throughout the offering process. Issuers
are also given greater visibility into the number and size of
the indications of interest
11
and firm commitments to purchase their bonds. Institutional
investors are given another method to gain information
regarding, and better access to, new issues.
In the new-issues market, 11 broker-dealers utilize our
platform, all of whom are in the top 20 broker-dealers as ranked
by 2004 new-issue underwriting volume and who collectively
represented the majority of new-issue underwriting volume in
2004. These dealers also continue to use traditional
distribution channels for new issues. All of our
U.S. institutional investors have access to our electronic
trading platform for new-issue bonds. In 2004, approximately
$199 billion of new issues inventory was made available on
our platform, representing approximately 45% of all
U.S. high-grade corporate bond new issues during the year.
|
|
|
Key Trading Functionalities |
|
|
|
Single Inquiry Trading Functionality |
We currently offer institutional investors the ability to
request bids or offers in a single inquiry from up to 18 of our
broker-dealer clients for U.S. high-grade corporate bonds
and from up to six of our broker-dealer clients for European
high-grade corporate bonds and for sovereign and corporate bonds
issued by entities domiciled in an emerging markets country.
Institutional investors can obtain bids or offers on any
security posted in inventory or included in the database
available on our platform. Institutional investors can choose
when they would like the broker-dealers prices or spreads
to be returned to them, in order to have the ability to see all
executable prices available at the same time. As part of the
price discovery process, institutional investors and
broker-dealers can also see the transaction history of the
security they are buying or selling by accessing Corporate
BondTicker before executing a transaction.
|
|
|
List Trading Functionality |
We currently offer institutional investors the ability to
request bids or offers on a list of up to 25 different bonds in
the U.S. high-grade corporate bond market and up to ten
different bonds in the European high-grade corporate bond
market. This facilitates efficient trading for institutional
investors such as mutual funds and hedge funds. Institutional
investors are able to have multiple lists executable throughout
the trading day, enabling them to manage their portfolio
duration, and credit and sector exposure.
|
|
|
Swap Trading Functionality |
We currently offer institutional investors the ability to
request an offer to purchase one bond and a bid to sell another
bond, in a manner such that the two trades will be executed
simultaneously, with payment based on the price or yield
differential of the securities. This functionality is currently
available for U.S. high-grade corporate bonds, European
high-grade corporate bonds, sovereign and corporate bonds issued
by entities domiciled in an emerging markets country, and
transactions involving a U.S. high-grade bond with a
U.S. government bond.
|
|
|
Information and Analytical Tools |
Corporate BondTicker provides real-time NASD TRACE data and
enhances it with MarketAxess trade data and analytical tools to
provide professional market participants with a comprehensive
set of corporate bond price information. The data include trade
time and sales information, including execution prices, as well
as MarketAxess-estimated spread-to-Treasuries, for trades
disseminated by the NASD TRACE system. The data also include
actual execution prices and spread-to-Treasury levels for
U.S. high-grade corporate bond trades executed on the
MarketAxess platform. Corporate BondTicker allows institutional
investors to search for and sort bonds based upon specific
criteria, such as volume, time/date of transaction, spread
change, issuer or security. This search function allows
institutional investors to compile information relating to
potential securities trades in a fraction of the time that it
takes to manually compile this information from disparate
sources or other electronic databases, including direct TRACE
feeds. In addition, Corporate BondTicker provides independent
credit research, as well as indicative prices for secondary
markets in loans and credit default swaps.
12
TRACE facilitates the mandatory reporting of over-the-counter
secondary market transactions in eligible fixed-income
securities. All broker-dealers that are NASD member firms have
an obligation to report transactions in corporate bonds to TRACE
under a set of rules approved by the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission (SEC). The NASD then publicly
disseminates a portion of this data, which is available free of
charge on a delayed basis through the NASD website or available
immediately for a set fee.
Corporate BondTicker is integrated directly into the MarketAxess
electronic trading platform and can be seamlessly accessed,
either when viewing securities inventory or when launching an
inquiry. Corporate BondTicker is also available through the
Internet for non-trading professional market participants,
including, among others, research analysts and rating agencies,
who can log in and access the information via an easy-to-use
browser-based interface.
We provide Corporate BondTicker as an ancillary service to our
trading clients and also to other industry participants. We
derive revenues from our Corporate BondTicker service by
charging for seat licenses per user at our broker-dealer and
institutional investor clients, through distribution agreements
with other information service providers and through bulk data
sales to third parties. Seat license fees from institutional
investor clients are waived for clients that transact a
sufficient volume of trades through MarketAxess.
We have recently added additional analytical capabilities to our
information services offerings that aim to provide clients with
more information about bond prices and market activity,
including asset swap spreads, turnover percentage and liquidity
ratios. These statistics measure a securitys trading
activity relative to its amount outstanding and relative to the
overall market, respectively, providing an additional
perspective on relative liquidity. In addition, we provide
pricing measures to help institutional investors better assess
the relative value of a corporate bond, providing more
consistent relative pricing information for institutional
investors, such as offering spread data versus the interest rate
swap curve and versus the U.S. Treasury curve. Users are also
able to download a variety of MarketAxess-compiled trade reports
containing a comprehensive review of trading activity. Corporate
BondTicker is currently the source of corporate bond trading
information for The Wall Street Journal.
Institutional investors are able to upload their corporate bond
portfolio onto our electronic trading platform utilizing the
My Portfolio trading feature. Institutional
investors who utilize My Portfolio benefit from the
ability to automatically match inventory on our platform to
bonds held in their portfolio, allowing them to more efficiently
launch an inquiry and transact in these securities. Users of
this feature can also directly access Corporate BondTicker to
obtain the trading history of the securities in their portfolio.
MarketAxess Research provides fixed-income, macroeconomic and
strategy research reports offered by 11 of our broker-dealer
clients: ABN Amro, Banc of America Securities, Bear Stearns, BNP
Paribas, Credit Suisse First Boston, Deutsche Bank, HSBC,
JPMorgan, Lehman Brothers, Morgan Stanley and UBS. These
broker-dealers determine which research reports to make
available on our platform and when they will be made available.
Users of this service benefit from being able to access these
reports in one place, rather than having to go to multiple
broker-dealer websites. In addition, clients can utilize
advanced search capabilities for finding content and can
customize the look and feel of the research views, as well as
create e-mail driven research alerts.
|
|
|
Straight-Through Processing |
Straight-through processing refers to the integration of systems
and processes to automate the trade process from
end-to-end trade execution, confirmation and
settlement without the need for manual intervention.
There are two elements of straight-through processing: internal
straight-through processing and
13
external straight-through processing. Internal straight-through
processing relates to the trade and settlement processes that
are internal to an industry participant. For example, in the
case of an institutional investor, this includes authorization
of orders, placement of orders with broker-dealers, receipt of
execution details and allocation of trades. External
straight-through processing refers to connecting seamlessly to
all external counterparts in the trading and settlement process.
Post-trade processing, which is an important part of the trading
cycle, generally entails significant cost and risk of error and
consequent failure in trade settlement. Automation by way of
straight-through processing improves the efficiency of the trade
cycle. We provide broker-dealers and institutional investors
with a range of tools that facilitate straight-through
processing, including easy-to-use online allocation tools and
post-trade messaging features that enable institutional
investors to communicate electronically between front-and
back-office systems, thereby integrating the order, portfolio
management and accounting systems of our broker-dealer and
institutional investor clients in real time. Our
straight-through processing tools can be customized to meet
specific needs of clients. We continue to build industry
partnerships to assist our clients in creating connectivity
throughout the trade cycle. Through these partnerships, we are
increasingly providing solutions that can quickly be deployed
within our clients trading operations.
Dependence on Our Broker-Dealer Clients Who Are Also Our
Stockholders
We have historically earned most of our commissions and most of
our revenues from the nine clients (ABN Amro, BNP Paribas, Banc
of America, Bear Stearns, Credit Suisse First Boston, Deutsche
Bank, JPMorgan, Lehman Brothers and UBS) that are (or whose
affiliates are) our stockholders. Affiliates of most of our
broker-dealer clients are also among our institutional investor
clients. Information relating to the percentage of our
commissions and the percentage of our revenues generated by
these nine broker-dealer clients is provided in the chart below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Percentage of commissions generated by broker-dealer client
stockholders and their respective affiliates
|
|
|
57.7% |
|
|
|
62.5% |
|
|
|
79.0% |
|
Percentage of total revenues generated by broker-dealer client
stockholders and their respective affiliates
|
|
|
53.6% |
|
|
|
57.0% |
|
|
|
66.4% |
|
Our broker-dealer clients are not restricted from buying and
selling fixed-income securities, directly or through their own
proprietary or third-party platforms, with institutional
investors. For more information, see Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations Risk Factors That May Affect Future
Results We are dependent on our broker-dealer
clients, nine of which are also our stockholders, who are not
restricted from buying and selling fixed-income securities,
directly or through their own proprietary or third-party
platforms, with institutional investors.
We currently have nine directors, eight of whom are not our
employees. Of the eight non-employee directors, two are
employees of entities that are affiliates of broker-dealer
clients and stockholders of MarketAxess, although these entities
do not have the contractual right to designate members of our
Board of Directors.
Our broker-dealer clients currently trade fixed-income
securities by means other than our electronic trading platform
and we expect them to continue to do so in the future. Our
broker-dealer clients buy and sell fixed-income securities
directly with their clients through traditional bond trading
methods, including telephone conversations, e-mail messaging and
other electronic means of communication, including proprietary,
single-dealer systems.
14
We cannot be assured that such broker-dealers primary
commitments will not be to one of our competitors. Other
companies, including some in which certain of our broker-dealer
clients or their affiliates have invested, have developed
electronic trading platforms or have announced their intention
to explore the development of electronic trading platforms that
compete or will compete with us. Furthermore, our broker-dealer
clients or their affiliates have made, or may in the future make
investments in or enter into agreements with other businesses
that directly or indirectly compete with us.
|
|
|
Stock Ownership by Our Broker-Dealer Clients |
Nine of our broker-dealer clients (ABN Amro, BNP Paribas, Banc
of America, Bear Stearns, Credit Suisse First Boston, Deutsche
Bank, JPMorgan, Lehman Brothers and UBS), or their affiliates,
are stockholders of ours. As of December 31, 2004, these
nine broker-dealer clients own 19,674,861 shares of our
common stock, our non-voting common stock and shares of our
common stock issuable upon exercise of warrants, representing
approximately 45.0% of our outstanding common stock. To the
extent that some or all of these broker-dealer clients or their
affiliates vote similarly, they are likely to be able to
influence decisions requiring approval by our stockholders.
For more information concerning the potential conflicts of
interest that may arise as a result of the various roles
(broker-dealer client and stockholder) played by certain of our
broker-dealer clients, please see the section
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations Risk Factors
That May Affect Future Results Risks Related to the
Potential Conflicts of Interest With Our Broker-Dealer Clients
Who Are Also Our Stockholders.
We promote our products and services using a variety of direct
and indirect sales and marketing strategies. Our sales force of
16 people located in the U.S. and seven persons located in the
U.K. is organized into three teams: U.S. client sales,
European client sales, and dealer relation groups both in the
U.S. and Europe. They are responsible for client acquisition
activity and for increasing use of our platform by our existing
clients. Their goal is to train and support existing and new
clients on how to use the system and to educate them as to the
benefits of utilizing an electronic fixed-income trading
platform. We employ various strategies, including advertising,
direct marketing, promotional mailings and participation in
industry conferences, to increase awareness of our brand and our
electronic trading platform. For example, we have worked with
The Wall Street Journal to establish Corporate BondTicker
as the source of information for its daily corporate bond and
high-yield tables.
Competition
The electronic trading industry is highly competitive and we
expect competition to intensify in the future. We face four main
areas of competition:
|
|
|
|
|
Telephone We compete with bond trading
business conducted over the telephone between broker-dealers and
their institutional investor clients. Institutional investors
have historically purchased fixed-income securities by
telephoning bond sales professionals at one or more
broker-dealers and inquiring about the price and availability of
individual bonds. This remains the manner in which the majority
of corporate bonds are still traded between institutional
investors and broker-dealers. |
|
|
|
E-mail We compete with bond trading business
conducted via e-mail between broker-dealers and their
institutional investor clients. E-mail provides an efficient
means of initiating product and price discovery with a large
universe of potential trading partners. |
|
|
|
Other electronic trading platforms There are
numerous other electronic trading platforms currently in
existence. These include Thomson TradeWeb, a multi-dealer to
institutional investor trading platform that has historically
focused on government bond trading, and Bloomberg, which provides |
15
|
|
|
|
|
electronic trading functionality. Thomson TradeWeb has launched
an electronic corporate bond trading platform. In addition, some
broker-dealers operate proprietary electronic trading systems
that enable institutional investors to trade directly with a
broker-dealer over an electronic medium. We believe that we are
currently the only platform primarily focused on multi-party
disclosed trading of credit products between broker-dealers and
institutional investors, though others have or may seek to
expand their product offerings to compete in this market.
Additionally, as we expand our business into new products, we
will likely come into more direct competition with other
electronic trading platforms. |
|
|
|
Market data and information vendors Several
large market data and information providers currently have a
data and analytics relationship with virtually every
institutional firm. Some of these entities currently offer
varying forms of electronic trading of fixed-income securities,
mostly on a single-dealer basis. Some of these entities have
announced their intention to expand their electronic trading
platforms or to develop new platforms. These entities are
currently direct competitors to our information services and may
in the future become direct competitors to our electronic
trading platform. |
Competitors, including companies in which some of our
broker-dealer clients have invested, have developed electronic
trading platforms or have announced their intention to explore
the development of electronic trading platforms that compete or
will compete with us. Furthermore, our broker-dealer clients
have made, or may in the future make investments in or enter
into agreements with other businesses that directly or
indirectly compete with us.
In general, we compete on the basis of a number of key factors,
including:
|
|
|
|
|
liquidity provided on the platform; |
|
|
|
magnitude and frequency of price improvement; |
|
|
|
facilitating the quality and speed of execution; |
|
|
|
total transaction costs; |
|
|
|
technology capabilities, including the ease of use of our
electronic trading platform; and |
|
|
|
range of products and services offered. |
We believe that we compete favorably with respect to these
factors. Our trading volume and client acceptance have grown
significantly over the past two years and we continue to
proactively build technology solutions that serve the needs of
the credit markets.
Our competitive position is also enhanced by the familiarity and
integration of our broker-dealer and institutional investor
clients with our electronic trading platform and other systems.
We have focused on the unique aspects of the credit markets we
serve in the development of our platform, working closely with
our clients to provide a system that is suited to their needs.
Furthermore, our broker-dealer clients have invested in building
application programming interfaces with us for inventory
contributions, electronic trading, government bond benchmark
pricing and post-trade messaging. We believe that we have
successfully built deep roots with our broker-dealer clients,
increasing our level of service to them while at the same time
increasing their commitment to our services.
Many of our current and potential competitors are more
established and substantially larger than we are and have
substantially greater market presence, as well as greater
financial, engineering, technical, marketing and other
resources. These competitors may aggressively reduce their
pricing to enter into market segments in which we have a
leadership position today, potentially subsidizing any losses
with profits from trading in other securities. In addition, many
of our competitors offer a wider range of services, have broader
name recognition and have larger customer bases than we do. Some
of them may be able to respond more quickly to new or evolving
opportunities, technologies and customer requirements than we
can and may be able to undertake more extensive promotional
activities.
16
Any combination of our competitors or our current broker-dealer
clients may enter into joint ventures or consortia to provide
services similar to those provided by us. Current and new
competitors can launch new platforms at a relatively low cost.
Others may acquire the capabilities necessary to compete with us
through acquisitions. Significant consolidation has occurred in
our industry and these firms, as well as others that may
undertake such consolidation in the future, are potential
competitors of ours.
Technology
The design and quality of our technology are critical to our
growth and our ability to execute our business strategy. Our
electronic trading platform has been designed with secure,
scalable, client-server architecture that makes broad use of
distributed computing to achieve speed, reliability and fault
tolerance. The platform is built on industry-standard
technologies.
All critical server-side components, primarily our networks,
application servers and databases, have backup equipment running
in case the main equipment fails. This offers fully redundant
system capacity to maximize uptime and minimize the potential
for loss of transaction data in the event of an internal
failure. We also seek to minimize the impact of external
failures by automatically recovering connections in the event of
a communications failure. The majority of our broker-dealer
clients have dedicated T-1 lines to our network in order to
provide fast data transfer. Our security measures include
industry-standard communications encryption.
We have designed our application with an easy-to-use,
Windows-based interface. Through a secure, single sign-on, our
clients are able to access our electronic trading platform. We
provide users an automatic software update feature which does
not require manual intervention.
We have completed the transition to new internally-developed
software for our U.S. high-grade corporate, emerging
markets and European bond platforms. The new trading platforms
incorporate the feedback we have received from our broker-dealer
and institutional investor clients. We expect that the new
platforms will offer enhanced functionality and greater
ease-of-use. Additionally, they will consolidate separate
trading protocols and systems, thereby reducing the ongoing
development and maintenance costs associated with maintaining
multiple technology platforms. The new platforms have been
designed initially to handle six times our current trading
volume.
Intellectual Property
We rely upon a combination of copyright, patent, trade secret
and trademark laws, written agreements and common law to protect
our proprietary technology, processes and other intellectual
property. Our software code, elements of our electronic trading
platform, Web site and other proprietary materials are protected
by copyright laws. We currently have five patent applications
pending, covering certain aspects of our business.
The written agreements upon which we rely to protect our
proprietary technology, processes and intellectual property
include agreements designed to protect our trade secrets.
Examples of these written agreements include third party
nondisclosure agreements, employee nondisclosure and inventions
assignment agreements, and agreements with customers,
contractors and strategic partners. Other written agreements
upon which we rely to protect our proprietary technology,
processes and intellectual property take many forms, and contain
provisions related to patent, copyright, trademark or trade
secret rights.
We have obtained U.S. federal registration of the
MarketAxess® name and logo, and the same mark and logo have
been registered in several foreign jurisdictions. We have
pending registrations for the MarketAxess®) name and logo
in several other foreign jurisdictions. In addition, we have
obtained U.S. federal registration for the marks
AutoSpotting®, BondLink® and Actives® and
associated designs, and have applied for U.S. federal
registration of the mark FrontPage. Corporate
BondTicker is a trademark we use, but it has not been
registered.
In addition to our efforts to register our intellectual
property, we believe that factors such as the technological and
creative skills of our personnel, new service developments,
frequent enhancements and reliability with respect to our
services are essential to establishing and maintaining a
technology and market leadership position.
17
Government Regulation
The securities industry and financial markets in the U.S. and
elsewhere are subject to extensive regulation. As a matter of
public policy, regulatory bodies in the U.S. and the rest of the
world are charged with safeguarding the integrity of the
securities and other financial markets and with protecting the
interests of investors participating in those markets. Our
active broker-dealer subsidiaries fall within the scope of their
regulations.
Our electronic trading platform facilitates broker-dealers
completing trades with their institutional investor clients.
With limited exceptions, we are not a party to these trades, we
do not hold any bonds in inventory, we are not directly involved
in the clearance or settlement of trades and we take no custody
of client funds or securities.
|
|
|
Regulation of the U.S. Securities Industry and
Broker-Dealers |
In the U.S., the SEC is the governmental agency responsible for
the administration of the federal securities laws. Our
U.S. subsidiary, MarketAxess Corporation, is registered
with the SEC as a broker-dealer. It is also a member of the
NASD, a self-regulatory organization to which most
broker-dealers belong. In addition, MarketAxess Corporation is a
member of the Securities Investor Protection Corporation, which
provides certain protection for clients accounts in the
event of a liquidation of a broker-dealer to the extent any such
accounts are held by the broker-dealer.
Finally, MarketAxess Corporation is registered with certain
states and the District of Columbia as a broker-dealer. The
states and the District of Columbia are responsible for the
administration of their respective blue sky laws,
rules and regulations.
|
|
|
Regulation of the Non-U.S. Securities Industries and
Investment Service Providers |
The securities industry and financial markets in the U.K., the
European Union and elsewhere are subject to extensive
regulation. MarketAxess Europe Limited may fall within the scope
of those regulations depending upon the extent to which it is
characterized as providing a regulated investment service.
Our principal regulator in the U.K. is the FSA. Our subsidiary,
MarketAxess Europe Limited, is registered as a dealer with the
FSA.
The securities industry in the member states of the European
Union is regulated by agencies in each member state. European
Union measures provide for the mutual recognition of regulatory
agencies and of prudential supervision making possible the grant
of a single authorization for providers of investment services
which, in general, is valid throughout the European Union. As an
FSA-approved dealer, MarketAxess Europe Limited receives the
benefit of this authorization.
Employees
As of December 31, 2004, we had 172 employees, 145 of whom
were based in the U.S. and 27 of whom were based in the U.K.
None of our employees is represented by a labor union. We
consider our relationships with our employees to be good and
have not experienced any interruptions of operations due to
labor disagreements.
Company Information
Our Internet website address is www.marketaxess.com. Through our
Internet website, we will make available, free of charge, the
following reports as soon as reasonably practicable after
electronically filing them with, or furnishing them to, the SEC:
our annual report on Form 10-K; our quarterly reports on
Form 10-Q; our current reports on Form 8-K; and
amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to
Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Our
Proxy Statements for our Annual Meetings are also available
through our Internet website. Our Internet website and the
information contained therein or connected thereto are not
intended to be incorporated into this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
18
You may also obtain copies of our reports without charge by
writing to:
MarketAxess
Holdings Inc.
140
Broadway
New
York, NY 10005
Attn:
Investor Relations
In addition, our Board of Directors has standing Audit,
Compensation and Nominating Committees. Each of these committees
has a written charter approved by our Board of Directors. Our
Board of Directors has also adopted a set of Corporate
Governance Guidelines. Copies of each committee charter, along
with the Corporate Governance Guidelines, are also posted on our
web site. The information on our corporate web site is not
incorporated by reference into this report.
We have obtained federal registration of the MarketAxess®
name and logo, as well as for the marks Auto-Spotting®,
BondLink® and Actives® and have applied for
U.S. federal registration of the mark
FrontPage. Other trademarks and service marks
appearing in this annual report on Form 10-K are the
property of their respective holders.
Our corporate headquarters and principal U.S. offices are
located at 140 Broadway, New York, New York, where we lease the
entire 42nd floor, which is approximately
24,000 square feet. This lease expires in February 2010. In
addition, we lease another 17,000 square feet at 350
Madison Avenue, New York, New York, which we currently sublet.
The lease expires in April 2011. MarketAxess Europe
Limiteds headquarters and principal offices are located at
71 Fenchurch Street, London, England, where we lease the entire
9th and 10th floors, which are approximately 4,700 square
feet per floor. This lease expires in November 2015. MarketAxess
Europe Limited sublets the 9th floor and was notified in
November 2004 that the sublessee will exercise its termination
right and will vacate the premises in May 2005. Our current
intention is to reoccupy the 9th floor upon such event.
|
|
Item 3. |
Legal Proceedings |
We are not currently a party to any material legal proceedings.
We may be subject to various claims and legal actions arising in
the ordinary course of business.
|
|
Item 4. |
Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders |
No matters were submitted to security holders for a vote during
the fourth quarter of our fiscal year ended December 31,
2004.
19
PART II
|
|
Item 5. |
Market for Registrants Common Equity, Related
Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity
Securities |
Price Range
Our common stock commenced trading on the NASDAQ National Market
under the symbol MKTX on November 5, 2004.
Prior to that date, there was no public market for our common
stock. On November 4, 2004, the registration statement
relating to our initial public offering was declared effective
by the SEC. The high and low bid information for our common
stock, as reported by NASDAQ, was as follows:
|
|
|
November 5, 2004 |
to |
December 31, 2004 |
|
High |
|
Low |
|
|
|
$24.41 |
|
$12.75 |
On March 28, 2005, the last reported closing price of our
common stock on the NASDAQ National Market was $10.26.
Holders
There were approximately 188 holders of record of our common
stock as of March 28, 2005.
Dividend Policy
We have not declared or paid any cash dividends on our capital
stock since our inception. We intend to retain future earnings
to finance the operation and expansion of our business and do
not anticipate paying any cash dividends in the foreseeable
future.
In the event we decide to declare dividends on our common stock
in the future, such declaration will be subject to the
discretion of our Board of Directors. Our Board may take into
account such matters as general business conditions, our
financial results, capital requirements, contractual, legal, and
regulatory restrictions on the payment of dividends by us to our
stockholders or by our subsidiaries to us and any such other
factors as our Board may deem relevant.
Use of Proceeds
On November 4, 2004, the registration statement relating to
our initial public offering (No. 333-112718) was declared
effective. We received net proceeds from the sale of the shares
of our common stock in the offering of $53.9 million, at an
initial public offering price of $11.00 per share, after
deducting underwriting discounts and commissions and estimated
offering expenses. Additionally, prior to the closing of the
initial public offering, all outstanding shares of convertible
preferred stock were converted into 14,484,493 shares of
common stock and 4,266,310 shares of non-voting common
stock.
The underwriters for our initial public offering were Credit
Suisse First Boston LLC, J.P. Morgan Securities Inc., Banc
of America Securities LLC, Bear, Stearns & Co. Inc. and
UBS Securities LLC.
All of the underwriters are affiliates of some of our
broker-dealer clients and affiliates of some our institutional
investor clients. In addition, affiliates of all the
underwriters are stockholders of ours.
Except for salaries, and reimbursements for travel expenses and
other out-of-pocket costs incurred in the ordinary course of
business, none of the proceeds from the offering have been paid
by us, directly or indirectly, to any of our directors or
officers or any of their associates, or to any persons owning
ten percent or more of our outstanding stock or to any of our
affiliates. As of December 31, 2004, we have not used any
of the net proceeds from the initial public offering for product
development costs, sales and marketing activities and working
capital. We have invested the proceeds from the offering in cash
and cash equivalents and short-term marketable securities
pending their use for these or other purposes.
20
Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities
Between January 2003 and December 2004, we issued an aggregate
of 98,161 shares of common stock to 11 former employees and
one current employee upon exercise of vested stock options. The
shares were issued at an average price of approximately
$3.10 per share for total proceeds of $0.3 million.
Securities Authorized For Issuance Under Equity Compensation
Plans
The following table provides certain information regarding
common stock authorized for issuance under our equity
compensation plans, as of December 31, 2004.
Equity Compensation Plan Information
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of Securities | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Remaining Available for | |
|
|
Number of Securities | |
|
|
|
Future Issuance under | |
|
|
to be Issued upon | |
|
Weighted-Average | |
|
Equity Compensation | |
|
|
Exercise of | |
|
Exercise Price of | |
|
Plans (Excluding | |
|
|
Outstanding Options, | |
|
Outstanding Options, | |
|
Securities Reflected | |
|
|
Warrants and Rights | |
|
Warrants and Rights | |
|
in Column (a)) | |
Plan Category |
|
(a) | |
|
(b) | |
|
(c) | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Equity compensation plans approved by stockholders(1)
|
|
|
4,018,693 |
|
|
$ |
5.71 |
|
|
|
3,011,839 |
|
Equity compensation plans not approved by stockholders(2)
|
|
|
888,889 |
|
|
$ |
2.70 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
4,907,582 |
|
|
$ |
5.17 |
|
|
|
3,011,839 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
These plans consist of the Companys 2004 Stock Incentive
Plan, 2001 Stock Incentive Plan and 2000 Stock Incentive Plan. |
|
(2) |
Represents the grant of a stock option to a senior officer. This
option is now fully vested. |
Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
We did not repurchase any of our securities during any month
within the quarter ended December 31, 2004.
21
|
|
Item 6. |
Selected Financial Data |
The selected statement of operations data for each of the years
ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002 and the selected
balance sheet data as of December 31, 2004 and 2003 have
been derived from our audited financial statements included
elsewhere in this Form 10-K. The selected statement of
operations data for the year ended December 31, 2001 and
for the period from April 11, 2000 (date of inception)
through December 31, 2000, and the balance sheet data as of
December 31, 2002, 2001 and 2000 have been derived from our
audited financial statements not included in this Form 10-K.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 11, 2000 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Date of | |
|
|
|
|
Inception) | |
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
through | |
|
|
| |
|
December 31, | |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
2001 | |
|
2000 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In thousands, except share and per share data) | |
Statement of Operations Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commissions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. high-grade
|
|
$ |
45,465 |
|
|
$ |
40,310 |
|
|
$ |
13,390 |
|
|
$ |
3,392 |
|
|
$ |
47 |
|
|
|
European high-grade
|
|
|
15,142 |
|
|
|
7,126 |
|
|
|
975 |
|
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other(1)
|
|
|
7,565 |
|
|
|
5,364 |
|
|
|
1,190 |
|
|
|
833 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commissions
|
|
|
68,172 |
|
|
|
52,800 |
|
|
|
15,555 |
|
|
|
4,273 |
|
|
|
47 |
|
|
Information and user access fees
|
|
|
2,713 |
|
|
|
1,144 |
|
|
|
287 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
License fees
|
|
|
3,143 |
|
|
|
4,145 |
|
|
|
924 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income
|
|
|
882 |
|
|
|
371 |
|
|
|
742 |
|
|
|
2,132 |
|
|
|
1,666 |
|
|
Other(2)
|
|
|
887 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,193 |
|
|
|
181 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues
|
|
|
75,797 |
|
|
|
58,460 |
|
|
|
18,701 |
|
|
|
6,598 |
|
|
|
1,713 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Employee compensation and benefits
|
|
|
33,146 |
|
|
|
26,860 |
|
|
|
24,290 |
|
|
|
24,356 |
|
|
|
5,862 |
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
3,468 |
|
|
|
4,688 |
|
|
|
6,658 |
|
|
|
5,127 |
|
|
|
1,446 |
|
|
Technology and communications
|
|
|
6,402 |
|
|
|
4,755 |
|
|
|
3,943 |
|
|
|
5,240 |
|
|
|
2,304 |
|
|
Professional and consulting fees
|
|
|
4,908 |
|
|
|
4,180 |
|
|
|
4,699 |
|
|
|
12,903 |
|
|
|
5,005 |
|
|
Warrant-related expense(3)
|
|
|
2,524 |
|
|
|
5,400 |
|
|
|
8,624 |
|
|
|
7,484 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
Marketing and advertising
|
|
|
2,530 |
|
|
|
2,292 |
|
|
|
2,588 |
|
|
|
1,780 |
|
|
|
235 |
|
|
Moneyline revenue share
|
|
|
1,240 |
|
|
|
1,806 |
|
|
|
708 |
|
|
|
408 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restructuring charges
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(674 |
) |
|
|
8,244 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
4,263 |
|
|
|
4,077 |
|
|
|
3,941 |
|
|
|
6,153 |
|
|
|
3,681 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total expenses
|
|
|
58,481 |
|
|
|
54,058 |
|
|
|
54,777 |
|
|
|
71,694 |
|
|
|
18,548 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before taxes
|
|
|
17,316 |
|
|
|
4,402 |
|
|
|
(36,076 |
) |
|
|
(65,096 |
) |
|
|
(16,835 |
) |
Provision (benefit) for income taxes(4)
|
|
|
(41,330 |
) |
|
|
190 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)(4)
|
|
$ |
58,646 |
|
|
$ |
4,212 |
|
|
$ |
(36,076 |
) |
|
$ |
(65,096 |
) |
|
$ |
(16,835 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) per common share(5):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$ |
6.90 |
|
|
$ |
(2.20 |
) |
|
$ |
(14.39 |
) |
|
$ |
(24.08 |
) |
|
$ |
(7.53 |
) |
|
|
Diluted
|
|
$ |
1.91 |
|
|
$ |
(2.20 |
) |
|
$ |
(14.39 |
) |
|
$ |
(24.08 |
) |
|
$ |
(7.53 |
) |
Weighted average number of shares of common stock outstanding:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
7,097,682 |
|
|
|
3,288,464 |
|
|
|
3,290,326 |
|
|
|
3,097,994 |
|
|
|
2,573,979 |
|
|
|
Diluted
|
|
|
30,638,644 |
|
|
|
3,288,464 |
|
|
|
3,290,326 |
|
|
|
3,097,994 |
|
|
|
2,573,979 |
|
22
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
2001 | |
|
2000 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In thousands) | |
Balance Sheet Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments
|
|
$ |
103,449 |
|
|
$ |
36,182 |
|
|
$ |
23,806 |
|
|
$ |
37,200 |
|
|
$ |
49,927 |
|
|
Working capital
|
|
|
103,996 |
|
|
|
31,884 |
|
|
|
20,140 |
|
|
|
30,588 |
|
|
|
43,944 |
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
176,705 |
|
|
|
57,183 |
|
|
|
39,437 |
|
|
|
56,042 |
|
|
|
55,532 |
|
|
Total redeemable convertible preferred stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
159,664 |
|
|
|
148,209 |
|
|
|
128,527 |
|
|
|
67,555 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 11, 2000 | |
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
(Date of Inception) | |
|
|
| |
|
through | |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
2001 | |
|
December 31, 2000 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In billions) | |
Trading Volume Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. high-grade
|
|
$ |
183.5 |
|
|
$ |
140.3 |
|
|
$ |
39.4 |
|
|
$ |
10.0 |
|
|
$ |
0.2 |
|
|
European high-grade
|
|
|
76.5 |
|
|
|
31.8 |
|
|
|
4.2 |
|
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other(1)
|
|
|
38.1 |
|
|
|
20.1 |
|
|
|
4.8 |
|
|
|
1.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$ |
298.1 |
|
|
$ |
192.2 |
|
|
$ |
48.4 |
|
|
$ |
11.7 |
|
|
$ |
0.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
Other commissions consist primarily of commissions from the
trading of emerging markets and new issues bonds. Other trading
volume refers to the volume of bonds traded of the
aforementioned types. |
|
(2) |
Other revenues consist primarily of telecommunications line
charges to broker-dealer clients, other miscellaneous revenues
and, in 2002, insurance proceeds. |
|
(3) |
Warrant-related expense is the expense associated with the
allocation of warrants to purchase shares of our common stock
issuable pursuant to a warrant issued to six of our
broker-dealer clients at the time they made an equity investment
in us. The total number of shares underlying the warrant is
5,000,002. While the warrant was expensed each quarter, this was
a non-cash expense that varied with the underlying fair market
value of our common stock. The final share allocations under the
warrant program occurred on March 1, 2004. Accordingly, we
will no longer record any expense related to this warrant. |
|
(4) |
During the year ended December 31, 2004, we reduced the
valuation allowance relating to our deferred tax assets by
$46.2 million from $64.3 million to
$18.1 million. Due to the fact that we had achieved
multiple quarters of profitability, it became more likely than
not that we would be able to utilize our net operating loss
carryforwards. We also determined that it was more likely than
not that all of the temporary differences relating to the
deductibility of certain expenses for book and tax purposes,
including the warrant-related expense, would be utilized prior
to expiration. We also recognized $1.6 million in tax
credits and a reversal of a prior year overstatement of
$1.0 million. Without giving effect to the reduction of the
valuation allowance, tax credits and reversal, our net income
for the year ended December 31, 2004 would have been
$9.9 million. |
|
(5) |
Includes the effect of dividends accrued on our redeemable
convertible preferred stock. We have not included dilutive net
income (loss) per common share for periods in which we had a net
loss, as the effect would have been anti-dilutive. Upon
completion of our initial public offering, all outstanding
shares of redeemable convertible preferred stock and convertible
preferred stock were converted into 14,484,493 shares of
common stock and 4,266,310 shares of non-voting common
stock. |
|
(6) |
Working capital is defined as current assets minus current
liabilities. Current assets consist of Cash and cash
equivalents, Short-term investments, Securities and cash
provided as collateral, Accounts receivable, and Prepaid
expenses. Current liabilities consist of Accrued employee
compensation, Deferred license revenue, and Accounts payable,
accrued expenses and other liabilities. |
23
|
|
Item 7. |
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations |
You should read the following discussion and analysis of our
financial condition and results of operations in conjunction
with Selected Financial Data and our consolidated
financial statements and related notes included elsewhere in
this Form 10-K. In addition to historical information, this
discussion and analysis contains forward-looking statements that
involve risks, uncertainties and assumptions. Our actual results
may differ materially from those anticipated in these
forward-looking statements as a result of certain factors,
including those set forth under Risk Factors That
May Affect Future Results and elsewhere in this
Form 10-K.
Executive Summary
MarketAxess operates one of the leading platforms for the
electronic trading of corporate bonds and certain other types of
fixed-income securities. Through our platform, 539 active
institutional investor client firms (firms that executed at
least one trade through our electronic trading platform between
January 2004 and December 2004) can access the aggregate
liquidity provided by the collective interest of our 22
broker-dealer clients in buying or selling bonds through our
platform. Our active institutional investor clients include
investment advisers, mutual funds, insurance companies, public
and private pension funds, bank portfolios and hedge funds. We
also provide data and analytical tools that help our clients
make trading decisions and we facilitate the trading process by
electronically communicating order information between trading
counterparties. Our revenues are primarily generated from the
trading of U.S. and European high-grade corporate bonds.
Our multi-dealer trading platform allows our institutional
investor clients to simultaneously request competing, executable
bids or offers from our broker-dealer clients and execute trades
with the broker-dealer of their choice from among those that
choose to respond. We offer our broker-dealer clients a solution
that enables them to efficiently reach our institutional
investor clients for the distribution and trading of bonds. In
addition to U.S. high-grade corporate bonds and European
high-grade corporate bonds, we also offer our clients the
ability to trade emerging markets bonds, which we define as
sovereign and corporate bonds issued by entities domiciled in an
emerging markets country, including both investment-grade and
non-investment grade debt.
The majority of our revenues are derived from commissions for
trades executed on our platform that are billed to our
broker-dealer clients on a monthly basis. We also derive
revenues from information and user access fees, license fees and
other income. Our expenses consist of employee compensation and
benefits, depreciation and amortization, technology and
communication expenses, professional and consulting fees,
warrant-related expense, marketing and advertising and other
general and administrative expenses.
Based on our limited operating history, we will encounter risks
and difficulties frequently experienced by companies in rapidly
evolving industries, such as the electronic financial services
industry. These risks and difficulties include, but are not
limited to, our ability to:
|
|
|
|
|
attract and retain broker-dealer and institutional investor
clients; |
|
|
|
deliver, expand and enhance reliable and cost-effective product
and service offerings; |
|
|
|
respond effectively to competition; |
|
|
|
diversify our sources of revenues; |
|
|
|
maintain adequate control of our expenses; and |
|
|
|
attract and retain personnel. |
We operate in a highly competitive business environment. In
particular, we compete with bond trading business conducted over
the telephone between broker-dealers and their institutional
investor clients. Institutional investors have historically
purchased fixed-income securities by contacting bond sales
professionals at one or more broker-dealers by telephone or
e-mail and inquiring about the price and availability of
individual bonds. This remains the manner in which the majority
of corporate bonds are traded between institutional investors
and broker-dealers. In addition, there are numerous other
electronic trading platforms
24
currently in existence. These include Thomson TradeWeb, a
multi-dealer to institutional investor trading platform, and
Bloomberg, which provides electronic trading functionality.
We believe that we compete favorably on the basis of several
factors, including the liquidity provided on our platform, the
magnitude and frequency of price improvement enabled by our
platform, the quality and speed of execution, total transaction
costs, technological capabilities, including the ease of use of
our trading platform, and the range of our products and
services. We also believe that we are well positioned to respond
to future challenges due to the experience and continuity of our
senior management team.
We seek to grow and diversify our revenues by capitalizing on
our status as the operator of a leading platform for the
electronic trading of corporate bonds and certain other types of
fixed-income securities. The key elements of our strategy are:
|
|
|
|
|
to innovate and efficiently add new functionality and product
offerings to the MarketAxess platform which we believe will help
us increase our market share with existing clients, as well as
expand our client base; |
|
|
|
to leverage our technology, as well as our strong broker-dealer
and institutional investor relationships, to deploy our
electronic trading platform into additional product and client
segments within the fixed-income securities markets; |
|
|
|
to continue building our existing service offerings so that our
electronic trading platform is fully integrated into the
workflow of our broker-dealer and institutional investor clients
and to continue to add functionality to allow our clients to
achieve a fully automated end-to-end straight-through processing
solution (automation from trade initiation to settlement); |
|
|
|
to add new content and analytical capabilities to Corporate
BondTicker in order to improve the value of the information we
provide to our clients; and |
|
|
|
to continue to supplement our internal growth by entering into
strategic alliances, or acquiring businesses or technologies
that will enable us to enter new markets, provide new products
or services, or otherwise enhance the value of our platform to
our clients. |
History
MarketAxess was formed in April 2000, and pilot trading on our
fully disclosed multi-dealer platform began in October 2000. We
launched trading on our electronic platform in January 2001 with
eight broker-dealer clients. Since that time, our broker-dealer
clients have grown to include 22 of the leading securities
firms. Our broker-dealer clients currently are: ABN Amro, Banc
of America Securities, Barclays, Bear Stearns, BNP Paribas,
Citigroup, Credit Suisse First Boston, Deutsche Bank, DZ Bank
AG, First Tennessee National, Goldman Sachs, HSBC, ING Financial
Markets, JPMorgan, Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch, Morgan
Stanley, The Royal Bank of Scotland, Santander Investment
Securities, Société Générale, UBS and
Wachovia.
In March 2001, we acquired Trading Edge, Inc. (Trading
Edge), the operator of an anonymous trading platform for
U.S. corporate bonds, convertible bonds, municipal bonds,
and sovereign and corporate bonds issued by entities domiciled
in emerging markets. In an anonymous platform, the identities of
buyers and sellers of securities are not disclosed to each
other. Rather, the broker-dealer stands between buyers and
sellers, acting as riskless principal to both sides of each
transaction. Two clearing brokers cleared all trades executed on
the Trading Edge platform. The MarketAxess platform differs from
the Trading Edge platform in that trading on the MarketAxess
platform is conducted on a fully-disclosed basis, where buyers
and sellers are aware of the others identity. Trades
executed on the MarketAxess platform are settled directly
between the buyer and the seller, with no credit risk exposure
to MarketAxess.
In May 2001, we decided to halt development efforts for the
convertible bond trading platform, while continuing to operate
that platform with its existing functionality. In October 2001,
we decided to terminate the municipal bond trading platform. The
decisions with respect to the convertible bond and municipal
bond trading platforms were not contemplated at the time of the
Trading Edge acquisition and resulted from lower
25
than anticipated trading volumes on these platforms. We
currently maintain an anonymous trading platform capability for
U.S. corporate bonds, convertible bonds, and sovereign and
corporate bonds issued by entities domiciled in an emerging
markets country, although it is dormant.
In August 2001, one of our U.K. subsidiaries, MarketAxess Europe
Limited, began operations with secondary electronic trading in
U.S. dollar-denominated and Euro-denominated corporate
bonds.
In February 2002, we reorganized into MarketAxess Holdings Inc.,
a holding company that operates primarily through two operating
subsidiaries, MarketAxess Corporation and MarketAxess Europe
Limited. These subsidiaries are registered as broker-dealers
with applicable market regulators in the U.S. and the U.K.,
respectively.
We launched our information service, Corporate
BondTickertm,
in July 2002. Corporate BondTicker combines NASD TRACE data
with MarketAxess data and analytical tools to provide trading
professionals, research firms, rating and news agencies, and
other market participants with a comprehensive set of corporate
bond information.
We have been funded by nine of our 22 broker-dealer clients
through purchases of equity securities, primarily convertible
preferred stock, for a total purchase price of
$79.8 million. In addition, we acquired cash and
investments at fair value totaling $36.4 million in
connection with the acquisition of Trading Edge. We also
received net proceeds of $53.9 million from the sale of shares
of our common stock in our November 2004 initial public
offering. As of December 31, 2004, we had cash, cash
equivalents and short-term investments totaling
$103.4 million. We have no outstanding debt.
Critical Factors Affecting Our Industry and Our Company
|
|
|
Economic, Political and Market Factors |
The global fixed-income securities industry is risky and
volatile and is directly affected by a number of economic,
political and market factors that may result in declining
trading volume. These factors could have a material adverse
effect on our business, financial condition and results of
operations. These factors include:
|
|
|
|
|
the current interest rate environment, including the volatility
of interest rates and investors forecasts of future
interest rates; |
|
|
|
economic and political conditions in the United States, Europe
and elsewhere; |
|
|
|
the availability of cash for investment by mutual funds and
other institutional and retail investors; |
|
|
|
the volume of new fixed-income securities being brought to the
market; |
|
|
|
investors assessment of the level of risk attributable to
the issuers of corporate bonds; |
|
|
|
adverse market conditions, including unforeseen market closures
or other disruptions in trading; |
|
|
|
concerns over inflation and weakening consumer confidence levels; |
|
|
|
the level and volatility of foreign currency exchange
rates; and |
|
|
|
legislative and regulatory changes. |
Any one or more of these factors may contribute to reduced
trading activity in the fixed-income securities markets
generally. Our revenues and profitability are likely to decline
during periods of stagnant economic conditions or low trading
volume in the U.S. and global fixed-income securities markets.
The global fixed-income securities industry generally, and the
electronic financial services markets in which we engage in
particular, are highly competitive, and we expect competition to
intensify in the future. We will continue to compete with bond
trading conducted directly between broker-dealers and their
26
institutional investor clients over the telephone or
electronically. In addition, our current and prospective
competitors are numerous and include:
|
|
|
|
|
other multi-dealer trading companies; |
|
|
|
market data and information vendors; |
|
|
|
securities and futures exchanges; |
|
|
|
inter-dealer brokerage firms; |
|
|
|
electronic communications networks; |
|
|
|
technology, software, information and media or other companies
that have existing commercial relationships with broker-dealers
or institutional investors; and |
|
|
|
other electronic marketplaces that are not currently in the
securities business. |
Competitors, including companies in which some of our
broker-dealer clients have invested, have developed electronic
trading platforms or have announced their intention to explore
the development of electronic platforms that compete or will
compete with us.
In general, we compete on the basis of a number of key factors,
including:
|
|
|
|
|
the liquidity provided on our platform; |
|
|
|
the magnitude and frequency of price improvement enabled by our
platform; |
|
|
|
the quality and speed of execution; |
|
|
|
total transaction costs; |
|
|
|
technology capabilities, including the ease of use of our
trading platform; and |
|
|
|
the range of our products and services. |
We believe that we compete favorably with respect to these
factors. Our trading volume and client acceptance have grown
significantly over the past three years and we continue to
proactively build technology solutions that serve the needs of
the credit markets.
Our competitive position is also enhanced by the familiarity and
integration of our broker-dealer and institutional investor
clients with our electronic trading platform and other systems.
We have focused on the unique aspects of the credit markets we
serve in the development of our platform, working closely with
our clients to provide a system that is suited to their needs.
Many of our current and potential competitors are more
established and substantially larger than we are, and have a
substantially greater market presence, as well as greater
financial, engineering, technical, marketing and other
resources. These competitors may aggressively reduce their
pricing to enter into market segments in which we have a
leadership position today, potentially subsidizing any losses
with profits from trading in other securities. In addition, many
of our competitors offer a wide range of services, have broader
name recognition and have larger customer bases. Some of them
may be able to respond more quickly to new or evolving
opportunities, technologies and customer requirements than we
can and may be able to undertake more extensive promotional
activities.
Any combination of our competitors or our current broker-dealer
clients may enter into joint ventures or consortia to provide
services similar to those provided by us. Others may acquire the
capabilities necessary to compete with us through acquisitions.
Significant consolidation has occurred in our industry and these
firms, as well as others that may undertake such consolidation
in the future, are potential competitors of ours.
27
Our industry has been and is subject to continuous regulatory
changes and may become subject to new regulations or changes in
the interpretation or enforcement of existing regulations, which
could require us to incur significant costs.
The requirements of being a public company may strain our
resources, divert managements attention and affect our
ability to attract and retain qualified board members. As a
public company, we are subject to the reporting requirements of
the Securities Exchange Act, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and
NASDAQ rules promulgated in response to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.
The requirements of these rules and regulations have increased
our legal and financial compliance costs, made some activities
more difficult, time-consuming or costly and may also place
undue strain on our systems and resources. In order to maintain
and improve the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and
procedures and internal control over financial reporting,
significant resources and management oversight are required.
|
|
|
Rapid Technological Changes |
We must continue to enhance and improve our electronic trading
platform. The electronic financial services industry is
characterized by increasingly complex systems and
infrastructures and new business models. If new industry
standards and practices emerge, our existing technology, systems
and electronic trading platform may become obsolete or our
existing business may be harmed. Our future success will depend
on our ability to:
|
|
|
|
|
enhance our existing products and services; |
|
|
|
develop and/or license new products and technologies that
address the increasingly sophisticated and varied needs of our
broker-dealer and institutional investor clients and prospective
clients; and |
|
|
|
respond to technological advances and emerging industry
standards and practices on a cost-effective and timely basis. |
Trends in Our Business
The following table identifies changes in key financial measures
of our business for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003
and 2002.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
($ in thousands) | |
Revenues
|
|
$ |
75,797 |
|
|
$ |
58,460 |
|
|
$ |
18,701 |
|
% change
|
|
|
29.7 |
% |
|
|
212.6 |
% |
|
|
N/A |
|
Income (loss) before taxes
|
|
|
17,316 |
|
|
|
4,402 |
|
|
|
(36,076 |
) |
Net income (loss)(1)
|
|
|
58,646 |
|
|
|
4,212 |
|
|
|
(36,076 |
) |
Net increase (decrease) in cash, cash equivalents and short-term
investments
|
|
|
67,267 |
|
|
|
12,376 |
|
|
|
(13,394 |
) |
|
|
(1) |
During the year ended December 31, 2004, we reduced the
valuation allowance relating to our deferred tax assets by
$46.2 million from $64.3 million to
$18.1 million. Due to the fact that we had achieved
multiple quarters of profitability, it became more likely than
not that we would be able to utilize our net operating loss
carryforwards. We also determined that it was more likely than
not that all of the temporary differences relating to the
deductibility of certain expenses for book and tax purposes,
including the warrant-related expense, would be utilized prior
to expiration. We also recognized $1.6 million in tax
credits and a reversal of a prior year overstatement of
$1.0 million. Without giving effect to the reduction of the
valuation allowance, tax credits and reversal, our net income
for the year ended December 31, 2004 would have been
$9.9 million. |
28
The majority of our revenues are primarily derived from
commissions for transactions in U.S. and European high-grade
corporate bonds executed on our platform. These commissions are
paid by our 22 broker-dealer clients.
Most transactions executed on our platform are originated by our
active institutional investor clients (firms that executed at
least one trade through our electronic trading platform between
January 2004 and December 2004), consisting of 539 institutions
as of December 31, 2004. The volume of transactions
executed across our platform is largely determined by the number
of transaction inquiries originated by our institutional
investor clients and the competitiveness of the prices they
receive from our broker-dealer clients in response to these
inquiries.
The notional value of bonds traded over our platform has grown
rapidly since the commercial launch of the platform in January
2001. The total notional value traded increased from
$11.7 billion for the year ended December 31, 2001, to
$48.4 billion for the year ended December 31, 2002, to
$192.2 billion for the year ended December 31, 2003
and to $298.1 billion for the year ended December 31,
2004. This has resulted in revenues that have grown from $6.6
million for the year ended December 31, 2001, to
$18.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2002, to
$58.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2003 and
to $75.8 million in the year ended December 31, 2004.
Our overall trading volume is impacted by volume in the
corporate bond market generally. Various factors that have
historically impacted overall corporate bond market trading
volume include the absolute level of interest rates, the
direction of interest rate movements, the level of new issues of
U.S. high-grade corporate bonds, volatility of corporate
bond spreads versus U.S. Treasury securities, economic
conditions, the geopolitical environment, market psychology,
relative prices of competing asset classes and, more
importantly, changes in expectations about inflation. While we
believe that trading volume is affected more by volatility in
the corporate bond market than by the absolute levels of
interest rates or the direction of interest rate changes, we
have limited experience with periods of rising interest rates.
If interest rates continue to rise, it is possible that our
trading volumes will continue to be adversely impacted. Because
a significant percentage of our revenue is tied directly to the
volume of securities traded on our platform, it is likely that a
general decline in trading volumes, regardless of the cause of
such decline, would reduce our revenues and have a significant
negative impact on our future profitability.
|
|
|
Commission Revenue Trends |
Commissions are generally calculated as a percentage of notional
dollar volume of bonds traded on our platform and vary based on
the type and the maturity of the bond traded. Commission
revenues have grown from $15.6 million for the year ended
December 31, 2002, to $52.8 million for the year ended
December 31, 2003 and to $68.2 million for the year
ended December 31, 2004.
Our standard fee schedule for U.S. high-grade corporate
bonds was revised in August 2003 to provide lower average
transaction commissions for dealers who transact higher
U.S. high-grade volumes through our platform, while at the
same time providing us with an element of fixed commissions over
the two-year term of the plans. One of the new plans that is
well suited for our most active broker-dealer clients includes a
fee cap that limits the potential growth in U.S. high-grade
revenue. The fee caps were set to take effect at volume levels
significantly above those being transacted at the time the new
transaction fee plans were introduced. Most of our broker-dealer
clients have entered into fee arrangements with respect to the
trading of U.S. high-grade corporate bonds that include
both a fixed component and a variable component. During periods
of decreased or increased volume transacted on our system by
those clients in this product, the variable portion of the fee
arrangement will result in decreased or increased revenue, but
the fixed portion of the fees will not be affected. A continued
period of decreased volume of U.S. high-grade corporate
bond trading on our platform could result in our being unable to
renew these transaction fee arrangements on terms that are
acceptable to us, if at all. To the extent that we are not able
to renew these arrangements on their current terms or other
terms that are acceptable to us, our commissions in future
periods could be negatively affected.
29
In addition to the commissions discussed above, we have also
earned revenue from certain fees paid by institutional investor
and broker-dealer clients, income earned on investments and
insurance recoveries. Revenues from these sources totaled
$3.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2002,
$5.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2003 and
$7.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2004. We
anticipate that revenues other than commissions will grow as we
expand our data and information services offerings.
Growth in revenue and in the value of trades executed on our
platform has been achieved without commensurate increases in
expenses. Our total expenses were $54.8 million for the
year ended December 31, 2002, $54.1 million for the
year ended December 31, 2003 and $58.5 million for the
year ended December 31, 2004. As a result, we had a Loss
before income taxes of $36.1 million for the year ended
December 31, 2002, Income before income taxes of
$4.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2003 and
Income before income taxes of $17.3 million for the year
ended December 31, 2004.
In the normal course of business, we incur the following
expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
employee compensation and benefits expenses, which include
salaries, incentive compensation and related employee benefits
and taxes; |
|
|
|
depreciation and amortization expenses, which result primarily
from the depreciation of the fixed assets we purchase, including
computer software and hardware used in the development of our
trading systems; |
|
|
|
technology and communications expenses, which consist primarily
of costs for our network connections with our customers and our
data centers, as well as connectivity to various other market
participants; |
|
|
|
professional and consulting expenses, which consist primarily of
legal and accounting expenses; |
|
|
|
marketing and advertising expenses, which consist primarily of
media, print and other advertising expenses as well as client
marketing expenses; and |
|
|
|
general and administrative expenses, which include travel and
entertainment expenses, rental and occupancy expenses, and other
administrative expenses and general office costs. |
We anticipate expense growth in the future, notably in employee
compensation and benefits, professional and consulting fees and
general and administrative expenses now that we are a public
company, but we believe that operating leverage can be achieved
by increasing volumes in existing products and adding new
products without substantial additions to our infrastructure.
As a public company, we are subject to the requirements of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, which will require us to incur
significant expenditures in the near term to establish systems
and hire and train personnel to comply with these requirements.
In addition, as a public company, we are required, pursuant to
SFAS No. 123(R), Share-Based Payment
(SFAS No. 123(R)), which will be effective on
July 1, 2005, to record compensation expense based on the
fair value of options issued to employees. Currently, we are
only required to record compensation expense to the extent that
the fair value of our common stock exceeds the exercise price of
the options on the measurement date.
30
Revenues and Expenses
We derive our revenues from commissions from trades executed on
our platform, information and user access fees, license fees and
other income. A table detailing the amount and percentage of
revenue generated from each of these sources is provided below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
$ | |
|
% | |
|
$ | |
|
% | |
|
$ | |
|
% | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
($ in thousands) | |
Revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commissions
|
|
$ |
68,172 |
|
|
|
89.9 |
% |
|
$ |
52,800 |
|
|
|
90.3 |
% |
|
$ |
15,555 |
|
|
|
83.2 |
% |
Information and user access fees
|
|
|
2,713 |
|
|
|
3.6 |
|
|
|
1,144 |
|
|
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
287 |
|
|
|
1.5 |
|
License fees
|
|
|
3,143 |
|
|
|
4.1 |
|
|
|
4,145 |
|
|
|
7.1 |
|
|
|
924 |
|
|
|
4.9 |
|
Interest income
|
|
|
882 |
|
|
|
1.2 |
|
|
|
371 |
|
|
|
0.6 |
|
|
|
742 |
|
|
|
4.0 |
|
Other
|
|
|
887 |
|
|
|
1.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.0 |
|
|
|
1,193 |
|
|
|
6.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues
|
|
$ |
75,797 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
$ |
58,460 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
$ |
18,701 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We believe that there are five key variables that impact the
notional value of bonds traded on our platform and the amount of
commissions earned by us:
|
|
|
|
|
the number of institutional investor clients that participate on
the platform and their willingness to originate transactions
through the platform; |
|
|
|
the number of broker-dealer clients on the platform and the
competitiveness of the prices they provide to the institutional
investor clients; |
|
|
|
the number of markets for which we make trading available to our
clients; |
|
|
|
the overall level of activity in these markets; and |
|
|
|
the level of commissions that we collect for trades executed
through the platform. |
Growth in the notional value of trades executed over our
platform has been driven by an increase in the base of
institutional investor clients. Our active institutional
investor client base (clients that executed trades through our
electronic trading platform in the preceding year) has increased
from 301 as of December 31, 2002, to 432 as of
December 31, 2003 and to 539 as of December 31, 2004.
However, as the number of institutional investor clients has
increased, our volumes have been and will in the future be
increasingly driven not only by new clients but also by existing
clients executing a larger portion of their trading activity
through our platform. We believe that our ability to continue to
deliver enhanced functionality and to provide reliable,
real-time access to our platform will be important factors in
increasing usage of the platform by existing clients.
Our broker-dealer client base has also increased from 13 as of
December 31, 2002, to 18 as of December 31, 2003 and
to 22 as of December 31, 2004. We believe that these
broker-dealer clients represent the principal source of
secondary market liquidity in U.S. high-grade corporate
bonds, European high-grade corporate bonds, and sovereign and
corporate bonds issued by entities domiciled in an emerging
markets country. Historical growth in the number of our
broker-dealer clients is not necessarily indicative of future
growth, although it is likely that the majority of our future
growth will be derived from additional trading by existing
broker-dealer clients rather than from the addition of new
broker-dealer clients.
We commenced commercial operations in January 2001 with the
launch of our U.S. high-grade corporate bond platform. We
expanded the markets we serve to sovereign and corporate bonds
issued by entities domiciled in an emerging markets country in
March 2001 and to European high-grade corporate bonds in
31
September 2001. In the future, we expect to leverage our
existing technology and client relationships to expand into new
segments of the fixed-income securities market.
As the notional value of bonds traded over our platform has
grown, we have also been more dependent on the overall level of
activity in the markets in which we operate. While we believe
that trading activity in the fixed-income markets in which we
operate has generally increased since our inception, there have
been periods in which such trading activity was flat or actually
declined. We have experienced fluctuations in trading volumes
between quarters as a result of general economic conditions as
well as factors specific to the fixed-income markets in which we
operate. These quarterly fluctuations have in the past created,
and may in the future create, some variability in our revenues.
Our average commission on trades executed over our platform has
declined from $321 per million for the year ended
December 31, 2002, to $275 per million for the year
ended December 31, 2003 and to $229 per million for
the year ended December 31, 2004. Under the fee plans
currently in place for secondary U.S. high-grade corporate
bond trading and European high-grade corporate bond trading, the
average fees per million will decline as trading volumes
increase. We also anticipate that some reduction in average fees
per million for other products may occur in the future.
Consequently, past trends in commissions are not necessarily
indicative of future commissions.
We are dependent on our broker-dealer clients, nine of which are
also our stockholders, who are not restricted from buying and
selling fixed-income securities, directly or through their own
proprietary or third party platforms, with institutional
investors. Our broker-dealer clients buy and sell fixed-income
securities directly with their clients through traditional bond
trading methods. Any reduction in the use of our electronic
trading platform by our broker-dealer clients could reduce the
number of different bond issues and the volume of trading in
those bond issues on our platform, which could, in turn, reduce
the use of our platform by our institutional investor clients.
The occurrence of any of the foregoing may have a material
adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results
of operations.
During 2004 and 2003, the product mix of our revenues shifted.
Specifically, commissions from European high-grade corporate
bonds became a more significant percentage of our revenues.
Revenues from European high-grade corporate bonds grew from
$1.0 million, to $7.1 million and to
$15.1 million for the years ended December 31, 2002,
2003 and 2004, respectively. This represents percentage
increases of 112.7% and 610.0%, respectively, for the years
ended December 31, 2004 and 2003.
We intend to continue to diversify our revenue base. As we
continue to expand our service offerings, we believe that there
will be more opportunities for us to generate revenues from all
of our trading and information services clients.
The following table shows the extent to which the changes in
revenue for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003 were
attributable to increases in volumes, reductions in the average
level of commissions charged, the introduction of our
information services or other factors:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change from Prior Year | |
|
|
| |
|
|
Year Ended | |
|
|
December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(in thousands) | |
Volume increases
|
|
$ |
29,092 |
|
|
$ |
46,215 |
|
Average fee reductions
|
|
|
(13,721 |
) |
|
|
(8,970 |
) |
Introduction of information services
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15 |
|
Other
|
|
|
1,966 |
|
|
|
2,499 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenue increase
|
|
$ |
17,337 |
|
|
$ |
39,759 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A table detailing the amount of revenues generated by our nine
broker-dealer clients that are also stockholders (ABN Amro, Banc
of America Securities, Bear Stearns, BNP Paribas, Credit Suisse
First Boston, Deutsche Bank, JPMorgan, Lehman Brothers and UBS),
and their respective affiliates, as well as the
32
corresponding percentage of total revenues, is provided below
for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
($ in thousands) | |
Total revenues generated by broker-dealer client stockholders
and their respective affiliates
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commissions
|
|
$ |
39,307 |
|
|
$ |
33,023 |
|
|
$ |
12,290 |
|
|
Information and user access fees
|
|
|
461 |
|
|
|
203 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income
|
|
|
380 |
|
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
118 |
|
|
Other
|
|
|
515 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues generated by broker-dealer client stockholders
and their respective affiliates
|
|
$ |
40,663 |
|
|
$ |
33,291 |
|
|
$ |
12,408 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percentage of total revenues generated by broker-dealer client
stockholders and their respective affiliates
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commissions
|
|
|
57.7 |
% |
|
|
62.5 |
% |
|
|
79.0 |
% |
|
Information and user access fees
|
|
|
17.0 |
% |
|
|
17.7 |
% |
|
|
0.0 |
% |
|
Interest income
|
|
|
43.1 |
% |
|
|
17.5 |
% |
|
|
15.9 |
% |
|
Other
|
|
|
58.1 |
% |
|
|
0.0 |
% |
|
|
0.0 |
% |
|
|
Percentage of total revenues generated by broker-dealer client
stockholders and their respective affiliates
|
|
|
53.6 |
% |
|
|
57.0 |
% |
|
|
66.4 |
% |
We derive a significant percentage of our total revenues, and an
even greater percentage of our commissions, from broker-dealer
clients that are also our stockholders. Commissions from these
nine broker-dealer stockholders have decreased as a percentage
of revenues primarily due to increased volume from existing
broker-dealer clients that are not stockholders as well as the
addition of new broker-dealer clients that are not stockholders.
Potential reduction in the level of their equity ownership if
these broker-dealer shareholders sell shares of our common stock
in the future, may cause them to reduce or discontinue their use
of our electronic trading platform and other services, which
could negatively impact the use of our platform by our
institutional investor clients and result in a reduction in our
revenues and net income.
Our current fee plans may result in a reduction in average fees
as trading volume increases. We may also introduce new plans
that could result in lower fees, particularly where we believe
that fee reductions will be offset by higher trading volumes.
Historical trading volume and revenue are not necessarily
indicative of future trading volume and revenue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
% of Total | |
|
|
|
% of Total | |
|
|
|
% of Total | |
|
|
$ | |
|
Revenues | |
|
$ | |
|
Revenues | |
|
$ | |
|
Revenues | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
($ in thousands) | |
U.S. high-grade
|
|
$ |
45,465 |
|
|
|
60.0% |
|
|
$ |
40,310 |
|
|
|
69.0% |
|
|
$ |
13,390 |
|
|
|
71.6% |
|
European high-grade
|
|
|
15,142 |
|
|
|
20.0 |
|
|
|
7,126 |
|
|
|
12.2 |
|
|
|
975 |
|
|
|
5.2 |
|
Other
|
|
|
7,565 |
|
|
|
9.9 |
|
|
|
5,364 |
|
|
|
9.1 |
|
|
|
1,190 |
|
|
|
6.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commissions
|
|
$ |
68,172 |
|
|
|
89.9% |
|
|
$ |
52,800 |
|
|
|
90.3% |
|
|
$ |
15,555 |
|
|
|
83.2% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
While the vast majority of our commissions are generated from
transactions between a broker-dealer client and an institutional
investor client, we generate a de minimus amount of our
commissions from transactions between two broker-dealer clients.
Commissions are generally calculated as a percentage of the
notional dollar volume of bonds traded on our platform and vary
based on the type and the maturity of the
33
bond traded. The commission rates are generally set at levels
that are based on a number of factors, including fees charged by
inter-dealer brokers in the respective markets, average
bid-offer spreads in the products we offer, transaction costs
through alternative channels including the telephone, and the
trading volume executed through our platform by the
broker-dealer completing the trade. Under our transaction fee
plans, bonds that are more actively traded or that have shorter
maturities are generally charged lower commissions, while bonds
that are less actively traded or that have longer maturities
generally command higher commissions.
For the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003, and 2002, we
experienced overall trading volume increases, while the overall
average fee per million traded has decreased, as detailed in the
table below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Trading Volume Data (in billions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. high-grade
|
|
$ |
183.5 |
|
|
$ |
140.3 |
|
|
$ |
39.4 |
|
|
European high-grade
|
|
|
76.5 |
|
|
|
31.8 |
|
|
|
4.2 |
|
|
Other
|
|
|
38.1 |
|
|
|
20.1 |
|
|
|
4.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$ |
298.1 |
|
|
$ |
192.2 |
|
|
$ |
48.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commissions (in thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. high-grade
|
|
$ |
45,465 |
|
|
$ |
40,310 |
|
|
$ |
13,390 |
|
|
European high-grade
|
|
|
15,142 |
|
|
|
7,126 |
|
|
|
975 |
|
|
Other
|
|
|
7,565 |
|
|
|
5,364 |
|
|
|
1,190 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$ |
68,172 |
|
|
$ |
52,800 |
|
|
$ |
15,555 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average Fee Per Million Traded
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. high-grade
|
|
$ |
248 |
|
|
$ |
287 |
|
|
$ |
340 |
|
|
European high-grade
|
|
$ |
198 |
|
|
$ |
224 |
|
|
$ |
232 |
|
|
Other
|
|
$ |
199 |
|
|
$ |
267 |
|
|
$ |
248 |
|
|
|
Average Fee Per Million Traded For All Products
|
|
$ |
229 |
|
|
$ |
275 |
|
|
$ |
321 |
|
For volume reporting purposes, transactions in foreign
currencies are converted to U.S. dollars at the exchange
rates prevailing on the day the transactions were executed.
|
|
|
U.S. High-Grade Corporate Bonds |
Prior to August 2003, all of our broker-dealer clients operated
under a standard transaction fee plan for the secondary trading
of U.S. high-grade corporate bonds. Under the standard
transaction fee plan, commissions are calculated as a percentage
of the notional dollar volume of the bonds traded on our
platform, vary based on the type and maturity of the bond, and
are generally higher on bonds with longer maturities. Under this
plan, there is no fixed monthly fee and no cap on the aggregate
amount of commissions payable by a broker-dealer client. In
August 2003, we offered our broker-dealer clients the
opportunity to switch from the standard transaction fee plan to
one of two new transaction fee plans for secondary
U.S. high-grade corporate bond trading. These plans have a
two-year term, which commenced on either August 1, 2003 or
September 1, 2003. The plans differ in their fixed monthly
fees, amount of variable fees per trade, and fee caps:
|
|
|
|
|
Plan 1: Under this plan, the broker-dealer pays a fixed monthly
fee for trading U.S. high-grade corporate bonds, which
provides us with a recurring revenue stream. In exchange for
paying the fixed monthly fee, the broker-dealer pays variable
fees per trade that are lower than those in the standard
transaction fee plan. There is no cap on the aggregate
commissions payable by the broker-dealer client under this plan. |
|
|
|
Plan 2: Under this plan, the broker-dealer pays a fixed monthly
fee for trading U.S. high-grade corporate bonds that is
higher than that in Plan 1. In exchange for paying the higher
fixed monthly fee, the broker-dealer pays variable fees per
trade that are lower than those in Plan 1 and the standard
transaction fee plan, and the aggregate commissions payable by
the broker-dealer client are capped on a monthly and an annual
basis. |
34
The new transaction fee plans were introduced during the third
quarter of 2003 to provide incentives for dealers who transacted
higher volumes through the platform while at the same time
providing us with an element of fixed commission revenue over
the two-year term of the new plans. Commissions for our
U.S. high-grade platform increased from $9.8 million
for the three months ended June 30, 2003 to
$12.2 million for the three months ended September 30,
2003. Since September 30, 2003, commissions for our
U.S. high-grade platform have remained relatively constant.
Specifically, commissions for our U.S. high-grade platform,
starting with the three-month period ended December 31,
2003 through the three-month period ended September 30,
2004, were between $11.1 million and $11.5 million,
with commissions for the three-month period ended
December 31, 2004 at $11.4 million. Due primarily to
the new transaction fee plans, average U.S. high-grade
commissions declined from $312 per million traded in the
three months ended June 30, 2003 to $259 per million
traded in the three months ended December 31, 2003. Average
U.S. high-grade commissions declined further to $231 per
million traded in the three months ended December 31, 2004.
These decreases in the average commission per million traded
were more than offset by volume increases. Specifically, our
trading volume for U.S. high-grade corporate bonds grew from
$31.4 billion for the three months ended June 30, 2003
to $49.4 billion for the three months ended
December 31, 2004.
Broker-dealer clients who selected either Plan 1 or Plan 2 for
U.S. high-grade corporate bond trading had the opportunity
to switch to the other transaction fee plan in the second year.
Currently, 13 broker-dealer clients are operating under
Plan 1, one is operating under Plan 2 and four are
operating under our standard transaction fee plan. Our four
remaining broker-dealer clients execute trades through our
platform exclusively for European high-grade corporate or
emerging markets bonds and are not therefore eligible to
participate in our U.S. high-grade corporate bond
transaction fee plan. Currently, seven broker-dealer clients who
are also our stockholders are operating under Plan 1, one
broker-dealer client who is also a stockholder is operating
under Plan 2 and one broker-dealer client who is also a
stockholder is operating under the standard transaction fee
plan. The fee caps were set to take effect at volume levels
significantly above those being transacted at the time the new
transaction fee plans were introduced but will limit revenue
growth in the future for U.S. high-grade corporate bond
trading from the broker-dealers that have selected these plans
if the higher volume levels at which the fee cap is triggered
are reached.
The fee caps of Plan 2 set an upper limit on the potential
revenues for U.S. high-grade corporate bond trading from
our broker-dealer clients that select that transaction fee plan.
We believe that Plan 2 is well suited for our most active
broker-dealer clients and it is designed to encourage more
trading volume on our platform. For the year ended
December 31, 2004 and the year ended December 31,
2003, had all broker-dealers been on the standard fee plan, our
commission revenue would have been greater by approximately
$5.3 million and $1.4 million, respectively.
Management believes, however, that had the new fee plans not
been in place, we might have experienced lower transaction
volumes in U.S. high-grade corporate bonds.
As the broker-dealer operating under Plan 2 has not yet reached
the monthly cap, additional trading volume has resulted in
incremental revenue for us. In future periods, if the caps are
met, we may be limited in our ability to offset declines in the
average commission by additional trading volume for
U.S. high-grade corporate bonds. Due in part to the
introduction of the fee caps of Plan 2, historical growth
in trading volume and commission revenue is not necessarily
indicative of future growth.
|
|
|
European High-Grade Corporate Bonds |
On our European platform, broker-dealer transaction fees vary
based on the type of bond traded. Different fee schedules apply
to fixed rate and floating rate bonds. Within the schedule for
fixed rate bonds, the fee varies depending on whether the bond
is a corporate or a sovereign issue. For corporate bonds, the
fee also varies depending on the maturity of the issue. This fee
schedule applies a tiered fee structure, which reduces the fee
per trade upon the attainment of certain specified amounts of
monthly commissions generated by a particular broker-dealer and
does not carry a fixed monthly fee or fee cap. The average
commission on European high-grade transactions has decreased
from $232 per million traded for the year ended
December 31, 2002, to $224 per million traded for the
year ended December 31, 2003 and to $198 per million
traded for the year ended December 31, 2004. This decrease
in average commission per million traded was caused by a shift
in the mix of bonds traded and by the impact of the tiered fee
structure described above.
35
Broker-dealer clients pay a commission for transactions in
sovereign and corporate bonds issued by entities domiciled in an
emerging markets country based on the type and amount of the
security traded. The commission is calculated on a standard
schedule that applies to all broker-dealer clients and varies
depending on whether the transaction is in an actively traded
sovereign issue, a less actively traded sovereign issue or a
corporate issue. A lower commission rate is charged for actively
traded sovereign issues, while a higher commission rate is
charged for corporate issues. The average commission on emerging
markets transactions for the year ended December 31, 2004
was $205 per million traded.
For newly-issued U.S. high-grade corporate bonds and for
newly-issued sovereign and corporate bonds issued by entities
domiciled in an emerging markets country, we enable
U.S. institutional investors to submit indications of
interest on our electronic trading platform directly to the
underwriter syndicate desks of our broker-dealer clients.
Broker-dealer clients pay a commission for new issue
transactions that is based on the allocation amount. The
commission is set as a percentage of the new issue selling costs
paid by the issuer to our broker-dealer client. The percentage
of the new issue selling costs is lower on orders over
$5 million. The fee is capped on larger transactions. There
are currently no fixed monthly fees or caps on the level of
monthly commissions. The average commission on new issue
transactions for the year ended December 31, 2004 was
$297 per million traded.
In September 2004, we started trading U.S. Treasury
securities on our trading platform. In 2004, the total revenues
we derived from the trading of U.S. Treasury securities on
our platform was not material. The commission is calculated as a
flat fee per million of notional amount traded and applies to
all broker-dealer clients. Please see Risk Factors
That May Affect Future Results If we are unable to
enter into additional marketing and strategic alliances or if
our current strategic alliances are not successful, we may not
maintain the current level of trading or generate increased
trading on our trading platform.
|
|
|
Information and User Access Fees |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
% of | |
|
|
|
% of | |
|
|
|
% of | |
|
|
|
|
Total | |
|
|
|
Total | |
|
|
|
Total | |
|
|
$ | |
|
Revenues | |
|
$ | |
|
Revenues | |
|
$ | |
|
Revenues | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
($ in thousands) | |
Information services fees
|
|
$ |
2,280 |
|
|
|
3.0% |
|
|
$ |
826 |
|
|
|
1.5% |
|
|
$ |
15 |
|
|
|
0.0% |
|
User access fees
|
|
|
433 |
|
|
|
0.6 |
|
|
|
318 |
|
|
|
0.5 |
|
|
|
272 |
|
|
|
1.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
2,713 |
|
|
|
3.6% |
|
|
$ |
1,144 |
|
|
|
2.0% |
|
|
$ |
287 |
|
|
|
1.5% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Information and user access fees consist of information services
fees and monthly user fees.
We charge information services fees for Corporate BondTicker to
our broker-dealer clients, institutional investor clients and
data only subscribers. The information services fee is a flat
monthly fee, based on the level of service. We also generate
information services fees from the sale of bulk data to certain
institutional investor clients and data only subscribers.
Institutional investor clients trading U.S. high-grade
corporate bonds are charged a monthly user access fee for the
use of our platform. The fee, billed quarterly, is charged to
the client based on the number of the clients users. To
encourage institutional investor clients to execute trades on
our U.S. high-grade corporate bond platform, we reduce
these information and user access fees for such clients once
minimum quarterly trading volumes are attained.
36
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
% of | |
|
|
|
% of | |
|
|
|
% of | |
|
|
|
|
Total | |
|
|
|
Total | |
|
|
|
Total | |
|
|
$ | |
|
Revenues | |
|
$ | |
|
Revenues | |
|
$ | |
|
Revenues | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
($ in thousands) | |
License fees
|
|
$ |
3,143 |
|
|
|
4.1% |
|
|
$ |
4,145 |
|
|
|
7.1% |
|
|
$ |
924 |
|
|
|
4.9% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
License fees consist of fees received from broker-dealer
clients. In the agreements with our broker-dealer clients, we
agree to provide access to our trading platform through a
non-exclusive and non-transferable license. Broker-dealer
clients, other than those that previously made equity
investments in MarketAxess, pay an initial license fee, which is
typically due and payable upon execution of the broker-dealer
agreement. The initial license fee varies by agreement and at a
minimum is intended to cover the initial set-up costs we incur
to enable a broker-dealer to begin using our platform. The
license fee is a one-time fee and is recognized in the first
three months of the agreement in the estimated amount of the
set-up costs that we incur and the remaining amount is amortized
over the initial term of the agreement, which is generally three
years. We anticipate that license fees will be a less material
source of revenues for us on a going-forward basis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
% of | |
|
|
|
% of | |
|
|
|
% of | |
|
|
|
|
Total | |
|
|
|
Total | |
|
|
|
Total | |
|
|
$ | |
|
Revenues | |
|
$ | |
|
Revenues | |
|
$ | |
|
Revenues | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
($ in thousands) | |
Interest income
|
|
$ |
882 |
|
|
|
1.2% |
|
|
$ |
371 |
|
|
|
0.6% |
|
|
$ |
742 |
|
|
|
4.0% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income consists of income earned on our investments. We
generate interest income through the investment of our excess
cash in U.S. Treasury obligations and money market
instruments.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
% of | |
|
|
|
% of | |
|
|
|
% of | |
|
|
|
|
Total | |
|
|
|
Total | |
|
|
|
Total | |
|
|
$ | |
|
Revenues | |
|
$ |
|
Revenues | |
|
$ | |
|
Revenues | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
($ in thousands) | |
Other revenues
|
|
$ |
887 |
|
|
|
1.1% |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
0.0% |
|
|
$ |
1,193 |
|
|
|
6.4% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other revenues consist of funds received as business
interruption insurance settlements, which was a non-recurring
item in relation to the effects of the September 11, 2001
terrorist acts, telecommunications line charges to broker-dealer
clients and other miscellaneous revenues.
|
|
|
Employee Compensation and Benefits |
Employee compensation and benefits is our most significant
expense and includes employee salaries, bonuses, stock-based
employee compensation, related employee benefits and payroll
taxes. Many employees receive bonuses based on our overall
operating results as well as their individual performance. These
bonuses vary from year to year and have a significant impact on
our employee compensation and benefits expense. Increases in the
number of our employees and cost increases affecting
employee-provided benefit plans also drive changes in this
expense.
37
|
|
|
Depreciation and Amortization |
Depreciation and amortization expense results from the
depreciation of fixed assets, which consist of computer
hardware, furniture and fixtures, and the amortization of
software, capitalized software development costs and leasehold
improvements. We depreciate our fixed assets and amortize our
capitalized software development costs on a straight-line basis
over a three-year period. We amortize leasehold improvements on
a straight-line basis over the lesser of the life of the
improvement and the remaining term of the lease. Our
depreciation and amortization expense varies from year to year
due to new asset purchases and assets that become fully
depreciated during the year.
|
|
|
Technology and Communications |
Technology and communications expense consists primarily of
costs relating to the amortization of licenses for software used
in our trading platform, maintenance on software and hardware,
our internal network connections, data center hosting costs and
data feeds provided by outside vendors or service providers. We
amortize software licenses and maintenance agreements relating
to hardware and software over the term of these agreements,
which is generally one year. Maintenance agreements for our
computer hardware are in place to ensure that we receive
technical service from the vendor in the event of a malfunction.
We enter into software maintenance agreements to ensure that we
have access to the latest versions of the software we use. The
majority of our broker-dealer clients have dedicated T-1 lines
to our network in order to provide fast data transfer. We charge
our broker-dealer clients a monthly fee for these connections,
which is recovered against the relevant expenses we incur. The
number of users accessing our trading and information services
products affects our technology and communications expense.
|
|
|
Professional and Consulting Fees |
Professional and consulting fees consist primarily of fees paid
to information technology and non-information technology
consultants for services provided for the maintenance of our
trading platform and information services products and, to a
lesser extent, accounting and legal fees.
Warrant-related expense is the expense associated with the
allocation of shares of our common stock issuable pursuant to a
warrant issued to six of our broker-dealer clients at the time
they made an equity investment in us. The warrant program was
put in place in April 2000 and was designed to motivate
broker-dealers to trade on our platform.
The total number of shares underlying the warrant is 5,000,002.
The warrant program had two distinct pieces, a U.S. portion
and a European portion, under which the aggregate number of
shares underlying the warrant to be allocated in each
three-month period was fixed. Allocations under this program
commenced on May 1, 2001 for the U.S. portion and
June 1, 2002 for the European portion, and were based on
each broker-dealer clients respective commissions as a
percentage of the total commissions paid to us from the six
participating warrant holders, calculated on a quarterly basis.
Shares allocated under the warrant program were expensed each
quarter at fair market value in accordance with Statement of
Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 123,
Accounting for Stock Based Compensation
(SFAS No. 123). We determined the fair
market value of the shares issuable upon exercise of the warrant
using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model. The final share
allocations under the warrant program occurred on March 1,
2004. Accordingly, we will no longer record any expenses related
to this warrant.
|
|
|
Marketing and Advertising |
Marketing and advertising expense consists primarily of print
and other advertising expenses we incur to promote our products
and services. This expense also includes costs associated with
attending or exhibiting at
38
industry-sponsored seminars, conferences and conventions. Also
included in this expense are travel and entertainment expenses
incurred by our sales force to promote our trading platform and
information services.
Moneyline revenue share expense consists of expenses incurred
pursuant to our agreement with Moneyline Telerate
(Moneyline), an independent technology and data
company, which assisted us in the development of our
U.S. high-grade corporate bond and European trading
platforms. Pursuant to the agreement, a revenue share is paid
quarterly to Moneyline based on a percentage of revenues
generated on our U.S. high-grade corporate bond and
European trading platforms, after deduction of identified
development costs. We have completed the transition to new
internally-developed software for our U.S. high-grade
corporate and European bond platforms. In the first quarter of
2005, we ceased using the Moneyline technology and the Moneyline
revenue share expense ceased. In connection with the transition
to the new internally-developed software for our
U.S. high-grade corporate and European bond platforms, we
have accelerated depreciation in the amount of approximately
$0.1 million for the year ending December 31, 2004,
which is included in Depreciation and amortization expense in
our Consolidated Statements of Operations. In addition,
$0.2 million will be depreciated in the quarter ending
March 31, 2005.
|
|
|
General and Administrative |
General and administrative expense consists primarily of
occupancy and utilities, general travel and entertainment, staff
training and various state franchise and U.K. value-added taxes.
|
|
|
Net Operating Loss Carryforwards |
A net operating loss carryforward enables a company to apply net
operating losses incurred during a current period against a
future periods profits in order to reduce tax liability in
those future periods. In periods when a company is generating
operating losses, its net operating loss carryforward will
increase. The income tax effect of the net operating loss
carryforwards is recorded as a deferred income tax asset. If the
company does not believe that it is more likely than not that it
will be able to utilize the net operating loss carryforwards, it
records a valuation allowance against the deferred tax asset.
Additionally, as defined in Section 382 of the Internal
Revenue Code (Section 382), a change in control
occurs, and causes a limitation in the utilization of net
operating losses, when there is a 50% or greater change in the
companys ownership, as determined over a rolling
three-year period.
As of December 31, 2004, we had net operating loss
carryforwards for income tax purposes of $102.4 million.
The U.S. net operating loss carryforwards as of
December 31, 2004 totaling $89.7 million will begin to
expire in 2017 and the U.K. net operating loss carryforwards as
of December 31, 2004 totaling $12.7 million do not
expire. In 2000 and in 2001, MarketAxess Holdings Inc. and
MarketAxess Corporation, respectively, had an ownership change
within the meaning of Section 382. As a result of
Section 382 and pertinent tax provisions, the utilization
of $39.1 million of our net operating loss carryforwards
existing at the date of the ownership change is subject to
significant limitations. In addition, our net operating loss
carryforwards may be subject to additional annual limitations if
there is a 50% or greater change in our ownership, as determined
over a rolling three-year period.
During the year ended December 31, 2004, we reduced the
valuation allowance by $46.2 million to $18.1 million
based on managements reassessment of the factors impacting
the valuation allowance previously recorded. Such factors
include seven consecutive quarters of profitable operations in
the U.S. and six consecutive quarters of profitable operations
in the U.K., managements expectation of our continuing
profitable future operations, managements anticipation
that we would be able to utilize certain net operating loss
carryforwards in 2004 and our ability to utilize certain of the
net operating loss carryforwards in future years prior to
expiration. We believe it is likely, but subject to some
uncertainty, that approximately 76% of the net operating losses
will be utilized prior to their expiration in 2017. In addition,
we have temporary differences (defined as the tax effect of the
difference between the financial reporting basis and the tax
reporting basis of certain balance sheet items) of
$13.5 million available as of December 31, 2004.
39
|
|
|
Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates |
This Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations discusses our Consolidated
Financial Statements, which have been prepared in accordance
with accounting principles generally accepted in the United
States, also referred to as U.S. GAAP. The preparation of
these financial statements requires management to make estimates
and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and
liabilities and the reported amounts of income and expenses
during the reporting periods. We base our estimates and
judgments on historical experience and on various other factors
that we believe are reasonable under the circumstances. Actual
results may differ from these estimates under varying
assumptions or conditions. Note 2 of the Notes to our
Consolidated Financial Statements includes a summary of the
significant accounting policies and methods used in the
preparation of our Consolidated Financial Statements.
On an ongoing basis, management evaluates its estimates and
judgments, particularly as they relate to accounting policies
that management believes are critical. That is, these accounting
policies are most important to the portrayal of our financial
condition and results of operations and they require
managements most difficult, subjective or complex
judgments, often as a result of the need to make estimates about
the effect of matters that are inherently uncertain.
|
|
|
Allowance for Doubtful Accounts |
We charge certain of our institutional investor clients an
information services fee and a monthly user access fee for the
use of our trading platform. The user access fees charged to an
institutional investor client are reduced or eliminated if the
institutional investor client meets certain minimum quarterly
trading volumes.
We have established an allowance for doubtful accounts based
upon the estimated collectibility of information and user access
fees. Additions to the allowance are charged to bad debt
expense, which is included in the general and administrative
expense in our Consolidated Statements of Operations.
We recognize revenues relating to broker-dealer license fees in
the first three months of the applicable agreement in the
estimated amount of the setup costs incurred, and the remaining
amount is amortized over the initial term of the agreement,
which is generally three years.
Where a broker-dealer client has selected Plan 2 of the new
transaction fee plans for secondary U.S. high-grade
corporate bond trading, the U.S. high-grade commissions
that it pays are capped at $0.5 million per month and
$4.8 million per year. If the commissions paid by a
broker-dealer client in any one quarter measured from the
effective date of the agreement exceed $1.2 million, the
excess commissions over $1.2 million are reserved and only
recorded as revenue when the year-to-date commissions generated
by the broker-dealer client either reach the annual
$4.8 million cap or fall below a year-to-date quarterly
average of $1.2 million.
|
|
|
Stock-Based Employee Compensation |
During the years ended December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004, we
have accounted for stock-based employee compensation plans in
accordance with Accounting Principles Board Opinion
(APB) No. 25, Accounting for Stock Issued to
Employees (APB No. 25), as permitted by
SFAS No. 123. In accordance with APB No. 25,
compensation expense is recognized for stock awards that have
intrinsic value on the date of grant. Unearned compensation is
amortized and charged to income over the vesting schedule. Our
employee option grants usually vest over a three-year period
from the date of issuance.
Had we adopted SFAS No. 148, Accounting for
Stock-Based Compensation Transactions and Disclosure, to
expense the fair value of an employee grant over the appropriate
vesting period, we would have incurred stock-based employee
compensation expense of $0.2 million for the year ended
December 31, 2003 and $0.3 million for the year ended
December 31, 2002.
40
Beginning July 1, 2005, the Company will adopt
SFAS No. 123(R), Share Based Payments,
which requires previously granted but unvested awards to be
recorded as an expense on a prorated basis over the remaining
vesting period. Had we adopted SFAS No. 123(R), we
would have incurred additional stock-based employee compensation
expense of $2.0 million for the year ended
December 31, 2004. We expect the adoption of
SFAS No. 123(R) will have a material impact on our
Consolidated Statements of Operations.
We allocated shares of common stock issuable upon exercise of a
warrant to certain of our broker-dealer clients on a quarterly
basis. Allocations under our warrant program were based on a
percentage of the total quarterly commissions generated either
on our U.S. or our European trading platform by
broker-dealer clients eligible for the warrant pool.
We accounted for this warrant in accordance with
SFAS No. 123. Expense was recognized on the
measurement date based on the fair market value of the shares of
common stock underlying the warrant. Fair market value was
determined using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model. This
pricing model requires the following inputs: our underlying
stock price; the volatility of the underlying stock; the
expiration date of the warrant; the risk-free rate of return;
and dividend payments on our stock. The underlying stock price
has been obtained using independent third-party valuations. For
the stock volatility factor, we used a weighted average
volatility over a 30-month period for the NASDAQ 100 index. We
determined the risk-free rate of return based on the interest
rate of a three-year U.S. government obligation. The
expiration date of the warrant is November 30, 2008, and we
have assumed no dividend payments on our common stock. The final
share allocations under the warrant program occurred on
March 1, 2004. Accordingly, we will no longer record any
warrant-related expense.
Income taxes are accounted for on the asset and liability method
in accordance with SFAS No. 109, Accounting for
Income Taxes. Deferred tax assets arise as a result of our
net operating losses and from the tax effect of various types of
temporary differences including, in our case, differences
between amounts reported for income tax purposes and for
financial statement purposes.
Realization of the deferred tax assets is dependent upon the
generation of future taxable income during the periods in which
the temporary differences become deductible. A valuation
allowance is recognized against deferred tax assets if it is
more likely than not that such assets will not be realized in
future periods. We generated net operating loss carryforwards
from inception through the first quarter of 2003, resulting from
losses we incurred. At each reporting period since inception, we
assessed the need for a valuation allowance against this
deferred tax asset. From inception through March 31, 2004,
an allowance equal to 100% of the deferred tax asset was
established as it was unlikely that we would be able to utilize
such deferred tax assets.
We have recorded a valuation allowance against our deferred tax
assets arising from net operating loss carryforwards and
temporary differences. Certain of our net operating loss
carryforwards are subject to significant limitations on annual
utilization pursuant to the Internal Revenue Code. In addition,
our net operating loss carryforwards may be subject to further
annual limitations as a result of ownership changes in the
future.
As of December 31, 2004, we had net operating loss
carryforwards for income tax purposes of $102.4 million.
The U.S. net operating loss carryforwards as of
December 31, 2004 totaling $89.7 million will begin to
expire in 2017 and the U.K. net operating loss carryforwards as
of December 31, 2004 totaling $12.7 million do not
expire. In 2000 and in 2001, MarketAxess Holdings Inc. and
MarketAxess Corporation, respectively, had an ownership change
within the meaning of Section 382. As a result of
Section 382 and pertinent tax provisions, the utilization
of $39.1 million of our net operating loss carryforwards
existing at the date of the ownership change is subject to
significant limitations. In addition, our net operating loss
carryforwards may be subject to additional annual limitations if
there is a 50% or greater change in our ownership, as determined
over a rolling three-year period.
41
During the year ended December 31, 2004, we reduced the
valuation allowance by $46.2 million to $18.1 million
based on managements reassessment of the factors impacting
the valuation allowance previously recorded. Such factors
include seven consecutive quarters of profitable operations in
the U.S. and six consecutive quarters of profitable operations
in the U.K., managements expectation of our continuing
profitable future operations, managements anticipation
that we would be able to utilize certain net operating loss
carryforwards in 2004 and our ability to utilize certain of the
net operating loss carryforwards in future years prior to
expiration. We believe it is likely, but subject to some
uncertainty, that approximately 76% of the net operating losses
will be utilized prior to their expiration in 2017. In addition,
we have temporary differences (defined as the tax effect of the
difference between the financial reporting basis and the tax
reporting basis of certain balance sheet items) of
$13.5 million available as of December 31, 2004.
As of December 31, 2003, the gross deferred tax asset was
$64.3 million, reduced to a net deferred tax asset of zero
by recording a valuation allowance of $64.3 million. Our
first profitable quarter was the second quarter of 2003. While
we were forecasting increasing revenues and net income for 2004
and 2005, as evidenced by the projections used for the
valuations of our common stock as of December 31, 2002 and
2003, management exercised judgment in assessing the positive
evidence of the three quarters of profitability and the forecast
future year earnings against the negative evidence of
accumulated losses, the uncertainty of attainment of forecast
future year earnings and the potential likelihood of the
realization of the utilization of net operating loss
carryforwards. For the year ended December 31, 2003, net
income was $4.2 million, bringing the accumulated losses to
$113.8 million. Additionally, $40.6 million of our net
operating loss carryforward for financial income tax purposes of
$137.0 million was subject to Section 382 limitations.
Accordingly, a 100% valuation allowance against the deferred
income tax assets was deemed appropriate as of December 31,
2003. The net operating losses will be carried forward to future
years. In addition, we had temporary differences of
$13.4 million available as of December 31, 2003.
As of December 31, 2002, the gross deferred tax asset was
$68.0 million, reduced to a net deferred tax asset of zero
by recording a valuation allowance of $68.0 million. While
we were forecasting increasing revenues and a reduced loss for
2003, as well as net income for 2004, as evidenced by the
projections used for the valuation of our common stock as of
December 31, 2002, management exercised judgment in
assessing the positive evidence of the forecast future year
earnings against the negative evidence of accumulated losses,
the uncertainty of attainment of forecast future year earnings
and the potential likelihood of the realization of the
utilization of net operating loss carryforwards. For the year
ended December 31, 2002, the net loss was
$36.1 million, bringing the accumulated losses to
$118.0 million. Additionally, $40.6 million of our net
operating loss carryforward for financial income tax purposes of
$131.5 million was subject to Section 382 limitations.
Accordingly, a 100% valuation allowance against the deferred tax
assets was deemed appropriate as of December 31, 2002. In
addition, we had temporary differences of $12.5 million
available as of December 31, 2002.
Results of Operations
The following table provides the notional value of the bonds
traded on our platform for each of the periods presented:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In billions, except number of | |
|
|
trading days) | |
U.S. high-grade
|
|
$ |
183.5 |
|
|
$ |
140.3 |
|
|
$ |
39.4 |
|
European high-grade
|
|
|
76.5 |
|
|
|
31.8 |
|
|
|
4.2 |
|
Other
|
|
|
38.1 |
|
|
|
20.1 |
|
|
|
4.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$ |
298.1 |
|
|
$ |
192.2 |
|
|
$ |
48.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of U.S. trading days
|
|
|
250 |
|
|
|
250 |
|
|
|
248 |
|
Number of U.K. trading days
|
|
|
250 |
|
|
|
253 |
|
|
|
250 |
|
For volume reporting purposes, transactions in foreign
currencies are converted to U.S. dollars at the exchange
rates prevailing on the day the transactions were executed.
42
The following tables present our consolidated operating results
expressed in U.S. dollars and as a percentage of total
revenues for each of the periods presented:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In thousands) | |
Revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commissions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. high-grade
|
|
$ |
45,465 |
|
|
$ |
40,310 |
|
|
$ |
13,390 |
|
|
|
European high-grade
|
|
|
15,142 |
|
|
|
7,126 |
|
|
|
975 |
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
7,565 |
|
|
|
5,364 |
|
|
|
1,190 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commissions
|
|
|
68,172 |
|
|
|
52,800 |
|
|
|
15,555 |
|
|
Information and user access fees
|
|
|
2,713 |
|
|
|
1,144 |
|
|
|
287 |
|
|
License fees
|
|
|
3,143 |
|
|
|
4,145 |
|
|
|
924 |
|
|
Interest income
|
|
|
882 |
|
|
|
371 |
|
|
|
742 |
|
|
Other
|
|
|
887 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,193 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues
|
|
|
75,797 |
|
|
|
58,460 |
|
|
|
18,701 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Employee compensation and benefits
|
|
|
33,146 |
|
|
|
26,860 |
|
|
|
24,290 |
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
3,468 |
|
|
|
4,688 |
|
|
|
6,658 |
|
|
Technology and communications
|
|
|
6,402 |
|
|
|
4,755 |
|
|
|
3,943 |
|
|
Professional and consulting fees
|
|
|
4,908 |
|
|
|
4,180 |
|
|
|
4,699 |
|
|
Warrant-related expense(1)
|
|
|
2,524 |
|
|
|
5,400 |
|
|
|
8,624 |
|
|
Marketing and advertising
|
|
|
2,530 |
|
|
|
2,292 |
|
|
|
2,588 |
|
|
Moneyline revenue share
|
|
|
1,240 |
|
|
|
1,806 |
|
|
|
708 |
|
|
Restructuring charges
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(674 |
) |
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
4,263 |
|
|
|
4,077 |
|
|
|
3,941 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total expenses
|
|
|
58,481 |
|
|
|
54,058 |
|
|
|
54,777 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before taxes
|
|
|
17,316 |
|
|
|
4,402 |
|
|
|
(36,076 |
) |
|
Provision (benefit) for income tax(2)
|
|
|
(41,330 |
) |
|
|
190 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$ |
58,646 |
|
|
$ |
4,212 |
|
|
$ |
(36,076 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
Warrant-related expense is the expense associated with the
allocation of rights to purchase shares of our common stock
issuable pursuant to a warrant issued to six of our
broker-dealer clients at the time they made an equity investment
in us. The total number of shares underlying the warrant is
5,000,002. While the warrant is expensed each quarter at fair
market value, this is a non-cash expense that fluctuates with
the underlying price of our common stock. The final share
allocations under the warrant program occurred on March 1,
2004. Accordingly, we will no longer record any expense related
to this warrant. |
|
(2) |
During the year ended December 31, 2004, we reduced the
valuation allowance relating to our deferred tax assets by
$46.2 million from $64.3 million to
$18.1 million. Due to the fact that we had achieved
multiple quarters of profitability, it became more likely than
not that we would be able to utilize our net operating loss
carryforwards. We also determined that it was more likely than
not that all of the temporary differences relating to the
deductibility of certain expenses for book and tax purposes,
including the warrant-related expense, would be utilized prior
to expiration. We also recognized $1.6 million in tax
credits and a reversal of a prior year overstatement of
$1.0 million. Without giving effect to the reduction of the
valuation allowance, tax credits and reversal, our net income
for the year ended December 31, 2004 would have been
$9.9 million. |
43
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended | |
|
|
December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commissions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. high-grade
|
|
|
60 |
% |
|
|
69 |
% |
|
|
72 |
% |
|
|
European high-grade
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commissions
|
|
|
90 |
|
|
|
90 |
|
|
|
83 |
|
|
Information and user access fees
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
License fees
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
Interest income
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
Other
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues
|
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Employee compensation and benefits
|
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
130 |
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
Technology and communications
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
Professional and consulting fees
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
Warrant-related expense
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
Marketing and advertising
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
Moneyline revenue share
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
Restructuring charges
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total expenses
|
|
|
78 |
|
|
|
92 |
|
|
|
293 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before taxes
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
(193 |
) |
|
Provision (benefit) for income tax
|
|
|
(55 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
|
77 |
% |
|
|
7 |
% |
|
|
(193 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
44
As an electronic, multi-dealer to client platform for trading
fixed-income securities, our operations constitute a single
business segment pursuant to SFAS No. 131,
Disclosures about Segments of an Enterprise and Related
Information. Because of the highly integrated nature of
the financial markets in which we compete and the integration of
our worldwide business activities, we believe that results by
geographic region, products or types of clients are not
necessarily meaningful in understanding our business.
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2004 Compared to Year Ended
December 31, 2003 |
For the year ended December 31, 2004, Income before taxes
increased by $12.9 million to $17.3 million compared
to Income before taxes of $4.4 million for the year ended
December 31, 2003. Net income increased by
$54.4 million to $58.6 million compared to Net income
of $4.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2003.
This increase was primarily due to a net income tax benefit of
$41.3 million that was recorded for the year ended
December 31, 2004 primarily due to the reduction of the
valuation allowance against our deferred tax asset, which is
more fully described below. Without giving effect to the
reduction of the valuation allowance, our Net income for the
year ended December 31, 2004 would have been
$9.9 million.
Total revenues increased by $17.3 million or 30.0% to
$75.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2004
from $58.5 million for the year ended December 31,
2003. This increase in total revenues was primarily due to the
growth in the total volume of bonds traded on our platform,
which grew 55.0% to $298.1 billion for the year ended
December 31, 2004 from $192.3 billion for the
comparable period in 2003, offset in part by an increasing
portion of our total trading volume generated from European
high-grade corporate bonds, which carry a lower fee per million,
as well as by the introduction of the new U.S. high-grade
fee plans in the third quarter of 2003. Total expenses increased
by $4.4 million or 8.2% to $58.5 million for the year
ended December 31, 2004 from $54.1 million for the
comparable period in 2003.
For the year ended December 31, 2004, our total expenses
increased primarily due to increases in employee compensation
and benefits, technology and communications, professional and
consulting fees, marketing and advertising and general and
administrative expenses, offset by decreases in depreciation,
amortization, warrant-related expense and Moneyline revenue
share, in each case compared to the comparable period in 2003.
During the year ended December 31, 2004, we reduced the
valuation allowance relating to our deferred tax assets by
$46.2 million from $64.3 million to
$18.1 million. Due to the fact that we had achieved
multiple quarters of profitability, it became more likely than
not that we would be able to utilize our net operating loss
carryforwards. We also determined that it was more likely than
not that all of the temporary differences relating to the
deductibility of certain expenses for book and tax purposes,
including the warrant-related expense, would be utilized prior
to expiration. We also recognized $1.6 million in tax
credits and a reversal of a prior year overstatement of
$1.0 million. Without giving effect to the reduction of the
valuation allowance, tax credits and reversal, our net income
for the year ended December 31, 2004 would have been
$9.9 million.
45
Our revenues for the years ended December 31, 2004 and
2003, and the resulting dollar and percentage change, are as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ | |
|
% of Revenues | |
|
$ | |
|
% of Revenues | |
|
$ Change | |
|
% Change | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
($ in thousands) | |
Revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commissions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. high-grade
|
|
$ |
45,465 |
|
|
|
60.0 |
% |
|
$ |
40,310 |
|
|
|
69.0 |
% |
|
$ |
5,155 |
|
|
|
12.8 |
% |
|
|
European high-grade
|
|
|
15,142 |
|
|
|
20.0 |
|
|
|
7,126 |
|
|
|
12.2 |
|
|
|
8,016 |
|
|
|
112.5 |
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
7,565 |
|
|
|
10.0 |
|
|
|
5,364 |
|
|
|
9.1 |
|
|
|
2,201 |
|
|
|
41.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commissions
|
|
|
68,172 |
|
|
|
90.0 |
|
|
|
52,800 |
|
|
|
90.3 |
|
|
|
15,372 |
|
|
|
29.1 |
|
|
Information and user access fees
|
|
|
2,713 |
|
|
|
3.6 |
|
|
|
1,144 |
|
|
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
1,569 |
|
|
|
137.2 |
|
|
License fees
|
|
|
3,143 |
|
|
|
4.1 |
|
|
|
4,145 |
|
|
|
7.1 |
|
|
|
(1,002 |
) |
|
|
(24.2 |
) |
|
Interest income
|
|
|
882 |
|
|
|
1.2 |
|
|
|
371 |
|
|
|
0.6 |
|
|
|
511 |
|
|
|
137.7 |
|
|
Other
|
|
|
887 |
|
|
|
1.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
887 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues
|
|
$ |
75,797 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
58,460 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
17,337 |
|
|
|
29.7 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commissions. Total commissions increased by
$15.4 million or 29.1% to $68.2 million for the year
ended December 31, 2004 from $52.8 million for the
comparable period in 2003. This increase was primarily due to
increases in the amount of U.S. high-grade commissions and
substantial increases in European high-grade commissions.
U.S. high-grade commissions increased by $5.2 million
or 12.8% to $45.5 million for the year ended
December 31, 2004 from $40.3 million for the
comparable period in 2003. European high-grade commissions
increased by $8.0 million or 112.5% to $15.1 million
from $7.1 million for the comparable period in 2003. Other
commissions increased by $2.2 million or 41.0% to
$7.6 million from $5.4 million for the comparable
period in 2003. These increases were primarily due to an
increase in transaction volume from $192.2 billion for the
year ended December 31, 2003 to $298.1 billion for the
year ended December 31, 2004 generated by new and existing
clients, offset by a 16.7% reduction in the average commission
per million from $275 per million for the year ended
December 31, 2003 to $229 per million for the year
ended December 31, 2004. This decrease in average
commission per million was attributable to the full-year effect
of our U.S. high-grade fee plans, increasing volumes of
transactions with lower fees per million and an increase in the
percentage of trades executed on the platform with shorter
maturities, which generally generate lower commissions per
million,
Information and User Access Fees. Information and user
access fees increased by $1.6 million or 137.2% to
$2.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2004 from
$1.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2003.
This increase was primarily due to an increase in the number of
subscribers to our Corporate BondTicker service.
License Fees. License fees decreased by $1.0 million
or 24.2% to $3.1 million for the year ended
December 31, 2004 from $4.1 million for the year ended
December 31, 2003. This decrease was due to the addition of
four new broker-dealer clients in the year ended
December 31, 2004 compared to five new broker-dealer
clients added in the year ended December 31, 2003.
Interest Income. Interest income increased by
$0.5 million or 137.7% to $0.9 million for the year
ended December 31, 2004 from $0.4 million for the
comparable period in 2003. This increase was due to a rise in
interest rates and higher cash, cash equivalents and short-term
investment balances during the year ended December 31, 2004
as compared to the comparable period in 2003.
Other. Other revenues increased to $0.9 million for
the year ended December 31, 2004 from $0.0 million for
the comparable period in 2003. This increase was primarily due
to the effects of a change in accounting policy with respect to
recognizing as revenue gross telecommunication line fees paid by
broker-
46
dealer clients. These line fees were immaterial and were offset
against the related technology and communications cost in prior
years.
Our expenses for the year ended December 31, 2004 and 2003,
and the resulting dollar and percentage change, are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ | |
|
% of Revenues | |
|
$ | |
|
% of Revenues | |
|
$ Change | |
|
% Change | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
($ in thousands) | |
Expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Employee compensation and benefits
|
|
$ |
33,146 |
|
|
|
43.7 |
% |
|
$ |
26,860 |
|
|
|
45.9 |
% |
|
$ |
6,286 |
|
|
|
23.4 |
% |
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
3,468 |
|
|
|
4.6 |
|
|
|
4,688 |
|
|
|
8.0 |
|
|
|
(1,220 |
) |
|
|
(26.0 |
) |
Technology and communications
|
|
|
6,402 |
|
|
|
8.5 |
|
|
|
4,755 |
|
|
|
8.1 |
|
|
|
1,647 |
|
|
|
34.6 |
|
Professional and consulting fees
|
|
|
4,908 |
|
|
|
6.5 |
|
|
|
4,180 |
|
|
|
7.2 |
|
|
|
728 |
|
|
|
17.4 |
|
Warrant-related expense
|
|
|
2,524 |
|
|
|
3.3 |
|
|
|
5,400 |
|
|
|
9.2 |
|
|
|
(2,876 |
) |
|
|
(53.3 |
) |
Marketing and advertising
|
|
|
2,530 |
|
|
|
3.3 |
|
|
|
2,292 |
|
|
|
3.9 |
|
|
|
238 |
|
|
|
10.4 |
|
Moneyline revenue share
|
|
|
1,240 |
|
|
|
1.6 |
|
|
|
1,806 |
|
|
|
3.1 |
|
|
|
(566 |
) |
|
|
(31.3 |
) |
General and administrative
|
|
|
4,263 |
|
|
|
5.6 |
|
|
|
4,077 |
|
|
|
7.0 |
|
|
|
186 |
|
|
|
4.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total expenses
|
|
$ |
58,481 |
|
|
|
77.1 |
% |
|
$ |
54,058 |
|
|
|
92.4 |
% |
|
$ |
4,423 |
|
|
|
8.2 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Employee Compensation and Benefits. Employee compensation
and benefits increased by $6.3 million or 23.4% to
$33.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2004
from $26.9 million for the year ended December 31
2003. This increase was primarily due to the addition of new
employees to support our growth and Moneyline consultant staff
that became our full-time employees. The total number of
employees increased to 172 as of December 31, 2004 from 159
as of December 31, 2003. As a percentage of total revenues,
employee compensation and benefits expense decreased to 43.7%
for the year ended December 31, 2004 from 45.9% for the
year ended December 31, 2003.
Depreciation and Amortization. Depreciation and
amortization expense decreased by $1.2 million or 26.0% to
$3.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2004 from
$4.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2003.
This decrease was primarily due to certain assets coming to the
end of their depreciable lives during 2004. For the year ended
December 31, 2004, we capitalized $3.6 million of
software development costs, of which $3.0 million was
placed into production. Depreciation and amortization of the
remaining balance of $0.6 million will commence when the
software becomes operational. In November 2004, we determined
that our trading platform software developed by us with input
from Moneyline, a stockholder, would be retired by
March 31, 2005. Therefore, we accelerated depreciation of
this software. During the fourth quarter of 2004, we recorded
additional depreciation in the amount of $0.1 million. An
additional $0.2 million will be depreciated by
March 31, 2005.
Technology and Communications. Technology and
communications expense increased by $1.6 million or 34.6%
to $6.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2004
from $4.8 million for the year ended December 31,
2003. This increase was attributable to increased cost relating
to data center hosting, market data, and office and production
telecommunications. As a percentage of total revenues,
technology and communications expense increased to 8.5% for the
year ended December 31, 2004 from 8.1% for the year ended
December 31, 2003.
Professional and Consulting Fees. Professional and
consulting fees increased by $0.7 million or 17.4% to
$4.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2004 from
$4.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2003.
This increase was primarily due to additional legal, accounting
and insurance expenses associated with becoming a public
company. As a percentage of total revenues, professional and
consulting fees decreased to 6.5% for the year ended
December 31, 2004 from 7.2% for the year ended
December 31, 2003.
47
Warrant-related Expense. Warrant-related expense
decreased by $2.9 million or 53.3% to $2.5 million for
the year ended December 31, 2004 from $5.4 million for
the year ended December 31, 2003. This decrease was
primarily due to the fact that the final share allocations under
the warrant program occurred on March 1, 2004.
Marketing and Advertising. Marketing and advertising
expense increased by $0.2 million or 10.4% to
$2.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2004 from
$2.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2003.
This increase was primarily due to expenses we incurred for
print and other advertising used to promote our electronic
trading platform.
Moneyline Revenue Share. Moneyline revenue share expense
decreased by $0.6 million or 31.3% to $1.2 million for
the year ended December 31, 2004 from $1.8 million for
the year ended December 31, 2003. The increased trading
volume in U.S. and European high-grade corporate bonds that is
the basis for the revenue share calculation was offset by the
changes in the U.S. high-grade corporate bond fee plan in
2003 and the migration away from the Moneyline platform to the
new U.S. high-grade platform in May 2004.
General and Administrative. General and administrative
expense increased by $0.2 million or 4.6% to
$4.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2004 from
$4.1 million for the comparable period in 2003. This
increase was due to a number of factors, including increase in
occupancy expenses, value-added tax (VAT) and franchise tax
payments, partially offset by the reversal of $0.2 million
in a VAT tax reserve taken in 2003.
For the year ended December 31, 2004, we recorded a net
income tax benefit of $41.3 million. The benefit consists
of a reduction in the valuation allowance relating to our
deferred tax asset of $46.2 million, the recognition of
$1.6 million in tax credits and the reversal of a prior
year overstatement of $1.0 million. This was offset with a
charge of $7.5 million, which includes federal, state and
local and foreign taxes. We have recorded a valuation allowance
of $18.1 million against the gross deferred tax assets of
$59.5 million arising from net operating loss carryforwards
and temporary differences relating to deductibility of certain
expenses for book and tax purposes. The ultimate realization of
deferred tax assets is dependent upon the generation of future
taxable income during the periods in which the temporary
differences become deductible. The valuation allowance was
reduced to $18.1 million during the year ended
December 31, 2004 based on our reassessment of the factors
impacting the valuation allowance previously recorded. Such
factors include seven consecutive quarters of profitable
operations in the U.S. and six consecutive quarters of
profitable operations in the U.K., our expectation of continuing
future profitable operations, our anticipation that we would be
able to utilize certain net operating loss carryforwards during
2004 and our ability to utilize certain of the net operating
loss carryforwards in future periods prior to their expiration.
We believe it is likely, but subject to some uncertainty, that
approximately 76% of the net operating losses will be utilized
prior to their expiration in 2017. These net operating loss
carryforwards are limited pursuant to Section 382 due to
the acquisition by us of 100% of the outstanding equity of
Trading Edge. This estimate assumes that all temporary
differences will be utilized during this period, and that a
majority of the net operating loss carryforwards subject to
Section 382 limitations may expire prior to their ability
to be utilized. This valuation allowance was deemed appropriate
due to available evidence indicating that some of the deferred
tax assets might not be realized in future years due to annual
utilization restrictions. The net operating losses will be
carried forward to future years.
We cannot predict the timing of the reversal of certain of the
temporary differences. Therefore, the reversal of the temporary
differences may result in charges to the provision for income
taxes and may affect our future earnings.
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2003 Compared to Year Ended
December 31, 2002 |
For the year ended December 31, 2003, net income increased
by $40.3 million to $4.2 million from a net loss of
$36.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2002.
Total revenues increased by $39.8 million or 212.6% to
$58.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2003
from $18.7 million for the year ended December 31,
2002. This increase in total revenue was primarily due to the
growth in the total volume of
48
bonds traded on our platform, which grew 297.1% to
$192.2 billion for the year ended December 31, 2003
from $48.4 billion for the year ended December 31,
2002. Total expenses decreased by $0.7 million or 1.3% to
$54.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2003
from $54.8 million for the year ended December 31,
2002. For the year ended December 31, 2003, our total
expenses decreased due to lower warrant-related, depreciation
and amortization, professional and consulting fees, and
marketing and advertising expenses, offset by increases in
employee compensation, technology and communications, Moneyline
revenue share expenses, restructuring charges, and general and
administrative expenses, in each case when compared to the year
ended December 31, 2002.
Our revenues and percentage of revenues for the years ended
December 31, 2003 and 2002, and the resulting dollar and
percentage change, are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ | |
|
% of Revenues | |
|
$ | |
|
% of Revenues | |
|
$ Change | |
|
% Change | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
($ in thousands) | |
Revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commissions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. high-grade
|
|
$ |
40,310 |
|
|
|
69.0 |
% |
|
$ |
13,390 |
|
|
|
71.6 |
% |
|
$ |
26,920 |
|
|
|
201.1 |
% |
|
|
European high-grade
|
|
|
7,126 |
|
|
|
12.2 |
|
|
|
975 |
|
|
|
5.2 |
|
|
|
6,151 |
|
|
|
630.8 |
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
5,364 |
|
|
|
9.1 |
|
|
|
1,190 |
|
|
|
6.4 |
|
|
|
4,174 |
|
|
|
350.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commissions
|
|
|
52,800 |
|
|
|
90.3 |
|
|
|
15,555 |
|
|
|
83.2 |
|
|
|
37,245 |
|
|
|
239.4 |
|
Information and user access fees
|
|
|
1,144 |
|
|
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
287 |
|
|
|
1.5 |
|
|
|
857 |
|
|
|
298.9 |
|
License fees
|
|
|
4,145 |
|
|
|
7.1 |
|
|
|
924 |
|
|
|
4.9 |
|
|
|
3,221 |
|
|
|
348.8 |
|
Interest income
|
|
|
371 |
|
|
|
0.6 |
|
|
|
742 |
|
|
|
4.0 |
|
|
|
(371 |
) |
|
|
(50.0 |
) |
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.0 |
|
|
|
1,193 |
|
|
|
6.4 |
|
|
|
(1,193 |
) |
|
|
(100.0 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues
|
|
$ |
58,460 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
18,701 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
39,759 |
|
|
|
212.6 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commissions. Total commissions increased by
$37.2 million or 239.4% to $52.8 million for the year
ended December 31, 2003 from $15.6 million for the
year ended December 31, 2002. This increase was primarily
due to increases in the amount of U.S. high-grade
commissions and European high-grade commissions.
U.S. high-grade commissions increased by $26.9 million
or 201.1% to $40.3 million for the year ended
December 31, 2003 from $13.4 million for the year
ended December 31, 2002. European high-grade commissions
increased by $6.2 million or 630.8% to $7.1 million
for the year ended December 31, 2003 from $1.0 million
for the year ended December 31, 2002. These increases were
primarily due to an increase in transaction volume from
$48.4 billion for the year ended December 31, 2002 to
$192.2 billion for the year ended December 31, 2003
generated by new and existing clients.
Information and User Access Fees. Information and user
access fees increased by $0.9 million or 298.9% to
$1.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2003 from
$0.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2002.
This increase was primarily due to $0.8 million in
information services fees received for the year ended
December 31, 2003 following the launch of our Corporate
BondTicker service in July 2002, for which we started charging
in November 2002.
License Fees. License fees increased by $3.2 million
or 348.8% to $4.1 million for the year ended
December 31, 2003 from $1.0 million for the year ended
December 31, 2002. This increase was primarily due to the
six new broker-dealer clients that joined the platform between
October 1, 2002 and December 31, 2003.
Interest Income. Interest income decreased by
$0.4 million or 50.0% to $0.4 million for the year
ended December 31, 2003 from $0.7 million for the year
ended December 31, 2002. This decrease was due to the lower
interest rate environment in 2003.
49
Other. Other income decreased to $0 for the year ended
December 31, 2003 from $1.2 million for the comparable
period in 2002. This decrease was due to the non-recurring
insurance settlement of $1.2 million received in 2002.
Our expenses and percentage of revenues for the years ended
December 31, 2003 and 2002, and the resulting dollar and
percentage change, are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ | |
|
% of Revenues | |
|
$ | |
|
% of Revenues | |
|
$ Change | |
|
% Change | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
($ in thousands) | |
Expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Employee compensation and benefits
|
|
$ |
26,860 |
|
|
|
45.9 |
% |
|
$ |
24,290 |
|
|
|
129.9 |
% |
|
$ |
2,570 |
|
|
|
10.6 |
% |
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
4,688 |
|
|
|
8.0 |
|
|
|
6,658 |
|
|
|
35.6 |
|
|
|
(1,970 |
) |
|
|
(29.6 |
) |
|
Technology and communications
|
|
|
4,755 |
|
|
|
8.1 |
|
|
|
3,943 |
|
|
|
21.1 |
|
|
|
812 |
|
|
|
20.6 |
|
|
Professional and consulting fees
|
|
|
4,180 |
|
|
|
7.2 |
|
|
|
4,699 |
|
|
|
25.1 |
|
|
|
(518 |
) |
|
|
(11.0 |
) |
|
Warrant-related expense
|
|
|
5,400 |
|
|
|
9.2 |
|
|
|
8,624 |
|
|
|
46.1 |
|
|
|
(3,224 |
) |
|
|
(37.4 |
) |
|
Marketing and advertising
|
|
|
2,292 |
|
|
|
3.9 |
|
|
|
2,588 |
|
|
|
13.8 |
|
|
|
(297 |
) |
|
|
(11.5 |
) |
|
Moneyline revenue share
|
|
|
1,806 |
|
|
|
3.1 |
|
|
|
708 |
|
|
|
3.8 |
|
|
|
1,098 |
|
|
|
155.2 |
|
|
Restructuring charges
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.0 |
|
|
|
(674 |
) |
|
|
(3.6 |
) |
|
|
674 |
|
|
|
(100.0 |
) |
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
4,077 |
|
|
|
7.0 |
|
|
|
3,941 |
|
|
|
21.1 |
|
|
|
136 |
|
|
|
3.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total expenses
|
|
$ |
54,058 |
|
|
|
92.4 |
% |
|
$ |
54,777 |
|
|
|
292.9 |
% |
|
$ |
(719 |
) |
|
|
(1.3 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Employee Compensation and Benefits. Employee compensation
and benefits expense increased by $2.6 million or 10.6% to
$26.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2003
from $24.3 million for the year ended December 31,
2002. This increase was primarily due to the addition of new
employees to support our growth, Moneyline consultant staff that
became our full-time employees and an increase in
performance-based bonuses. Total employees increased to 160 as
of December 31, 2003, from 133 as of December 31,
2002. As a percentage of total revenues, employee compensation
and benefits expense decreased to 45.9% for the year ended
December 31, 2003 from 129.9% for the year ended
December 31, 2002. We expect this expense to continue to
decline as a percentage of total revenues as we continue to grow
our business.
Depreciation and Amortization. Depreciation and
amortization expense decreased by $2.0 million or 29.6% to
$4.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2003 from
$6.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2002.
This decrease was primarily due to the fact that
$8.5 million of our fixed assets became fully depreciated
during 2003. As a percentage of total revenues, depreciation and
amortization expense decreased to 8.0% for the year ended
December 31, 2003 from 35.6% for the year ended
December 31, 2002.
Technology and Communications. Technology and
communications expense increased by $0.8 million or 20.6%
to $4.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2003
from $3.9 million for the year ended December 31,
2002. This increase was primarily due to the additional costs
relating to licenses, maintenance, production data feeds and
hosting, all associated with the growth in volume traded on our
platform. As a percentage of total revenues, technology and
communications expense decreased to 8.1% for the year ended
December 31, 2003 from 21.1% for the year ended
December 31, 2002.
Professional and Consulting Fees. Professional and
consulting fees decreased by $0.5 million or 11.0% to
$4.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2003 from
$4.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2002.
This decrease was primarily due to the fact that certain
Moneyline consultant staff became our full-time employees in May
2003. As a percentage of total revenues, professional and
consulting fees decreased to 7.2% for the year ended
December 31, 2003 from 25.1% for the year ended
December 31, 2002.
50
Warrant-related Expense. Warrant-related expense
decreased by $3.2 million or 37.4% to $5.4 million for
year ended December 31, 2003 from $8.6 million for the
year ended December 31, 2002. This decrease was primarily
due to the U.S. portion of the warrant program becoming
fully allocated on January 31, 2003, offset in part
by increases in the value of the warrant. As a percentage of
total revenues, warrant-related expense decreased to 9.2% for
the year ended December 31, 2003 from 46.1% for the year
ended December 31, 2002.
Marketing and Advertising. Marketing and advertising
expense decreased by $0.3 million or 11.5% to
$2.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2003 from
$2.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2002.
This decrease was primarily due to reduced advertising in 2003.
As a percentage of total revenues, marketing and advertising
expense decreased to 3.9% for the year ended December 31,
2003 from 13.8% for the year ended December 31, 2002.
Moneyline Revenue Share. Moneyline revenue share expense
increased by $1.1 million or 155.2% to $1.8 million
for the year ended December 31, 2003 from $0.7 million
for the year ended December 31, 2002. This increase was
primarily due to our increased trading volume and the resultant
increase in commissions. As a percentage of total revenues,
Moneyline revenue share expense decreased to 3.1% for the year
ended December 31, 2003 from 3.8% for the year ended
December 31, 2002.
Restructuring Charges. For the year ended
December 31, 2002, a restructuring charge of
$0.7 million recorded in the year ended December 31,
2001 was determined not to be required and was reversed. There
were no restructuring charges in 2003.
General and Administrative. General and administrative
expense increased by $0.1 million or 3.5% to
$4.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2003 from
$3.9 million for year ended December 31, 2002. This
increase was due primarily to a combination of increases in
travel expense and miscellaneous expenses, offset by a
$0.3 million decrease in occupancy costs due to the
subleasing of unneeded facilities. As a percentage of total
revenues, general and administrative expense decreased to 7.0%
for the year ended December 31, 2003 from 21.1% for the
year ended December 31, 2002.
For the year ended December 31, 2003, income taxes were
minimal due to the benefit of the net operating loss
carryforward. The effective income tax rate for the year was
2.6%. No income tax provision was recorded in the year ended
December 31, 2002 as a result of operating losses incurred
during the year. As of December 31, 2003, the gross
deferred tax asset was $64.3 million, reduced to a net tax
asset of zero by a valuation allowance of $64.3 million.
Our first profitable quarter was the second quarter of 2003.
While we were forecasting rising revenues and net income for
2004 and 2005, as evidenced by the projections used for the
valuations of our common stock as of December 31, 2002 and
2003, management exercised judgment in assessing the positive
evidence of the three quarters of profitability and the forecast
future year earnings against the negative evidence of
accumulated losses, the uncertainty of attainment of forecast
future year earnings and the potential likelihood of the
realization of the utilization of net operating loss
carryforwards. For the year ended December 31, 2003, net
income was $4.2 million, bringing the accumulated losses to
$113.8 million. Additionally, $40.6 million of our net
operating loss carryforward for income tax purposes of
$121.4 million was subject to Section 382 limitations.
Accordingly, a 100% valuation allowance against the deferred tax
assets was deemed appropriate. The net operating losses will be
carried forward to future years.
|
|
|
Quarterly Results of Operations |
Our quarterly results have varied significantly as a result of:
|
|
|
|
|
changes in trading volume due to market conditions, a decrease
in the number of trading days in certain quarters, and
seasonality effects caused by slow-downs in trading activity
during certain periods; |
|
|
|
non-recurring revenues relating to an insurance settlement and
New York State disaster recovery grant relating to the
September 11, 2001 terrorist acts and non-recurring
expenses relating to the Trading Edge acquisition; |
|
|
|
increases in the number of broker-dealers and institutional
investors using our trading platform as well as increased usage
by existing clients; and |
|
|
|
expansion of the products we offer to our clients. |
51
The following table sets forth certain consolidated quarterly
income statement data for the eight quarters ended
December 31, 2004. In our opinion, this unaudited
information has been prepared on a basis consistent with our
annual financial statements and includes all adjustments
(consisting only of normal recurring adjustments) necessary for
a fair statement of the unaudited quarterly data. This
information should be read in conjunction with our Consolidated
Financial Statements and related Notes included in this annual
report on Form 10-K. The results of operations for any
quarter are not necessarily indicative of results that we may
achieve for any subsequent periods.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended | |
|
|
| |
|
|
March 31, | |
|
June 30, | |
|
Sept 30, | |
|
Dec 31, | |
|
March 31, | |
|
June 30, | |
|
Sept 30, | |
|
Dec 31, | |
|
|
2003 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In thousands) | |
|
|
(Unaudited) | |
Revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commissions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. high-grade(1)
|
|
$ |
6,958 |
|
|
$ |
9,803 |
|
|
$ |
12,157 |
|
|
$ |
11,392 |
|
|
$ |
11,424 |
|
|
$ |
11,492 |
|
|
$ |
11,108 |
|
|
$ |
11,441 |
|
|
European high-grade(2)
|
|
|
1,009 |
|
|
|
1,465 |
|
|
|
2,114 |
|
|
|
2,538 |
|
|
|
4,521 |
|
|
|
3,621 |
|
|
|
3,652 |
|
|
|
3,348 |
|
|
Other(3)
|
|
|
888 |
|
|
|
1,277 |
|
|
|
1,439 |
|
|
|
1,761 |
|
|
|
1,804 |
|
|
|
1,677 |
|
|
|
2,073 |
|
|
|
2,009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commissions
|
|
|
8,855 |
|
|
|
12,544 |
|
|
|
15,710 |
|
|
|
15,690 |
|
|
|
17,750 |
|
|
|
16,791 |
|
|
|
16,833 |
|
|
|
16,798 |
|
Information and user access fees(4)
|
|
|
122 |
|
|
|
268 |
|
|
|
391 |
|
|
|
362 |
|
|
|
489 |
|
|
|
532 |
|
|
|
731 |
|
|
|
961 |
|
License fees
|
|
|
1,679 |
|
|
|
838 |
|
|
|
533 |
|
|
|
1,095 |
|
|
|
582 |
|
|
|
566 |
|
|
|
744 |
|
|
|
1,251 |
|
Interest income(5)
|
|
|
86 |
|
|
|
91 |
|
|
|
90 |
|
|
|
105 |
|
|
|
154 |
|
|
|
116 |
|
|
|
171 |
|
|
|
441 |
|
Other(6)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
198 |
|
|
|
228 |
|
|
|
239 |
|
|
|
222 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues
|
|
|
10,743 |
|
|
|
13,741 |
|
|
|
16,724 |
|
|
|
17,252 |
|
|
|
19,173 |
|
|
|
18,233 |
|
|
|
18,718 |
|
|
|
19,673 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Employee compensation and benefits
|
|
|
6,385 |
|
|
|
6,639 |
|
|
|
6,692 |
|
|
|
7,145 |
|
|
|
8,165 |
|
|
|
8,445 |
|
|
|
8,259 |
|
|
|
8,277 |
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
1,464 |
|
|
|
1,127 |
|
|
|
1,046 |
|
|
|
1,050 |
|
|
|
746 |
|
|
|
1,081 |
|
|
|
644 |
|
|
|
997 |
|
Technology and communications
|
|
|
1,099 |
|
|
|
1,204 |
|
|
|
1,152 |
|
|
|
1,300 |
|
|
|
1,592 |
|
|
|
1,547 |
|
|
|
1,496 |
|
|
|
1,767 |
|
Professional and consulting fees(7)
|
|
|
1,249 |
|
|
|
1,033 |
|
|
|
765 |
|
|
|
1,134 |
|
|
|
946 |
|
|
|
790 |
|
|
|
1,041 |
|
|
|
2,131 |
|
Warrant-related expense
|
|
|
1,439 |
|
|
|
913 |
|
|
|
913 |
|
|
|
2,133 |
|
|
|
2,524 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Marketing and advertising
|
|
|
558 |
|
|
|
557 |
|
|
|
551 |
|
|
|
626 |
|
|
|
625 |
|
|
|
518 |
|
|
|
750 |
|
|
|
637 |
|
Moneyline revenue share
|
|
|
371 |
|
|
|
448 |
|
|
|
478 |
|
|
|
508 |
|
|
|
464 |
|
|
|
356 |
|
|
|
219 |
|
|
|
201 |
|
Restructuring charges
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
750 |
|
|
|
890 |
|
|
|
953 |
|
|
|
1,485 |
|
|
|
1,102 |
|
|
|
1,239 |
|
|
|
1,337 |
|
|
|
585 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total expenses
|
|
|
13,315 |
|
|
|
12,812 |
|
|
|
12,550 |
|
|
|
15,382 |
|
|
|
16,165 |
|
|
|
13,975 |
|
|
|
13,746 |
|
|
|
14,595 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before taxes
|
|
|
(2,572 |
) |
|
|
930 |
|
|
|
4,174 |
|
|
|
1,871 |
|
|
|
3,008 |
|
|
|
4,258 |
|
|
|
4,971 |
|
|
|
5,078 |
|
Provision (benefit) for income tax(8)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
190 |
|
|
|
92 |
|
|
|
(39,737 |
) |
|
|
(4,163 |
) |
|
|
2,478 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$ |
(2,572 |
) |
|
$ |
930 |
|
|
$ |
4,174 |
|
|
$ |
1,681 |
|
|
$ |
2,916 |
|
|
$ |
43,995 |
|
|
$ |
9,134 |
|
|
$ |
2,600 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
Of these amounts, $4,816, $5,814, $7,052, $6,506, $6,506,
$6,265, $6,100 and $6,442, respectively, were from related
parties. |
|
(2) |
Of these amounts, $729, $984, $1,087, $1,605, $2,611, $1,971,
$1,990 and $1,778, respectively, were from related parties. |
|
(3) |
Of these amounts, $835, $998, $1,135, $1,461, $1,434, $1,139,
$1,592 and $1,479, respectively, were from related parties. |
|
(4) |
Of these amounts, $41, $43, $53, $52, $60, $76, $118 and $207,
respectively, were from related parties. |
52
|
|
(5) |
Of these amounts, $17, $15, $13, $20, $90, $31, $41 and $218,
respectively, were from related parties. |
|
(6) |
Of these amounts, $0, $0, $0, $0, $124, $122, $136 and $133,
respectively, were from related parties. |
|
(7) |
Of these amounts, $286, $92, $0, $0, $0, $0, $0 and $0,
respectively, were from a related party, Moneyline. Moneyline
provided certain software development services to the Company. |
|
(8) |
During the three months ended June 30, 2004, we reduced the
valuation allowance relating to our deferred tax assets by
$31.0 million from $60.2 million to
$29.2 million. During the three months ended
September 30, 2004, we reduced the valuation allowance
relating to our deferred tax assets by $11.0 million from
$29.2 million to $18.2 million. Due to the fact that
we had achieved multiple quarters of profitability, it became
more likely than not that we would be able to utilize our net
operating loss carryforwards. We also determined that it was
more likely than not that all of the temporary differences
relating to the deductibility of certain expenses for book and
tax purposes, including the warrant-related expense, would be
utilized prior to expiration. During the three months ended
December 31, 2004, we further reduced the valuation
allowance relating to our deferred tax assets by
$0.1 million from $18.2 million to $18.1 million.
We also recognized $1.6 million in tax credits and a
reversal of a prior year overstatement of $1.0 million.
Without giving effect to the reduction of the valuation
allowance, tax credits and reversal, our net income for the
three months ended June 30, 2004 would have been
$1.4 million and our net income for the three months ended
September 30, 2004 would have been $5.6 million. |
The following tables set forth trading volume and average fee
per million traded for the eight quarters ended
December 31, 2004.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended | |
|
|
| |
|
|
March 31, | |
|
June 30, | |
|
Sept 30, | |
|
Dec 31, | |
|
March 31, | |
|
June 30, | |
|
Sept 30, | |
|
Dec 31, | |
|
|
2003 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In billions, except number of trading days) | |
Trading Volume:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. high-grade
|
|
$ |
21.0 |
|
|
$ |
31.4 |
|
|
$ |
43.9 |
|
|
$ |
44.0 |
|
|
$ |
45.0 |
|
|
$ |
44.2 |
|
|
$ |
44.9 |
|
|
$ |
49.4 |
|
|
European high-grade
|
|
|
4.3 |
|
|
|
6.1 |
|
|
|
9.1 |
|
|
|
12.3 |
|
|
|
23.6 |
|
|
|
17.6 |
|
|
|
18.4 |
|
|
|
16.9 |
|
|
Other
|
|
|
3.6 |
|
|
|
4.5 |
|
|
|
5.3 |
|
|
|
6.8 |
|
|
|
6.4 |
|
|
|
7.4 |
|
|
|
11.4 |
|
|
|
12.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$ |
28.9 |
|
|
$ |
41.9 |
|
|
$ |
58.2 |
|
|
$ |
63.2 |
|
|
$ |
75.0 |
|
|
$ |
69.1 |
|
|
$ |
74.7 |
|
|
$ |
79.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of U.S. trading days
|
|
|
61 |
|
|
|
63 |
|
|
|
64 |
|
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
63 |
|
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
63 |
|
|
|
62 |
|
|
Number of U.K. trading days
|
|
|
63 |
|
|
|
61 |
|
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
64 |
|
|
|
63 |
|
|
|
63 |
|
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended | |
|
|
| |
|
|
March 31, | |
|
June 30, | |
|
Sept 30, | |
|
Dec 31, | |
|
March 31, | |
|
June 30, | |
|
Sept 30, | |
|
Dec 31, | |
|
|
2003 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Average Fee Per Million Traded:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. high-grade
|
|
$ |
331 |
|
|
$ |
312 |
|
|
$ |
277 |
|
|
$ |
259 |
|
|
$ |
254 |
|
|
$ |
260 |
|
|
$ |
248 |
|
|
$ |
231 |
|
|
European high-grade
|
|
$ |
234 |
|
|
$ |
239 |
|
|
$ |
232 |
|
|
$ |
206 |
|
|
$ |
191 |
|
|
$ |
206 |
|
|
$ |
198 |
|
|
$ |
198 |
|
|
Other
|
|
$ |
251 |
|
|
$ |
283 |
|
|
$ |
273 |
|
|
$ |
258 |
|
|
$ |
284 |
|
|
$ |
228 |
|
|
$ |
182 |
|
|
$ |
155 |
|
|
|
Average Fee Per Million Traded For All Products
|
|
$ |
307 |
|
|
$ |
298 |
|
|
$ |
270 |
|
|
$ |
248 |
|
|
$ |
237 |
|
|
$ |
243 |
|
|
$ |
225 |
|
|
$ |
212 |
|
The new transaction fee plans for U.S. high-grade corporate
bonds were introduced during the third quarter of 2003 to
provide incentives for dealers to transact higher volumes
through the platform while at the same time providing us with an
element of fixed commission revenue over the two-year term of
the new plans. Commissions for our U.S. high-grade platform
increased from $9.8 million for the three months ended
June 30, 2003 to $12.2 million for the three months
ended September 30, 2003. Since September 30, 2003,
commissions for our U.S. high-grade platform have remained
relatively constant. Specifically, commissions for our
U.S. high-grade platform were $11.4 million for the
three months ended December 31, 2003, $11.4 million
for the three months ended March 31, 2004,
$11.5 million for the three months ended June 30,
2004, $11.1 million for the three months ended
September 30, 2004 and $11.4 million for the three
months
53
ended December 31, 2004. Due primarily to the new
transaction fee plans, and trades executed on the platform with
shorter maturities, which generally generate lower commissions
per million, average U.S. high-grade commissions declined
from $312 per million traded in the three months ended
June 30, 2003 to $231 per million traded in the three
months ended December 31, 2004. This decrease in the
average commission per million traded was more than offset by
volume increases. Specifically, our trading volume for
U.S. high-grade corporate bonds was $31.4 billion for
the three months ended June 30, 2003, rising to
$43.9 billion for the three months ended September 30,
2003, and, with some variances in trading volume in interim
quarters, increasing to $49.4 billion for the three months
ended December 31, 2004.
For the European high-grade platform during the last eight
quarters, revenues ranged from a low of $1.0 million for
the three months ended March 31, 2003 to a high of
$4.5 million for the three months ended March 31, 2004
and an average of $3.8 million for the four quarters of the
year ended December 31, 2004. Trading volume ranged from a
low of $4.3 billion for the three months ended
March 31, 2003 to a high of $23.6 billion for the
three months ended March 31, 2004 and an average of
$19.1 billion for the four quarters of the year ended
December 31, 2004. The average fee per million did not
trend in the same manner as revenue and trading volume. Because
of the product mix of the bonds traded on the European
high-grade platform, average European high-grade corporate bond
commissions declined from $234 per million traded in the
three months ended March 31, 2003 to an average of
$198 per million traded for the four quarters of the year
ended December 31, 2004.
For the Other bonds traded on our platform during the last eight
quarters, commissions ranged from a low of $0.9 million for
the three months ended March 31, 2003 to a high of
$2.1 million for the three months ended September 30,
2004 and an average of $1.9 million for the year ended
December 31, 2004. Trading volume ranged from a low of
$3.6 billion for the three months ended March 31, 2003
to a high of $12.9 billion for the three months ended
December 31, 2004, with an average of $9.5 billion for
the four quarters of the year ended December 31, 2004. The
average fee per million did not trend in the same manner as
revenue and trade volume because of the product mix and ranged
from a high of $284 per million traded for the quarter
ended March 31, 2004 to a low $155 per million traded
for the three months ended December 31, 2004 and an average
of $212 per million for the four quarters of the year ended
December 31, 2004.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
Since our inception, we have met our funding requirements
through the issuance of our preferred stock, internally
generated funds, and our initial public offering in November
2004. Cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments totaled
$37.2 million at December 31, 2001, $23.8 million
at December 31, 2002, $36.2 million at
December 31, 2003 and $103.4 million at
December 31, 2004. The changes in the balances were the
result of capital-raising activities and operating cash flow. As
of December 31, 2004, we did not invest in equities or
corporate fixed-income securities. In January 2005, we invested
the net proceeds of our initial public offering in commercial
paper, municipal bonds, and short-term corporate bonds. To limit
our exposure to foreign currency fluctuations from MarketAxess
Europe Limited and MarketAxess Leasing, our U.K. subsidiaries,
we use foreign currency forward contracts in which we sell
Pounds Sterling and buy U.S. dollars for forward settlement.
Current assets consists of cash and cash equivalents, short-term
investments, securities provided as collateral, accounts
receivable and prepaid expenses. These assets represented 79.6%
of our total assets at December 31, 2002, 86.3% at
December 31, 2003 and 70.4% at December 31, 2004. In
addition our current ratio, which is computed by dividing
current assets by current liabilities, was 2.8 at
December 31, 2002, 2.8 at December 31, 2003 and 6.1 at
December 31, 2004.
54
We have no long-term or short-term debt and do not maintain bank
lines of credit. Our contingent liabilities and commitments
consist of our non-cancelable leases for office space. As of
December 31, 2004, the minimum rentals under our leases,
net of sublease income, were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, |
|
Minimum Rentals | |
|
|
| |
|
2005
|
|
$ |
2.1 million |
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2.3 million |
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2.2 million |
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2.2 million |
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2.2 million |
|
Thereafter through 2011
|
|
|
5.8 million |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$ |
16.8 million |
|
The standby letters of credit used as security for these
long-term leases and our foreign currency forward contracts are
collateralized by U.S. Treasury securities with a fair
value of $3.3 million as of December 31, 2004.
U.S. Treasury securities are replaced as they mature to
continually collateralize the letters of credit.
Our cash flows for the periods presented below were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In thousands) | |
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities
|
|
$ |
20,372 |
|
|
$ |
16,914 |
|
|
$ |
(18,643 |
) |
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities
|
|
|
2,520 |
|
|
|
(8,619 |
) |
|
|
10,554 |
|
Net cash provided by financing activities
|
|
|
54,169 |
|
|
|
80 |
|
|
|
8,400 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase for the year
|
|
$ |
77,061 |
|
|
$ |
8,375 |
|
|
$ |
311 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commissions, information and access fees, and general operating
expenses are the key factors that influence our cash flow. At
December 31, 2004, we had cash and cash equivalents of
$97.7 million, an increase of $77.1 million compared
to December 31, 2003. In 2003, cash and cash equivalents
increased $8.4 million to $20.6 million from
$12.2 million at December 31, 2002. As of
December 31, 2004, cash and cash equivalents represented
55.3% of our total assets compared to 36.0% and 31.0% at
December 31, 2003 and 2002, respectively. The increase in
cash and cash equivalents in 2004 was due primarily to the
increase in cash and cash equivalents from the net proceeds of
our initial public offering of $53.9 million. The increase
in 2003 was due primarily to net cash provided by operations.
The slight increase in cash and cash equivalents in 2002 was due
primarily to the maturity of short-term investments and the
issuance of preferred stock offset by smaller operating losses
than in the previous year.
Past trends of cash flows are not necessarily indicative of
future cash flow levels. A decrease in cash flows may have a
material adverse effect on our liquidity, business and financial
condition.
Net cash provided by existing activities was $20.4 and
$16.9 million for the years ended December 31, 2004
and 2003, respectively. Net cash used in operating activities
was $18.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2002.
Cash provided by operating activities of $20.4 million for
the year ended December 31, 2004 consisted of net income of
$58.6 million, adjusted for non-cash charges, primarily
consisting of $41.4 million recognition of deferred taxes,
charges of $3.5 million for depreciation and amortization
and $2.5 million for warrant-related expense. These
non-cash charges were offset by a decrease in cash used for
working capital of $2.8 million.
Cash provided by operating activities of $16.9 million for
the year ended December 31, 2003 consisted of net income of
$4.2 million, adjusted for non-cash charges, primarily
consisting of charges of $4.7 million for depreciation and
amortization and $5.4 million for warrant-related expense.
These non-cash charges were offset by an increase in cash used
for working capital of $2.6 million.
55
Cash used in operating activities of $18.6 million for the
year ended December 31, 2002 consisted of a net loss of
$36.1 million, adjusted for non-cash charges, primarily
consisting of charges of $6.7 million for depreciation and
amortization and $8.6 million for warrant-related expense.
These non-cash charges were offset by an increase in cash used
for working capital of $2.2 million.
Net cash provided by investing activities was $2.5 million
and $10.6 million for the years ended December 31,
2004 and 2002, respectively. For the year ended
December 31, 2003, net cash used in investing activities
was $8.6 million.
Cash used in investing activities of $2.5 million for the
year ended December 31, 2004 consisted of net maturities of
short-term investments of $9.8 million, which was offset by
purchase of furniture, equipment and leasehold improvements of
$3.4 million and capitalization of software development
costs of $3.6 million, and securities provided as
collateral of $0.3 million.
Cash used in investing activities of $8.6 million for the
year ended December 31, 2003 consisted of net purchases of
short-term investments of $4.0 million, securities provided
as collateral of $0.1 million, purchase of furniture,
equipment and leasehold improvements of $1.4 million and
capitalization of software development costs of
$3.3 million.
Cash provided by investing activities of $10.6 million for
the year ended December 31, 2002 consisted of net
maturities of short-term investments of $13.7 million,
which was offset by purchase of furniture, equipment and
leasehold improvements of $1.0 million and capitalization
of software development costs of $1.4 million, and
securities provided as collateral of $0.7 million.
Net cash provided by financing activities was
$54.2 million, $0.1 million and $8.4 million for
the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002,
respectively. Financing activities in 2004 primarily consisted
of proceeds from our initial public offering completed in
November 2004.
|
|
|
Other Factors Influencing Liquidity and Capital
Resources |
We are dependent on our broker-dealer clients, nine of which are
also our stockholders, who are not restricted from buying and
selling fixed-income securities, directly or through their own
proprietary or third-party platforms, with institutional
investors. None of our broker-dealer clients is contractually or
otherwise obligated to continue to use our electronic trading
platform. The loss of, or a significant reduction in the use of
our electronic platform by, our broker-dealer clients could
reduce our cash flows, affect our liquidity and have a material
adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results
of operations.
We believe that our current resources are adequate to meet our
liquidity needs and capital expenditure requirements for at
least the next 12 months. However, our future liquidity and
capital requirements will depend on a number of factors,
including expenses associated with product development and
expansion and new business opportunities that are intended to
further diversify our revenue stream. We may also acquire or
invest in technologies, business ventures or products that are
complementary to our business. In the event we require any
additional financing, it will take the form of equity or debt
financing. Any additional equity offerings will result in
dilution to our stockholders. Any debt financings may involve
restrictive covenants with respect to dividends, issuances of
additional capital and other financial and operational matters
related to our business.
Our two major operating subsidiaries, MarketAxess Corporation
and MarketAxess Europe Limited, are registered broker-dealers in
the U.S. and the U.K., respectively. As such, they are subject
to minimum regulatory capital requirements imposed by their
respective market regulators that are intended to ensure general
financial soundness and liquidity based on certain minimum
capital requirements. The U.S. and the U.K. regulations prohibit
a registered broker-dealer from repaying borrowings from its
parent or affiliates, paying cash dividends, making loans to its
parent or affiliates or otherwise entering into transactions
that result in a significant reduction in its regulatory net
capital position without prior notification to or approval from
its principal regulator. The capital structures of our
broker-dealer subsidiaries are designed to provide each with
56
capital and liquidity consistent with its business and
regulatory requirements. As of December 31, 2004,
MarketAxess Corporation had net capital of $19.4 million,
which was $18.5 million in excess of its required minimum
net capital of $0.9 million. MarketAxess Europe Limited had
financial resources, as defined by the FSA, of
$3.1 million, which was $2.2 million in excess of its
required financial resources of $0.9 million.
The Companys U.S. subsidiary, MarketAxess
Corporation, maintains a securities clearing agreement with a
clearing broker that commenced in December 2004. MarketAxess
Corporation is contractually obligated to a minimum commitment
fee of $0.025 million per quarter, with this commitment
waived for the first 180 days of the relationship. The
securities clearing agreement also contains a termination fee.
If MarketAxess Corporation terminates the securities clearing
agreement in calendar year 2005, it is obligated to pay
$0.025 million and if the termination occurs in calendar
year 2006 or calendar year 2007, it is obligated to pay
$0.010 million. Under the securities clearing agreement,
MarketAxess Corporation maintains a collateral deposit with the
clearing broker in the form of cash or U.S. government
securities. As of December 31, 2004 and 2003, MarketAxess
Corporation had $0.5 million and $0.307 million,
respectively, of securities and cash on deposit with the
clearing broker included in securities and cash provided as
collateral.
In the ordinary course of business, we enter into contracts that
contain a variety of representations, warranties and general
indemnifications. Our maximum exposure from any claims under
these arrangements is unknown, as this would involve claims that
have not yet occurred. However, based on past experience, we
expect the risk of loss to be remote.
We have provided a funding guarantee to our U.K. subsidiaries in
the normal course of business to enable them to meet obligations
to individual creditors through March 31, 2005 to the
extent these subsidiaries cannot meet such obligations
themselves. As the maximum obligation under this arrangement is
unknown, and as the U.K. subsidiaries are consolidated for
reporting purposes, no separate accrual for such guarantee has
been made.
Because the majority of our assets are liquid in nature, they
are not significantly affected by inflation. However, the rate
of inflation may affect our expenses, such as employee
compensation, office leasing costs and communications expenses,
which may not be readily recoverable in the prices of our
services. To the extent inflation results in rising interest
rates and has other adverse effects on the securities markets,
it may adversely affect our financial position and results of
operations.
Contractual Obligations and Commitments
The following table summarizes our contractual arrangements as
of December 31, 2004.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments due by Period | |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
Less than | |
|
|
|
More than | |
|
|
Total | |
|
1 Year | |
|
1-3 Years | |
|
3-5 Years | |
|
5 Years | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In thousands) | |
Operating leases
|
|
$ |
16,840 |
|
|
$ |
2,060 |
|
|
$ |
4,516 |
|
|
$ |
4,492 |
|
|
$ |
5,772 |
|
Foreign currency forward contracts
|
|
|
8,333 |
|
|
|
8,333 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
25,173 |
|
|
$ |
10,393 |
|
|
$ |
4,516 |
|
|
$ |
4,492 |
|
|
$ |
5,772 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
57
Risk Factors That May Affect Future Results
Risks Related to the Potential Conflicts of Interest With Our
Broker-Dealer Clients
Who Are Also Our Stockholders
We are dependent on our broker-dealer clients, nine of
which are also our stockholders, who are not restricted from
buying and selling fixed-income securities, directly or through
their own proprietary or third-party platforms, with
institutional investors.
We rely on our broker-dealer clients to provide product and
liquidity on our electronic trading platform by posting bond
prices on our platform for bonds in their inventory and
responding to institutional investor client inquiries. Although
each broker-dealer client is currently a party to an agreement
with us, the obligations of each broker-dealer under these
agreements are minimal. None of these agreements is exclusive
and broker-dealers may terminate such agreements and/or enter
into, and in some cases have entered into, similar agreements
with our competitors. For example, some of our broker-dealer
clients are also clients of Thompson TradeWeb, a multi-dealer to
institutional investor trading platform that operates an online
corporate bond trading platform.
Our broker-dealer clients buy and sell fixed-income securities
directly with their clients through traditional bond trading
methods, including telephone conversations, e-mail messaging and
other electronic means of communication. Currently, the
preponderance of trading of U.S. high-grade corporate bonds
still occurs using traditional bond trading methods. Most of our
broker-dealer and institutional investor clients are involved in
other ventures, including other electronic trading platforms or
other distribution channels, as trading participants and/or as
equity holders, and such ventures or newly created ventures may
compete with us and our electronic trading platform now and in
the future.
Some of our broker-dealer clients have developed electronic
trading networks or have announced their intention to explore
the development of electronic trading networks. These competing
trading platforms may offer some features that we do not
currently offer. Furthermore, our broker-dealer clients have
made, and may in the future continue to make, investments in
businesses that directly or indirectly compete with us,
including, either individually or collectively, organizing or
investing in a separate company similar to us for the purpose of
competing with us or pursuing corporate opportunities that might
be attractive to us. Accordingly, there can be no assurance that
such broker-dealers primary commitments will not be to one
of our competitors.
Any reduction in the use of our electronic trading platform by
our broker-dealer clients would reduce the number of different
bond issues and the volume of trading in those bond issues on
our platform, which could, in turn, reduce the use of our
platform by our institutional investor clients. The occurrence
of any of the foregoing may have a material adverse effect on
our business, financial condition and results of operations.
We derive a significant percentage of our total revenues,
and an even greater percentage of our commissions, from
broker-dealer clients who are also our stockholders.
We have historically earned a substantial portion of our
commissions from the nine broker-dealer clients that are our
stockholders. For the year ended December 31, 2004,
$39.3 million or 57.7% of our commissions, for the year
ended December 31, 2003, $33.0 million or 62.5% of our
commissions, and for the year ended December 31, 2002,
$12.3 million or 79.0% of our commissions, were generated
by these nine broker-dealer clients. None of our broker-dealer
clients is contractually or otherwise obligated to continue to
use our electronic trading platform. Reduced involvement of
these broker-dealer clients due to their loss of a right to
designate a member of our Board of Directors or the potential
reduction in the level of their equity ownership if these
entities should sell shares of our common stock, may cause them
to reduce or discontinue their use of our electronic trading
platform and other services, which could negatively impact the
use of our platform by our institutional investor clients. The
loss of, or a significant reduction of, participation on our
platform by these broker-dealer clients may have a material
adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results
of operations.
58
|
|
|
Nine of our broker-dealer clients or their affiliates
beneficially own, in the aggregate, approximately 45.0% of our
outstanding common stock. These broker-dealer clients have
strategic interests that differ from those of our other
stockholders. |
As of December 31, 2004, nine of our broker-dealer clients
or their affiliates beneficially own, in the aggregate,
approximately 45.0% of our outstanding common stock. These
broker-dealer clients have strategic interests that are
different from ours and those of our other stockholders. For
example, in their capacity as broker-dealer clients, they would
presumably favor lower commissions and/or commission caps.
Furthermore, as stockholders in other consortia that have
developed competitive electronic trading networks or have
announced their intention to explore the development of
competitive electronic trading networks, they may decide to
direct some or all of their electronic trading business to one
or more of our competitors. While these actions, if taken, would
presumably reduce our revenues and our market capitalization
and, therefore, the value of their ownership position in us,
there can be no assurance that they will not decide to take such
actions for their own strategic reasons.
We are not a party to any voting agreement with any of our
stockholders and are not aware of any voting agreements among
our broker-dealer clients; however, they may enter into a voting
agreement in the future or otherwise vote in a similar manner.
To the extent that all of these broker-dealer clients or their
affiliates vote similarly, they will be able to determine
decisions requiring approval by our stockholders. As a result,
they or their affiliates may be able to:
|
|
|
|
|
control the composition of our Board of Directors through their
ability to nominate directors and vote their shares to elect
them; |
|
|
|
control our management and policies; and |
|
|
|
determine the outcome of significant corporate transactions,
including changes in control that may be beneficial to other
stockholders. |
As a result of these factors, we may be less likely to pursue
relationships with strategic partners who are not stockholders
of ours, which could impede our ability to expand our business
and strengthen our competitive position. Furthermore, these
factors could also limit stockholder value by preventing a
change in control or sale of MarketAxess.
|
|
|
Future sales of shares by our broker-dealer clients who
are also our stockholders could cause the market price of our
common stock to drop significantly and/or limit our ability to
utilize certain income tax benefits. |
All of the shares of common stock and non-voting common stock
owned by our broker-dealer clients are subject to a lock-up
agreement with the underwriters of our initial public offering,
pursuant to which such shares may not be sold for a period of
180 days following the date of the pricing of our initial
public offering, November 4, 2004. Subject to compliance
with the federal securities laws, all of these shares will
become available for resale in the public market after
180 days after the effective date of our initial public
offering, November 5, 2004, subject, in the case of
affiliates of MarketAxess, to volume limitations on
resale.
In addition, to the extent any future sales of common stock by
our broker-dealer clients result in an ownership
change within Section 382, we may not be able to
realize certain income tax benefits resulting from our net
operating loss carryforwards existing at the date of such
ownership change. For more information regarding these potential
income tax benefits and our net operating loss carryforwards,
see Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations Revenues and
Expenses Income Taxes.
59
Risks Related to Our Business
|
|
|
We face substantial competition that could reduce our
market share and harm our financial performance. |
The fixed-income securities industry generally, and the
electronic financial services markets in which we operate in
particular, are highly competitive, and we expect competition to
intensify in the future. We will continue to compete with bond
trading conducted directly between broker-dealers and their
institutional investor clients over the telephone or
electronically. In addition, our current and prospective
competitors are numerous and include:
|
|
|
|
|
other multi-dealer trading companies; |
|
|
|
market data and information vendors; |
|
|
|
securities and futures exchanges; |
|
|
|
inter-dealer brokerage firms; |
|
|
|
electronic communications networks; |
|
|
|
technology, software, information and media or other companies
that have existing commercial relationships with broker-dealers
or institutional investors; and |
|
|
|
other electronic marketplaces that are not currently in the
securities business. |
Many of our current and potential competitors are more
established and substantially larger than we are, and have
substantially greater market presence, as well as greater
financial, engineering, technical, marketing and other
resources. These competitors may aggressively reduce their
pricing to enter into market segments in which we have a
leadership position today, potentially subsidizing any losses
with profits from trading in other fixed-income or equity
securities. In addition, many of our competitors offer a wider
range of services, have broader name recognition and have larger
customer bases than we do. Some of them may be able to respond
more quickly to new or evolving opportunities, technologies and
customer requirements than we can and may be able to undertake
more extensive promotional activities.
Any combination of our competitors may enter into joint ventures
or consortia to provide services similar to those provided by
us. Current and new competitors can launch new platforms at a
relatively low cost. Others may acquire the capabilities
necessary to compete with us through acquisitions. We expect
that we will potentially compete with a variety of companies
with respect to each product or service we offer. If we are not
able to compete successfully in the future, our business,
financial condition and results of operations would be adversely
affected.
We have experienced losses and may incur losses in the
future.
Our losses were $16.8 million from the period of inception
through December 31, 2000, $65.1 million for the year
ended December 31, 2001 and $36.1 million for the year
ended December 31, 2002. For the year ended
December 31, 2003, we reported net income of
$4.2 million and for the year ended December 31, 2004,
we reported net income of $58.6 million, which included
$46.2 million in income which was recognized upon our
reassessment of the likelihood of realization of a portion of
our deferred tax assets. We expect that our expenses will
increase in the near term as we continue to expand our business
and in order to meet the requirements related to being a public
company. We cannot predict whether we will be able to sustain
profitability and we may incur losses in future periods. If we
are not able to sustain profitability, our stock price may
decline.
Neither the sustainability of our current level of
business nor our historical growth can be assured. Even if we do
experience growth, we cannot assure you that we will grow
profitably.
The use of our electronic trading platform is relatively new.
The success of our business strategy depends, in part, on our
ability to maintain and expand the network of broker-dealer and
institutional investor clients that use our electronic trading
platform. Our business strategy also depends on increasing the
use of our
60
platform by these clients. Individuals at broker-dealers or
institutional investors may have conflicting interests which may
discourage their use of our platform.
Our growth is also dependent on our ability to diversify our
revenue base. We currently derive a majority of our revenues
from secondary trading in U.S. high-grade corporate bonds.
Our trading volume for U.S. high-grade corporate bonds has
remained relatively constant during the year ended
December 31, 2004 and our commissions from such trading
have also remained relatively constant during the year. Our
long-term business strategy is dependent on expanding our
service offerings and increasing our revenues from other
fixed-income products and other sources. We cannot assure you
that our efforts will be successful or result in increased
revenues or continued profitability.
Our plans to pursue other opportunities for revenue growth are
at an early stage, and we cannot assure you that our plans will
be successful or that we will actually proceed with them as
described.
Because we have a limited operating history, it is
difficult to evaluate our business and prospects.
MarketAxess was formed in April 2000 and pilot trading on our
electronic trading platform began in October 2000, with the
commercial launch of the platform in January 2001. As a result,
we have only a limited operating history from which you can
evaluate our business and our prospects. We will encounter risks
and difficulties frequently experienced by early-stage companies
in rapidly evolving industries, such as the electronic financial
services industry. These risks and difficulties include, but are
not limited to, our ability to:
|
|
|
|
|
attract and retain broker-dealers and institutional investors on
a cost-effective basis; |
|
|
|
expand and enhance reliable and cost-effective product and
service offerings to our clients; |
|
|
|
respond effectively to competitive pressures; |
|
|
|
diversify our sources of revenues; |
|
|
|
maintain adequate control of our expenses; |
|
|
|
operate, support, expand and develop our operations, website,
software, communications and other systems; |
|
|
|
manage growth in personnel and operations; |
|
|
|
increase awareness of our brand or market positioning; |
|
|
|
expand our sales and marketing programs; and |
|
|
|
respond to regulatory changes or demands. |
If we are unsuccessful in addressing these risks or in executing
our business strategy, our business, financial condition and
results of operations may suffer.
The cap we instituted on one of our pricing plans relating
to commissions and fees paid by broker-dealers on our
U.S. high-grade corporate bond trading platform could limit
our revenues.
For the year ended December 31, 2002, 71.6% of our
revenues, for the year ended December 31, 2003, 69.0% of
our revenues, and for the year ended December 31, 2004,
60.0% of our revenues, came from the commissions paid directly
by broker-dealer clients for secondary trading of
U.S. high-grade corporate bonds on our electronic trading
platform. In 2003 we offered our broker-dealer clients the
opportunity to switch to one of two new transaction fee plans
for secondary U.S. high-grade corporate bond trading, each
of which includes a fixed monthly fee component and a variable
fee per trade component. For one of these new transaction fee
plans, the aggregate amount of transaction fees payable by a
broker-dealer client for U.S. high-grade corporate bond
trading is capped on a monthly and an annual basis. Currently,
one of our broker-dealer clients has selected the pricing plan
that includes the fee cap. While the fee cap is designed to
encourage our broker-dealer clients to be more active on our
electronic trading platform, the fee cap limits the maximum
61
amount of commissions payable to us by our most active
broker-dealer clients, which could limit our revenues and
constrain our growth and profitability.
Decreases in trading volumes in the fixed-income markets
generally or on our platform could harm our business and
profitability.
We have experienced decreases in overall trading volume in
certain periods, including specifically during the three months
ended June 30, 2004, and may experience decreases in
trading volume in the future. Declines in the overall volume of
fixed-income securities trading and in market liquidity
generally, as well as declines in interest rate volatility,
result in lower revenues from commissions for trades executed on
our electronic trading platform and fees generated from related
activities.
Likewise, decreases in our share of the segments of the
fixed-income trading markets in which we operate, or shifts in
trading volume to segments of clients which we have not
penetrated, could result in lower trading volume on our platform
and, consequently, lower commissions and other revenue. During
periods of increased volatility in credit markets, the use of
electronic trading platforms by market participants may decrease
dramatically as institutional investors may seek to obtain
additional information during the trade process through
conversations with broker-dealers. In addition, during rapidly
moving markets, broker-dealers may be less likely to post prices
electronically.
A decline in trading volumes on our platform for any reason may
have a material adverse effect on our business, financial
condition and results of operations because our commissions are
largely variable but a significant portion of our costs is fixed.
If we experience significant fluctuations in our operating
results or fail to meet revenues and earnings expectations, our
stock price may fall rapidly and without advance notice.
Due to our limited operating history, our evolving business
model and the unpredictability of our industry, we may
experience significant fluctuations in our operating results. We
base our current and future expense levels and our investment
plans on estimates of future revenues and future rate of growth.
Our expenses and investments are, to a large extent, fixed and
we expect that these expenses will increase in the future. We
may not be able to adjust our spending quickly enough if our
revenues fall short of our expectations.
Our revenues and operating results may also fluctuate due to
other factors, including:
|
|
|
|
|
our ability to retain existing broker-dealer and institutional
investor clients and attract new broker-dealers and
institutional investor clients; |
|
|
|
our ability to drive an increase in use of our electronic
trading platform by new and existing broker-dealer and
institutional investor clients; |
|
|
|
changes in our pricing policies, including our introduction of a
fee arrangement with our broker-dealer clients relating to
U.S. high-grade corporate bond trading that includes a cap; |
|
|
|
the introduction of new features on our electronic trading
platform; |
|
|
|
the rate of expansion and effectiveness of our sales force; |
|
|
|
new product and service introductions by our competitors; |
|
|
|
fluctuations in overall market trading volume; |
|
|
|
technical difficulties or interruptions in our service; |
|
|
|
general economic conditions in our geographic markets; |
|
|
|
additional investment in our services or operations; and |
|
|
|
regulatory compliance costs. |
As a result, our operating results may fluctuate significantly
on a quarterly basis, which could result in decreases in our
stock price.
62
We may not be able to introduce enhanced versions of our
electronic trading platform, new services and/or service
enhancements in a timely or acceptable manner, which could harm
our competitive position.
Our business environment is characterized by rapid technological
change, changing and increasingly sophisticated client demands
and evolving industry standards. Our future will depend on our
ability to develop and introduce new features to, and new
versions of, our electronic trading platform. The success of new
features and versions depends on several factors, including the
timely completion, introduction and market acceptance of the
feature or version. In addition, the market for our electronic
trading platform may be limited if prospective clients require
customized features or functions that we are unable or unwilling
to provide. If we are unable to anticipate and respond to the
demand for new services, products and technologies and develop
new features and enhanced versions of our electronic trading
platform that achieve widespread levels of market acceptance on
a timely and cost-effective basis, it could have a material
adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results
of operations.
As we enter new markets, we may not be able to
successfully attract clients and adapt our technology and
marketing strategy for use in those markets.
Our strategy includes leveraging our electronic trading platform
to enter new markets. We cannot assure you that we will be able
to successfully adapt our proprietary software and technology
for use in other markets. Even if we do adapt our software and
technology, we cannot assure you that we will be able to attract
clients and compete successfully in any such new markets. We
cannot assure you that our marketing efforts or our pursuit of
any of these opportunities will be successful. If these efforts
are not successful, we may realize less than expected earnings,
which in turn could result in a decrease in the market value of
our common stock. Furthermore, these efforts may divert
management attention or inefficiently utilize our resources.
Rapid technological changes may render our technology
obsolete or decrease the attractiveness of our products and
services to our broker-dealer and institutional investor
clients.
We must continue to enhance and improve our electronic trading
platform. The electronic financial services industry is
characterized by increasingly complex systems and
infrastructures and new business models. If new industry
standards and practices emerge, our existing technology, systems
and electronic trading platform may become obsolete or our
existing business may be harmed. Our future success will depend
on our ability to:
|
|
|
|
|
enhance our existing products and services; |
|
|
|
develop and/or license new products and technologies that
address the increasingly sophisticated and varied needs of our
broker-dealer and institutional investor clients and prospective
clients; and |
|
|
|
respond to technological advances and emerging industry
standards and practices on a cost-effective and timely basis. |
Developing our electronic trading platform and other technology
entails significant technical and business risks. We may use new
technologies ineffectively or we may fail to adapt our
electronic trading platform, information databases and network
infrastructure to broker-dealer or institutional investor client
requirements or emerging industry standards. For example, our
electronic trading platform functionality that allows searches
and inquiries on bond pricing and availability is a critical
part of our service, and it may become out-of-date or
insufficient from our broker-dealer clients or
institutional investor clients perspective and in relation
to the inquiry functionality of our competitors systems.
If we face material delays in introducing new services, products
and enhancements, our broker-dealer and institutional investor
clients may forego the use of our products and use those of our
competitors.
Further, the adoption of new Internet, networking or
telecommunications technologies may require us to devote
substantial resources to modify and adapt our services. We
cannot assure you that we will be able to successfully implement
new technologies or adapt our proprietary technology and
transaction-processing systems to client requirements or
emerging industry standards. We cannot assure you that we will
be able to respond in a timely manner to changing market
conditions or client requirements.
63
We depend on third-party suppliers for key products and
services.
We rely on a number of third parties to supply elements of our
trading, information and other systems, as well as computers and
other equipment, and related support and maintenance. We cannot
assure you that any of these providers will be able to continue
to provide these services in an efficient, cost-effective
manner, if at all, or that they will be able to adequately
expand their services to meet our needs. If we are unable to
make alternative arrangements for the supply of critical
products or services in the event of a malfunction of a product
or an interruption in or the cessation of service by an existing
service provider, our business, financial condition and results
of operations could be materially adversely affected.
In particular, we depend on a third-party vendor for our
corporate bond reference database. Disruptions in the services
provided by that third party to us, including as a result of
their inability or unwillingness to continue to license products
that are critical to the success of our business, could have a
material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and
results of operations.
We also rely, and expect in the future to continue to rely, on
third parties for various computer and communications systems,
such as telephone companies, online service providers, data
processors, and software and hardware vendors. Other third
parties provide, for instance, our data center,
telecommunications access lines and significant computer systems
and software licensing, support and maintenance services. Any
interruption in these or other third-party services or a
deterioration in their performance could impair the quality of
our service. We cannot be certain of the financial viability of
all of the third parties on which we rely.
We license software from third parties, much of which is
integral to our electronic trading platform and our business. We
also hire contractors to assist in the development, quality
assurance testing and maintenance of our electronic trading
platform and other systems. Continued access to these licensors
and contractors on favorable contract terms or access to
alternative software and information technology contractors is
important to our operations. Adverse changes in any of these
relationships could have a material adverse effect on our
business, financial condition and results of operations.
We attempt to negotiate favorable pricing, service,
confidentiality and intellectual property ownership or licensing
and other terms in our contracts with our service providers.
These contracts usually have multi-year terms. However, there is
no guarantee that these contracts will not terminate and that we
will be able to negotiate successor agreements or agreements
with alternate service providers on competitive terms. Further,
the existing agreements may bind us for a period of time to
terms and technology that become obsolete as our industry and
our competitors advance their own operations and contracts.
Our success depends on maintaining the integrity of our
electronic trading platform, systems and infrastructure; our
computer systems may suffer failures, capacity constraints and
business interruptions that could increase our operating costs
and cause us to lose clients.
In order to be successful, we must provide reliable, real-time
access to our electronic trading platform for our broker-dealer
and institutional investor clients. If our electronic trading
platform is hampered by slow delivery times, unreliable service
or insufficient capacity, our broker-dealer and institutional
investor clients may decide to stop using our platform, which
would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial
condition and results of operations.
As our operations grow in both size and scope, we will need to
improve and upgrade our electronic trading platform and
infrastructure to accommodate potential increases in order
message volume and trading volume, the trading practices of new
and existing clients, regulatory changes and the development of
new and enhanced trading platform features, functionalities and
ancillary products and services. The expansion of our electronic
trading platform and infrastructure has required, and will
continue to require, substantial financial, operational and
technical resources. These resources will typically need to be
committed well in advance of any actual increase in trading
volumes and order messages. We cannot assure you that our
estimates of future trading volumes and order messages will be
accurate or that our systems will always be able to accommodate
actual trading volumes and order messages without failure or
degradation of performance. Furthermore, we use new technologies
to upgrade our established systems, and the development of these
new technologies also entails
64
technical, financial and business risks. We cannot assure you
that we will successfully implement new technologies or adapt
our existing electronic trading platform, technology and systems
to the requirements of our broker-dealer and institutional
investor clients or to emerging industry standards. The
inability of our electronic trading platform to accommodate
increasing trading volume and order messages would also
constrain our ability to expand our business.
We have completed the transition of our European bond platform
to our internally-developed software. Our European bond platform
accounted for over 20% of our aggregate revenues and
approximately 25% of our aggregate trading volume in 2004.
We cannot assure you that we will not experience systems
failures. Our electronic trading platform, computer and
communication systems and other operations are vulnerable to
damage, interruption or failure as a result of, among other
things:
|
|
|
|
|
irregular or heavy use of our electronic trading platform during
peak trading times or at times of unusual market volatility; |
|
|
|
power or telecommunications failures, hardware failures or
software errors; |
|
|
|
human error; |
|
|
|
computer viruses, acts of vandalism or sabotage (and resulting
potential lapses in security), both internal and external; |
|
|
|
natural disasters, fires, floods or other acts of God; |
|
|
|
acts of war or terrorism or other armed hostility; and |
|
|
|
loss of support services from third parties, including those to
whom we outsource aspects of our computer infrastructure
critical to our business. |
In the event that any of our systems, or those of our
third-party providers, fail or operate slowly, it may cause any
one or more of the following to occur:
|
|
|
|
|
unanticipated disruptions in service to our clients; |
|
|
|
slower response times or delays in our clients trade
execution; |
|
|
|
incomplete or inaccurate accounting, recording or processing of
trades; |
|
|
|
financial losses and liabilities to clients; |
|
|
|
litigation or other claims against us, including formal
complaints to industry regulatory organizations; and |
|
|
|
regulatory inquiries, proceedings or sanctions. |
Any system failure that causes an interruption in service or
decreases the responsiveness of our service, including failures
caused by client error or misuse of our systems, could damage
our reputation, business and brand name and lead our
broker-dealer and institutional investor clients to decrease or
cease their use of our electronic trading platform.
In these circumstances, our redundant systems or disaster
recovery plans may not be adequate. Similarly, although many of
our contracts with our service providers require them to have
disaster recovery plans, we cannot be certain that these will be
adequate or implemented properly. In addition, our business
interruption insurance may not adequately compensate us for
losses that may occur.
We also cannot assure you that we have sufficient personnel to
properly respond to system problems. We internally support and
maintain many of our computer systems and networks, including
those underlying our electronic trading platform. Our failure to
monitor or maintain these systems and networks or, if necessary,
to find a replacement for this technology in a timely and
cost-effective manner would have a material adverse effect on
our business, financial condition and results of operations.
65
If our security measures are breached and unauthorized
access is obtained to our electronic trading platform,
broker-dealers and institutional investors may become hesitant
to use, or reduce or stop their use of, our trading
platform.
Our electronic trading platform involves the storage and
transmission of our clients proprietary information. The
secure transmission of confidential information over public
networks is a critical element of our operations. Security
breaches could expose us to a risk of loss of this information,
litigation and possible liability. If our security measures are
breached as a result of third-party action, employee error,
malfeasance or otherwise, and, as a result, someone obtains
unauthorized access to trading or other confidential
information, our reputation could be damaged, our business may
suffer and we could incur significant liability. Because
techniques used to obtain unauthorized access or to sabotage
computer systems change frequently and generally are not
recognized until launched against a target, we may be unable to
anticipate these techniques or to implement adequate preventive
measures. If an actual, threatened or perceived breach of our
security occurs, the market perception of the effectiveness of
our security measures could be harmed and could cause
broker-dealers and clients to reduce or stop their use of our
electronic trading platform. We may be required to expend
significant resources to protect against the threat of security
breaches or to alleviate problems, including reputational harm
and litigation, caused by any breaches. Although we intend to
continue to implement industry-standard security measures, we
cannot assure you that those measures will be sufficient.
|
|
|
We may not be able to protect our intellectual property
rights or technology effectively, which would allow competitors
to duplicate or replicate our electronic trading platform. This
could adversely affect our ability to compete. |
Intellectual property is critical to our success and ability to
compete, and if we fail to protect our intellectual property
rights adequately, our competitors might gain access to our
technology. We rely primarily on a combination of patent,
copyright, trademark and trade secret laws in the United States
and other jurisdictions, as well as license agreements,
third-party non-disclosure and other agreements and other
contractual provisions and technical measures to protect our
intellectual property rights. We attempt to negotiate beneficial
intellectual property ownership provisions in our contracts and
also require employees, consultants, advisors and collaborators
to enter into confidentiality agreements in order to protect the
confidentiality of our proprietary information. We have filed
five patent applications covering aspects of our technology
and/or business, but can make no assurances that any such
patents will be issued or, if issued, will protect our business
and processes from competition. Additionally, laws and our
contractual terms may not be sufficient to protect our
technology from use or theft by third parties. For instance, a
third party might reverse engineer or otherwise obtain and use
our technology without our permission and without our knowledge,
thereby infringing our rights and allowing competitors to
duplicate or replicate our products. Furthermore, we cannot
assure you that these protections will be adequate to prevent
our competitors from independently developing technologies that
are substantially equivalent or superior to our technology.
We may have legal or contractual rights that we could assert
against illegal use of our intellectual property rights, but
lawsuits claiming infringement or misappropriation are complex
and expensive, and the outcome would not be certain. In
addition, the laws of some countries in which we now or in the
future provide our services may not protect software and
intellectual property rights to the same extent as the laws of
the United States.
Defending against intellectual property infringement or
other claims could be expensive and disruptive to our business.
If we are found to infringe the proprietary rights of others, we
could be required to redesign our products, pay royalties or
enter into license agreements with third parties.
In the technology industry, there is frequent litigation based
on allegations of infringement or other violations of
intellectual property rights. As the number of participants in
our market increases and the number of patents and other
intellectual property registrations increases, the possibility
of an intellectual property claim against us grows. Although we
have never been the subject of a material intellectual property
dispute, we cannot assure you that a third party will not assert
in the future that our technology or the manner in which we
operate our business violates its intellectual property rights.
From time to time, in the ordinary
66
course of our business, we may become subject to legal
proceedings and claims relating to the intellectual property
rights of others, and we expect that third parties may assert
intellectual property claims against us, particularly as we
expand the complexity and scope of our business, the number of
electronic trading platforms increases and the functionality of
these platforms further overlaps. Any claims, whether with or
without merit, could:
|
|
|
|
|
be expensive and time-consuming to defend; |
|
|
|
prevent us from operating our business, or portions of our
business; |
|
|
|
cause us to cease developing, licensing or using all or any part
of our electronic trading platform that incorporates the
challenged intellectual property; |
|
|
|
require us to redesign our products or services, which may not
be feasible; |
|
|
|
result in significant monetary liability; |
|
|
|
divert managements attention and resources; and |
|
|
|
require us to pay royalties or enter into licensing agreements
in order to obtain the right to use necessary technologies,
which may not be possible on commercially reasonable terms. |
We cannot assure you that third parties will not assert
infringement claims against us in the future with respect to our
electronic trading platform or any of our other current or
future products or services or that any such assertion will not
require us to cease providing such services or products, try to
redesign our products or services, enter into royalty
arrangements, if available, or engage in litigation that could
be costly to us. Any of these events could have a material
adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results
of operations.
If we are unable to enter into additional marketing and
strategic alliances or if our current strategic alliances are
not successful, we may not maintain the current level of trading
or generate increased trading on our trading platform.
During 2003, we entered into a strategic alliance with BrokerTec
in order to provide our institutional investor clients with an
electronic system to buy and sell U.S. Treasury securities.
Although this strategic alliance with BrokerTec terminated on
February 28, 2005, we are working with our broker-dealer
clients and others to provide our institutional investor clients
with an electronic system for the trading of U.S. Treasury
securities. We cannot assure you that we will be able to offer
our institutional investor clients uninterrupted access to an
electronic system for the trading of U.S. Treasury
securities.
From time to time, we may enter into additional strategic
alliances that will enable us to enter new markets, provide
products or services that we do not currently offer or otherwise
enhance the value of our platform to our clients.
Entering into joint ventures and alliances entails risks,
including:
|
|
|
|
|
difficulties in developing and expanding the business of newly
formed joint ventures; |
|
|
|
exercising influence over the activities of joint ventures in
which we do not have a controlling interest; and |
|
|
|
potential conflicts with or among our joint venture or alliance
partners. |
We cannot assure you that we will be able to enter into new
strategic alliances on terms that are favorable to us, or at
all. These arrangements, if entered into, may not generate the
expected number of new clients or increased trading volume we
are seeking. Unsuccessful joint ventures or alliances could have
a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition
and results of operations.
67
If we acquire or invest in other businesses, products or
technologies, we may be unable to integrate them with our
business, our financial performance may be impaired or we may
not realize the anticipated financial and strategic goals for
any such transactions.
If appropriate opportunities present themselves, we may acquire
or make investments in businesses, products or technologies that
we believe are strategic. We may not be able to identify,
negotiate or finance any future acquisition or investment
successfully. Even if we do succeed in acquiring or investing in
a business, product or technology, such acquisitions and
investments involve a number of risks, including:
|
|
|
|
|
we may find that the acquired company or assets do not further
our business strategy, or that we overpaid for the company or
assets, or the economic conditions underlying our acquisition
decision may change; |
|
|
|
we may have difficulty integrating the acquired technologies or
products with our existing electronic trading platform, products
and services; |
|
|
|
we may have difficulty integrating the operations and personnel
of the acquired business, or retaining the key personnel of the
acquired business; |
|
|
|
there may be client confusion if our services overlap with those
of the acquired company; |
|
|
|
our ongoing business and managements attention may be
disrupted or diverted by transition or integration issues and
the complexity of managing geographically or culturally diverse
enterprises; |
|
|
|
we may have difficulty maintaining uniform standards, controls,
procedures and policies across locations; |
|
|
|
an acquisition may result in litigation from terminated
employees or third parties; and |
|
|
|
we may experience significant problems or liabilities associated
with product quality, technology and legal contingencies. |
These factors could have a material adverse effect on our
business, financial condition, results of operations and cash
flows, particularly in the case of a larger acquisition or
multiple acquisitions in a short period of time. From time to
time, we may enter into negotiations for acquisitions or
investments that are not ultimately consummated. Such
negotiations could result in significant diversion of management
time, as well as out-of-pocket costs.
The consideration paid in connection with an investment or
acquisition also affects our financial results. If we were to
proceed with one or more significant acquisitions in which the
consideration included cash, we could be required to use a
substantial portion of our available cash to consummate any
acquisition. To the extent we issue shares of capital stock or
other rights to purchase capital stock, including options or
other rights, existing stockholders may be diluted and earnings
per share may decrease. In addition, acquisitions may result in
the incurrence of debt, large one-time write-offs, such as of
acquired in-process research and development costs, and
restructuring charges. They may also result in goodwill and
other intangible assets that are subject to impairment tests,
which could result in future impairment charges.
We are dependent on our management team, and the loss of
any key member of this team may prevent us from implementing our
business plan in a timely manner.
Our success depends largely upon the continued services of our
executive officers and other key personnel, particularly Richard
M. McVey, our President, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of
our Board of Directors. The terms of Mr. McVeys
employment agreement with us do not require him to continue to
work for us and allow him to terminate his employment at any
time, subject to certain notice requirements and forfeiture of
non-vested equity options. Any loss or interruption of
Mr. McVeys services or that of one or more of our
other executive officers or key personnel could result in our
inability to manage our operations effectively and/or pursue our
business strategy.
68
Because competition for our employees is intense, we may
not be able to attract and retain the highly skilled employees
we need to support our business.
We strive to provide high-quality services that will allow us to
establish and maintain long-term relationships with our
broker-dealer and institutional investor clients. Our ability to
provide these services and maintain these relationships, as well
as our ability to execute our business plan generally, depends
in large part upon our employees. We must attract and retain
highly qualified personnel. Competition for these personnel is
intense, especially for software engineers with extensive
experience in designing and developing software and
Internet-related services, hardware engineers, technicians,
product managers and senior sales executives.
The market for qualified personnel has grown more competitive in
recent periods as electronic commerce has experienced growth.
Domestic and international labor markets have tightened in
concert with the continuing recovery in general economic
conditions. Many of the companies with which we compete for
experienced personnel have greater resources than we have and
are longer established in the marketplace. In addition, in
making employment decisions, particularly in the Internet,
high-technology and financial services industries, job
candidates often consider the total compensation package
offered, including the value of the stock options they are to
receive in connection with their employment. Significant
volatility in the price of our common stock may adversely affect
our ability to attract or retain key employees. Furthermore,
proposed changes to accounting principles generally accepted in
the United States relating to the expensing of stock options may
discourage us from granting the size or type of stock option
awards that job candidates may require to join our company.
We cannot assure you that we will be successful in our efforts
to recruit and retain the required personnel. The failure to
attract new personnel or to retain and motivate our current
personnel may have a material adverse effect on our business,
financial condition and results of operations.
Our business is subject to increasingly extensive
government and other regulation and our relationships with our
broker-dealer clients may subject us to increasing regulatory
scrutiny.
The financial industry is extensively regulated by many
governmental agencies and self-regulatory organizations,
including the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
(SEC) and the National Association of Securities Dealers,
Inc. (NASD). As a matter of public policy, these regulatory
bodies are responsible for safeguarding the integrity of the
securities and other financial markets and protecting the
interests of investors in those markets. These regulatory bodies
have broad powers to promulgate and interpret, investigate and
sanction non-compliance with their laws, rules and regulations.
Most aspects of our broker-dealer subsidiaries are highly
regulated, including:
|
|
|
|
|
the way we deal with our clients; |
|
|
|
our capital requirements; |
|
|
|
our financial and regulatory reporting practices; |
|
|
|
required record-keeping and record retention procedures; |
|
|
|
the licensing of our employees; and |
|
|
|
the conduct of our directors, officers, employees and affiliates. |
We cannot assure you that we and/or our directors, officers and
employees will be able to fully comply with these laws, rules
and regulations. If we fail to comply with any of these laws,
rules or regulations, we may be subject to censure, fines,
cease-and-desist orders, suspension of our business, suspensions
of personnel or other sanctions, including revocation of our
membership in the NASD and registration as a broker-dealer.
Changes in laws or regulations or in governmental policies,
including the rules relating to the maintenance of specific
levels of net capital applicable to our broker-dealer
subsidiaries, could have a material adverse effect on our
business, financial condition and results of operations. Our
industry has been and is subject to continuous regulatory
changes and may become subject to new regulations or changes in
the
69
interpretation or enforcement of existing regulations, which
could require us to incur significant compliance costs or cause
the development of affected markets to become impractical. In
addition, as we expand our business into new markets, it is
likely that we will be subject to additional laws, rules and
regulations. We cannot predict the extent to which any future
regulatory changes may adversely affect our business and
operations.
Our disclosed trading system has not been subjected to
regulation as an alternative trading system under
Regulation ATS. A determination by the SEC to treat our
trading platform as an alternative trading system subject to
Regulation ATS would subject us to additional reporting
obligations and other limitations on the conduct of our
business, many of which could be material.
As an enterprise founded and historically controlled by
broker-dealer competitors, we may be subject to ongoing
regulatory scrutiny of our business to a degree that is not
likely to be experienced by some of our competitors. In November
2000, we received a Civil Investigative Demand from the
U.S. Department of Justice in connection with the Antitrust
Divisions investigation of electronic bond and other
consortia trading systems. After compliance with all information
requests, we recently received notice from the
U.S. Department of Justice that the investigation is now
officially closed. As the use of our electronic trading platform
grows and represents a greater share of the trading volume of
fixed-income securities, the risk that other regulatory
investigations could commence in the future increases.
Additionally, the involvement of individuals affiliated with
certain of our broker-dealer clients on our Board of Directors
and as stockholders may subject us to increased regulatory
scrutiny of our business. At any time, the outcome of
investigations and other regulatory scrutiny could lead to
compulsory changes to our business model, conduct or practices,
or our relationships with our broker-dealer clients, or
additional governmental scrutiny or private lawsuits against us,
any of which could materially harm our revenues, impair our
ability to provide access to the broadest range of fixed-income
securities and impact our ability to grow and compete
effectively, particularly as we implement new initiatives
designed to enhance our competitive position.
The activities and consequences described above may result in
significant distractions to our management and could have a
material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and
results of operations.
We expect to continue to expand our operations outside of
the United States; however, we may face special economic and
regulatory challenges that we may not be able to meet.
We operate an electronic trading platform in Europe and we plan
to further expand our operations throughout Europe and other
regions. There are certain risks inherent in doing business in
international markets, particularly in the financial services
industry, which is heavily regulated in many jurisdictions
outside the United States. These risks include:
|
|
|
|
|
less developed technological infrastructures and generally
higher costs, which could result in lower client acceptance of
our services or clients having difficulty accessing our trading
platform; |
|
|
|
difficulty in obtaining the necessary regulatory approvals for
planned expansion, if at all, and the possibility that any
approvals that are obtained may impose restrictions on the
operation of our business; |
|
|
|
the inability to manage and coordinate the various regulatory
requirements of multiple jurisdictions that are constantly
evolving and subject to unexpected change; |
|
|
|
difficulties in staffing and managing foreign operations; |
|
|
|
fluctuations in exchange rates; |
|
|
|
reduced or no protection for intellectual property rights; |
|
|
|
seasonal reductions in business activity; and |
|
|
|
potentially adverse tax consequences. |
70
Our inability to manage these risks effectively could adversely
affect our business and limit our ability to expand our
international operations, which could have a material adverse
effect on our business, financial condition and results of
operations.
We cannot predict our future capital needs or our ability
to obtain additional financing if we need it.
Our business is dependent upon the availability of adequate
funding and regulatory capital under applicable regulatory
requirements. Historically, we have satisfied these needs
primarily through equity financing from certain of our
broker-dealer clients, our acquisition of Trading Edge, Inc.,
internally generated funds and, most recently, our initial
public offering. Although we believe that our available cash
resources are sufficient to meet our presently anticipated
liquidity needs and capital expenditure requirements for at
least the next 12 months, we may in the future need to
raise additional funds to, among other things:
|
|
|
|
|
support more rapid growth of our business; |
|
|
|
develop new or enhanced services and products; |
|
|
|
respond to competitive pressures; |
|
|
|
acquire complementary companies or technologies; |
|
|
|
enter into strategic alliances; |
|
|
|
increase the regulatory net capital necessary to support our
operations; or |
|
|
|
respond to unanticipated capital requirements. |
We may not be able to obtain additional financing, if needed, in
amounts or on terms acceptable to us, if at all. Our existing
investors, including our broker-dealer clients and their
affiliates, have no obligation to make further investments in
us, and we do not anticipate that they will do so. If sufficient
funds are not available or are not available on terms acceptable
to us, our ability to fund our expansion, take advantage of
acquisition opportunities, develop or enhance our services or
products, or otherwise respond to competitive pressures would be
significantly limited. These limitations could have a material
adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results
of operations.
The requirements of being a public company may strain our
resources, divert managements attention and affect our
ability to attract and retain qualified board members.
As a public company, we are subject to the reporting
requirements of the Securities Exchange Act, the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002 and NASDAQ rules promulgated in response to the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act. The requirements of these rules and
regulations have increased our legal and financial compliance
costs, made some activities more difficult, time-consuming or
costly and may place undue strain on our systems and resources.
The Securities Exchange Act requires, among other things, that
we file annual, quarterly and current reports with respect to
our business and financial condition. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act
requires, among other things, that we maintain effective
disclosure controls and procedures and internal controls for
financial reporting. In order to maintain and improve the
effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures and
internal control over financial reporting, significant resources
and management oversight will be required. As a result,
managements attention may be diverted from other business
concerns, which could have a material adverse effect on our
business, financial condition and results of operations.
These rules and regulations could also make it more difficult
for us to attract and retain qualified independent members of
our Board of Directors. Additionally, we expect these rules and
regulations to make it more difficult and more expensive for us
to obtain director and officer liability insurance. We may be
required to accept reduced coverage or incur substantially
higher costs to obtain coverage. NASDAQ rules also require that
a majority of our Board of Directors and all of certain
sub-committees of the Board of Directors consist of independent
directors. We cannot assure you that our Board of Directors will
continue to include a majority of independent directors to
comply with the requirements of these rules.
71
We are subject to the risks of litigation and securities
laws liability.
Many aspects of our business, and the businesses of our clients,
involve substantial risks of liability. Dissatisfied clients may
make claims regarding quality of trade execution, improperly
settled trades, mismanagement or even fraud against their
service providers. We and our clients may become subject to
these claims as the result of failures or malfunctions of our
electronic trading platform and services provided by us. We
could incur significant legal expenses defending claims, even
those without merit. An adverse resolution of any lawsuits or
claims against us could have a material adverse effect on our
business, financial condition and results of operations.
Risks Related to Our Industry
If the use of electronic trading platforms does not
continue to increase, we will not be able to achieve our
business objectives.
The success of our business plan depends on our ability to
create an electronic trading platform for a wide range of
fixed-income products. Historically, fixed-income securities
markets operated through telephone communications between
institutional investors and broker-dealers. The utilization of
our products and services depends on the acceptance, adoption
and growth of electronic means of trading securities. We cannot
assure you that the growth and acceptance of electronic means of
trading securities will continue.
Weak economic conditions in the United States and in the
other countries and geographic areas in which we offer our
services may negatively impact our business.
In recent years, the United States and other international
markets in which we offer our services have experienced a
significant economic downturn. In addition, the United States
and other countries in which we offer our services have recently
suffered acts of war or terrorism or other armed hostilities.
These or similar acts have in the past increased or prolonged,
and may in the future increase or prolong, negative economic
conditions. An economic downturn may impact our ability to
maintain profitability by negatively affecting demand for our
services.
Economic, political and market factors beyond our control
could reduce demand for our services and harm our business, and
our profitability could suffer.
The global financial services business is, by its nature, risky
and volatile and is directly affected by many national and
international factors that are beyond our control. Any one of
these factors may cause a substantial decline in the U.S. and
global financial services markets, resulting in reduced trading
volume. These events could have a material adverse effect on our
business, financial condition and results of operations. These
factors include:
|
|
|
|
|
economic and political conditions in the United States and
elsewhere; |
|
|
|
adverse market conditions, including unforeseen market closures
or other disruptions in trading; |
|
|
|
concerns over inflation and weakening consumer confidence levels; |
|
|
|
the availability of cash for investment by mutual funds and
other wholesale and retail investors; |
|
|
|
the level and volatility of interest and foreign currency
exchange rates; and |
|
|
|
legislative and regulatory changes. |
Any one or more of these factors may contribute to reduced
activity and prices in the securities markets generally. Our
revenues and profitability are likely to decline significantly
during periods of stagnant economic conditions or low trading
volume in the U.S. and global financial markets.
|
|
Item 7A. |
Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market
Risk |
Market risk is the risk of the loss resulting from adverse
changes in market rates and prices, such as interest rates and
foreign currency exchange rates.
72
Interest Rate Risk
Interest rate risk represents our exposure to interest rate
changes with respect to the money market instruments and
U.S. Treasury obligations in which we invest. As of
December 31, 2004, we did not invest in equities or
corporate fixed-income securities. We do not maintain an
inventory of bonds that are traded on our platform, nor, with
limited exceptions, do we act as principal to the bond
transactions completed on our platform.
Our interest income from money market instruments and
U.S. Treasury obligations was $0.9 million for the
year ended December 31, 2004, $0.4 million for the
year ended December 31, 2003 and $0.7 million for the
year ended December 31, 2002. Fluctuations in interest
income are attributable to changes in our cash balances or
holdings of U.S. Treasury securities and fluctuations in
interest rates received on those balances or securities.
Derivative Risk
Our limited derivative risk stems from our activities in the
foreign currency forward contract market. We use this market to
mitigate our U.S. dollar versus Pound Sterling exposure
that arises from the activities of our U.K. subsidiaries. As of
December 31, 2004, the notional value of our foreign
currency forward contracts was $8.3 million, with an
unrealized loss of $0.022 million. We do not speculate in any
derivative instruments.
73
|
|
Item 8. |
Financial Statements and Supplementary Data |
INDEX TO MARKETAXESS HOLDINGS INC.
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
|
|
|
|
|
|
Audited Consolidated Financial Statements:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
75 |
|
|
|
|
|
76 |
|
|
|
|
|
77 |
|
|
|
|
|
78 |
|
|
|
|
|
79 |
|
|
|
|
|
80 |
|
74
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
To the Board of Directors and Stockholders of
MarketAxess Holdings Inc.:
In our opinion, the accompanying consolidated statements of
financial condition and the related consolidated statements of
operations, changes in convertible preferred stock,
stockholders equity (deficit) and accumulated other
comprehensive income (loss) and cash flows present fairly, in
all material respects, the financial position of MarketAxess
Holdings Inc. and subsidiaries (the Company) as of
December 31, 2004 and 2003, and the results of their
operations and their cash flows for the years ended
December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002 in conformity with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of
America. These financial statements are the responsibility of
the Companys management. Our responsibility is to express
an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits. We
conducted our audits of these statements in accordance with the
standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board
(United States). Those standards require that we plan and
perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether
the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An
audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting
the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements,
assessing the accounting principles used and significant
estimates made by management, and evaluating the overall
financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits
provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
|
|
|
/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers
LLP
|
|
|
|
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
|
New York, NY
March 4, 2005
75
MARKETAXESS HOLDINGS INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In thousands, except | |
|
|
share and per share | |
|
|
amounts) | |
ASSETS |
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$ |
97,652 |
|
|
$ |
20,591 |
|
Short-term investments, at market value
|
|
|
5,797 |
|
|
|
15,591 |
|
Securities and cash provided as collateral
|
|
|
3,799 |
|
|
|
3,507 |
|
Accounts receivable, net of allowance of $270 and $0 as of
December 31, 2004 and 2003 including receivables from
related parties of $7,225 and $5,204 respectively
|
|
|
14,375 |
|
|
|
9,063 |
|
Furniture, equipment and leasehold improvements, net of
accumulated depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
5,079 |
|
|
|
3,038 |
|
Software development costs, net
|
|
|
5,587 |
|
|
|
4,113 |
|
Prepaid expenses
|
|
|
2,801 |
|
|
|
920 |
|
Deferred tax assets, net
|
|
|
41,410 |
|
|
|
|
|
Other assets
|
|
|
205 |
|
|
|
360 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$ |
176,705 |
|
|
$ |
57,183 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES, REDEEMABLE CONVERTIBLE PREFERRED STOCK, AND
STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY (DEFICIT) |
Liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued employee compensation
|
|
$ |
11,803 |
|
|
$ |
9,346 |
|
|
Deferred license revenue
|
|
|
2,804 |
|
|
|
3,671 |
|
|
Accounts payable, accrued expenses, and other liabilities,
including payables to a related party of $530 and $389 as of
December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively
|
|
|
5,821 |
|
|
|
4,771 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities
|
|
|
20,428 |
|
|
|
17,788 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Redeemable convertible preferred stock 0 and
5,436,789 shares authorized, issued and outstanding in 2004
and 2003
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Redeemable convertible preferred stock
Series A, $0.01 par value, 8%, 0 and
1,822,785 shares authorized, issued and outstanding in 2004
and 2003
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24,000 |
|
|
Redeemable convertible preferred stock
Series C, $0.01 par value, 8%, 0 and
607,595 shares authorized, issued and outstanding in 2004
and 2003
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,500 |
|
|
Redeemable convertible preferred stock
Series D, $0.01 par value, 8%, 0 and
200,000 shares authorized, issued and outstanding in 2004
and 2003
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,000 |
|
|
Redeemable convertible preferred stock
Series E, $0.01 par value, 8%, 0 and
1,215,190 shares authorized, issued and outstanding in 2004
and 2003
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25,500 |
|
|
Redeemable convertible preferred stock
Series F, $0.01 par value, 8%, 0 and
1,126,219 shares authorized, issued and outstanding in 2004
and 2003
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
45,049 |
|
|
Redeemable convertible preferred stock
Series G, $0.01 par value, 8%, 0 and
100,000 shares authorized, issued and outstanding in 2004
and 2003
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,500 |
|
|
Redeemable convertible preferred stock
Series H, $0.01 par value, 8%, 0 and
65,000 shares authorized, issued and outstanding in 2004
and 2003
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,925 |
|
|
Redeemable convertible preferred stock
Series I, $0.01 par value, 8%, 0 and
300,000 shares authorized, issued and outstanding in 2004
and 2003
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,400 |
|
|
Accrued dividends on redeemable convertible preferred stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
34,790 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total redeemable convertible preferred stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
159,664 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders equity (deficit)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Convertible preferred stock Series B,
$0.01 par value, 8%, 0 and 175,443 shares authorized,
issued and outstanding in 2004 and 2003
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
Common stock voting, $0.003 par value,
110,000,000 shares authorized in 2004 and 120,000,000 in
2003, 22,846,579 shares issued and outstanding in 2004 and
2,532,260 shares issued and outstanding in 2003
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
Common stock non voting, $0.003 par value, 10,000,000
authorized in 2004 and 405,060 in 2003, 401,330 issued and
outstanding in 2004 and 135,020 shares authorized, issued
and outstanding in 2003
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Warrants, 5,007,969 authorized, issued and outstanding in 2004
and 4,778,800 authorized, issued and outstanding in 2003
|
|
|
24,047 |
|
|
|
21,523 |
|
|
Additional paid-in capital
|
|
|
233,110 |
|
|
|
7,819 |
|
|
Unearned compensation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
Receivable for common stock subscribed
|
|
|
(1,042 |
) |
|
|
(1,042 |
) |
|
Accumulated deficit
|
|
|
(99,578 |
) |
|
|
(148,585 |
) |
|
Accumulated other comprehensive (loss) income
|
|
|
(342 |
) |
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders equity (deficit)
|
|
|
156,277 |
|
|
|
(120,269 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities, redeemable convertible preferred stock and
stockholders equity (deficit)
|
|
$ |
176,705 |
|
|
$ |
57,183 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these
consolidated financial statements.
76
MARKETAXESS HOLDINGS INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In thousands, except share and per share | |
|
|
amounts) | |
Revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commissions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. high-grade, including $25,313, $24,188 and $10,344
from related parties for the years ended December 31, 2004,
2003 and 2002, respectively
|
|
$ |
45,465 |
|
|
$ |
40,310 |
|
|
$ |
13,390 |
|
|
European high-grade, including $8,350, $4,406 and $818 from
related parties for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003
and 2002, respectively
|
|
|
15,142 |
|
|
|
7,126 |
|
|
|
975 |
|
|
Other, including $5,644, $4,429 and $1,129 from related parties
for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002,
respectively
|
|
|
7,565 |
|
|
|
5,364 |
|
|
|
1,190 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commissions
|
|
|
68,172 |
|
|
|
52,800 |
|
|
|
15,555 |
|
|
Information and user access fees, including $461, $203, and $0
from related parties for the years ended December 31, 2004,
2003 and 2002, respectively
|
|
|
2,713 |
|
|
|
1,144 |
|
|
|
287 |
|
|
License fees
|
|
|
3,143 |
|
|
|
4,145 |
|
|
|
924 |
|
|
Interest income, including $380, $65 and $118 from related
parties for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and
2002, respectively
|
|
|
882 |
|
|
|
371 |
|
|
|
742 |
|
|
Other, including $515, $0 and $0 from related parties for the
years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively
|
|
|
887 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,193 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues
|
|
|
75,797 |
|
|
|
58,460 |
|
|
|
18,701 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Employee compensation and benefits
|
|
|
33,146 |
|
|
|
26,860 |
|
|
|
24,290 |
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
3,468 |
|
|
|
4,688 |
|
|
|
6,658 |
|
|
Technology and communications
|
|
|
6,402 |
|
|
|
4,755 |
|
|
|
3,943 |
|
|
Professional and consulting fees, including $0, $378 and $1,450
to related parties for the years ended December 31, 2004,
2003 and 2002, respectively
|
|
|
4,908 |
|
|
|
4,180 |
|
|
|
4,699 |
|
|
Warrant-related expense
|
|
|
2,524 |
|
|
|
5,400 |
|
|
|
8,624 |
|
|
Marketing and advertising
|
|
|
2,530 |
|
|
|
2,292 |
|
|
|
2,588 |
|
|
Moneyline revenue share to related party
|
|
|
1,240 |
|
|
|
1,806 |
|
|
|
708 |
|
|
Restructuring charges
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(674 |
) |
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
4,263 |
|
|
|
4,077 |
|
|
|
3,941 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total expenses
|
|
|
58,481 |
|
|
|
54,058 |
|
|
|
54,777 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before income taxes
|
|
|
17,316 |
|
|
|
4,402 |
|
|
|
(36,076 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision (benefit) for income taxes
|
|
|
(41,330 |
) |
|
|
190 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$ |
58,646 |
|
|
$ |
4,212 |
|
|
$ |
(36,076 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) per common share
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$ |
6.90 |
|
|
$ |
(2.20 |
) |
|
$ |
(14.39 |
) |
|
Diluted
|
|
$ |
1.91 |
|
|
$ |
(2.20 |
) |
|
$ |
(14.39 |
) |
Weighted average shares used to compute net income per common
share
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
7,097,682 |
|
|
|
3,288,464 |
|
|
|
3,290,326 |
|
|
Diluted
|
|
|
30,638,644 |
|
|
|
3,288,464 |
|
|
|
3,290,326 |
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these
consolidated financial statements.
77
MARKETAXESS HOLDINGS INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN CONVERTIBLE PREFERRED
STOCK, STOCKHOLDERS
EQUITY (DEFICIT) AND ACCUMULATED OTHER COMPREHENSIVE
INCOME (LOSS)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Redeemable | |
|
|
|
Redeemable | |
|
|
|
|
|
Common | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Receivable | |
|
|
|
Accumulated | |
|
Total | |
|
|
Convertible | |
|
Accrued Dividends | |
|
Convertible | |
|
Convertible | |
|
Common | |
|
Stock | |
|
|
|
Additional | |
|
|
|
for Common | |
|
|
|
Other | |
|
Stockholders | |
|
|
Preferred | |
|
on Redeemable | |
|
Preferred | |
|
Preferred | |
|
Stock | |
|
Non | |
|
|
|
Paid-In | |
|
Unearned | |
|
Stock | |
|
Accumulated | |
|
Comprehensive | |
|
Equity | |
|
|
Stock | |
|
Convertible Stock | |
|
Stock | |
|
Stock | |
|
Voting | |
|
Voting | |
|
Warrants | |
|
Capital | |
|
Compensation | |
|
Subscribed | |
|
Deficit | |
|
(Loss) Income | |
|
(Deficit) | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In thousands) | |
Balance at December 31, 2001
|
|
$ |
116,474 |
|
|
$ |
12,054 |
|
|
$ |
128,528 |
|
|
$ |
2 |
|
|
$ |
8 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
7,499 |
|
|
$ |
4,968 |
|
|
$ |
(245 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,042 |
) |
|
$ |
(93,985 |
) |
|
$ |
54 |
|
|
$ |
(82,741 |
) |
Issuance of Series I redeemable convertible preferred stock
|
|
|
8,400 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,400 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Redemption of employee stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued dividends on redeemable convertible preferred stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,281 |
|
|
|
11,281 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(11,281 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(11,281 |
) |
Additional paid-in capital, warrants
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,624 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,624 |
|
Additional paid-in capital, stock options
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,193 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,193 |
|
Earned compensation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
171 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
171 |
|
Other comprehensive income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
73 |
|
|
|
73 |
|
Net loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(36,076 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(36,076 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2002
|
|
$ |
124,874 |
|
|
$ |
23,335 |
|
|
$ |
148,209 |
|
|
$ |
2 |
|
|
$ |
8 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
16,123 |
|
|
$ |
6,161 |
|
|
$ |
(74 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,042 |
) |
|
$ |
(141,342 |
) |
|
$ |
127 |
|
|
$ |
(120,037 |
) |
Issuance of common stock voting
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
80 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
80 |
|
Redemption of employee stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued dividends on redeemable convertible preferred stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,455 |
|
|
|
11,455 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(11,455 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(11,455 |
) |
Additional paid-in capital, warrants
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,400 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,400 |
|
Additional paid-in capital, stock options
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,543 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,543 |
|
Issuance of stock options to directors
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
35 |
|
Earned compensation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
61 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
61 |
|
Other comprehensive loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(108 |
) |
|
|
(108 |
) |
Net income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,212 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,212 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2003
|
|
$ |
124,874 |
|
|
$ |
34,790 |
|
|
$ |
159,664 |
|
|
$ |
2 |
|
|
$ |
8 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
21,523 |
|
|
$ |
7,819 |
|
|
$ |
(13 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,042 |
) |
|
$ |
148,585 |
) |
|
$ |
19 |
|
|
$ |
(120,269 |
) |
Issuance of common stock voting
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
230 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
230 |
|
Accrued dividends on redeemable convertible preferred stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,639 |
|
|
|
9,639 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(9,639 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(9,639 |
) |
Additional paid-in capital, warrants
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,524 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,524 |
|
Additional paid-in capital, options
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
293 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
293 |
|
Additional paid-in capital, stock options
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,580 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,580 |
|
Additional paid-in capital, options to non-employees
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17 |
|
Earned Compensation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13 |
|
Other comprehensive loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(361 |
) |
|
|
(361 |
) |
Conversion of redeemable convertible preferred stock
|
|
|
(124,874 |
) |
|
|
(44,429 |
) |
|
|
(169,303 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
169,249 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
169,303 |
|
Issuance of common stock in initial public offering, net of
underwriting discounts
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
58,805 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
58,823 |
|
Direct costs of initial public offering
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4,883 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4,883 |
) |
Net income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
58,646 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
58,646 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2004
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
69 |
|
|
$ |
13 |
|
|
$ |
24,047 |
|
|
$ |
233,110 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(1,042 |
) |
|
$ |
(99,578 |
) |
|
$ |
(342 |
) |
|
$ |
156,277 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these
consolidated financial statements.
78
MARKETAXESS HOLDINGS INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In thousands) | |
Cash flows from operating activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$ |
58,646 |
|
|
$ |
4,212 |
|
|
$ |
(36,076 |
) |
|
|
Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss) to net cash provided
by (used in) operating activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
3,468 |
|
|
|
4,688 |
|
|
|
6,658 |
|
|
|
|
Warrant-related expense
|
|
|
2,524 |
|
|
|
5,400 |
|
|
|
8,624 |
|
|
|
|
Amortization of earned compensation
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
61 |
|
|
|
171 |
|
|
|
|
Issuance of stock options to directors and non-employees
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Compensation expense related to stock option issuance
|
|
|
1,873 |
|
|
|
1,543 |
|
|
|
1,193 |
|
|
|
|
Other comprehensive (loss) income
|
|
|
(361 |
) |
|
|
(108 |
) |
|
|
73 |
|
|
|
|
Deferred tax assets
|
|
|
(41,410 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for bad debts
|
|
|
270 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Increase) in accounts receivable, including increases of
$3,940, $3,069 and $1,205 from related parties for the years
ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively
|
|
|
(5,582 |
) |
|
|
(5,973 |
) |
|
|
(1,905 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(Increase) decrease in prepaid expenses
|
|
|
(1,880 |
) |
|
|
534 |
|
|
|
(313 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Decrease in other assets
|
|
|
156 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,921 |
|
|
|
|
|
Increase in accrued employee compensation
|
|
|
2,457 |
|
|
|
3,204 |
|
|
|
1,077 |
|
|
|
|
|
(Decrease) increase in deferred license revenue
|
|
|
(867 |
) |
|
|
3,566 |
|
|
|
(367 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Increase (decrease) in accounts payable, accrued expenses and
other liabilities, including increases of $34, $123 and $226 to
related parties for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003
and 2002, respectively
|
|
|
1,048 |
|
|
|
(248 |
) |
|
|
300 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities
|
|
|
20,372 |
|
|
|
16,914 |
|
|
|
(18,643 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from investing activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchase of short-term investments
|
|
|
(55,593 |
) |
|
|
(45,170 |
) |
|
|
(43,916 |
) |
|
Maturity of short-term investments
|
|
|
65,387 |
|
|
|
41,168 |
|
|
|
57,622 |
|
|
Securities and cash provided as collateral
|
|
|
(292 |
) |
|
|
104 |
|
|
|
(722 |
) |
|
Purchase of furniture, equipment and leasehold improvements
|
|
|
(3,394 |
) |
|
|
(1,391 |
) |
|
|
(1,060 |
) |
|
Capitalization of software development costs
|
|
|
(3,588 |
) |
|
|
(3,330 |
) |
|
|
(1,370 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities
|
|
|
2,520 |
|
|
|
(8,619 |
) |
|
|
10,554 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from financing activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from the issuance of common stock
|
|
|
230 |
|
|
|
80 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from initial public offering, net of underwriting
discounts
|
|
|
58,822 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Direct costs of initial public offering
|
|
|
(4,883 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of preferred stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,400 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by financing activities
|
|
|
54,169 |
|
|
|
80 |
|
|
|
8,400 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase for the year
|
|
|
77,061 |
|
|
|
8,375 |
|
|
|
311 |
|
|
Beginning of year
|
|
|
20,591 |
|
|
|
12,216 |
|
|
|
11,905 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
End of year
|
|
$ |
97,652 |
|
|
$ |
20,591 |
|
|
$ |
12,216 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental cash flow disclosures:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-cash activities, see Note 14
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these
consolidated financial statements.
79
MARKETAXESS HOLDINGS INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
|
|
1. |
Organization and Principal Business Activity |
MarketAxess Holdings Inc. (the Company) was
incorporated in the State of Delaware on April 11, 2000.
Through its subsidiaries, the Company operates an electronic,
multi-dealer to client platform primarily for the trading of
U.S. and European high-grade corporate bonds and sovereign and
corporate bonds issued by entities domiciled in an emerging
markets country. The Company facilitates transactions between
its broker-dealer and institutional investor clients. The
Companys broker-dealer clients are: ABN Amro, Banc of
America Securities, Barclays, Bear Stearns, BNP Paribas,
Citigroup, Credit Suisse First Boston, Deutsche Bank, DZ Bank
AG, First Tennessee National, Goldman Sachs, HSBC, ING Financial
Markets, JPMorgan, Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch, Morgan
Stanley, The Royal Bank of Scotland, Santander Investment
Securities, Société Générale, UBS and
Wachovia.
The Companys stockholder broker-dealer clients include ABN
Amro, Banc of America Securities, Bear Stearns, BNP Paribas,
Credit Suisse First Boston, Deutsche Bank, JPMorgan, Lehman
Brothers and UBS. All of these broker-dealer clients constitute
related parties of the Company (together, the Stockholder
Broker-Dealer Clients). In addition, Moneyline Telerate
(Moneyline) provided certain software development
services to the Company and has a revenue-sharing agreement with
the Company, and is also considered a related party. See
Note 7, Related Parties.
The Companys U.S. subsidiary, MarketAxess
Corporation, is a registered broker-dealer with the
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)
and is a member of the National Association of Securities
Dealers, Inc.(NASD) The Company also has two
international subsidiaries: MarketAxess Europe Limited
(MarketAxess Europe), which is a registered dealer
with the Financial Services Authority (FSA) in the
United Kingdom (U.K.), and MarketAxess Leasing
Limited (collectively with MarketAxess Europe, the U.K.
Subsidiaries).
In May 2003, the Company incorporated a Canadian subsidiary,
MarketAxess Canada Limited. This entity has not been funded and
is not currently active.
On November 4, 2004, the Company completed the initial
public offering of its common stock. Specifically,
5,750,000 shares of common stock, including an aggregate of
750,000 of common stock covered by an over-allotment option
granted by the Company to the underwriters, were sold at a price
to the public of $11.00 per share. The aggregate proceeds
to the Company from the offering were approximately, $63,250,
before deducting approximately $4,428 in underwriting discounts
and commissions and an estimated $4,883 in other expenses
incurred in connection with the offering.
Additionally, prior to the closing of the initial public
offering, all outstanding shares of redeemable convertible
preferred stock and convertible preferred stock were converted
into 14,484,493 shares of common stock and
4,266,310 shares of non-voting common stock.
|
|
2. |
Significant Accounting Policies |
The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of
the Company and its subsidiaries, MarketAxess Corporation,
MarketAxess Europe and MarketAxess Leasing Limited. All
intercompany transactions and balances have been eliminated.
Assets and liabilities denominated in foreign currencies are
translated using exchange rates at the end of the year; revenues
and expenses are translated at average monthly rates. Gains and
losses on foreign currency translation are included as a
cumulative translation adjustment to accumulated other
comprehensive income (loss) in the Consolidated Statements of
Changes in Convertible Preferred Stock, Stockholders
Equity (Deficit) and Accumulated other comprehensive income
(loss).
80
MARKETAXESS HOLDINGS INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
|
|
|
Cash and Cash Equivalents |
Cash and cash equivalents include cash maintained at U.S. and
U.K. banks and in money market funds. The Company defines cash
equivalents as short-term interest-bearing investments with
maturities at the time of purchase of three months or less. Cash
overdraft balances are included in Accounts payable, accrued
expenses and other liabilities.
Short-term investments consist of U.S. government
obligations with maturities of greater than three months and
less than one year at the time of purchase and are reported at
fair value. Short-term investment purchases and sales are
recorded on the trade date and as collateral for a broker-dealer
clearance account.
|
|
|
Securities and Cash Provided as Collateral |
Securities provided as collateral consist of
U.S. government obligations and cash. Collectively, these
securities are used as collateral for standby letters of credit,
as collateral for foreign currency forward contracts to hedge
the Companys net investments in the U.K. Subsidiaries and
as collateral for a broker-dealer clearance account.
Allowance for Doubtful Accounts
An allowance for doubtful accounts is based upon the estimated
collectibility of information and user access fees. Additions to
the allowance are charged to Bad debt expense, which is included
in the General and administrative expense on the Companys
Statements of Operations.
|
|
|
Depreciation and Amortization |
Fixed assets are carried at cost less accumulated depreciation.
The Company uses the straight-line method of depreciation over
three years.
Leasehold improvements are stated at cost and are amortized
using the straight-line method over the lesser of the life of
the improvement or the remaining term of the lease.
|
|
|
Software Development Costs |
In accordance with Statement of Position (SOP)
No. 98-1, Accounting for the Costs of Computer
Software Developed or Obtained for Internal Use, the
Company capitalizes certain costs associated with the
development of internal use software at the point at which the
conceptual formulation, design and testing of possible software
project alternatives have been completed. The Company
capitalizes employee compensation and related benefits incurred
during the preliminary software project stage. Once the product
is ready for its intended use, such costs are amortized on a
straight-line basis over three years. The Company reviews the
amounts capitalized for impairment whenever events or changes in
circumstances indicate that the carrying amounts of the assets
may not be recoverable.
A warrant program was put in place in April 2000, pursuant to
which the Company issued a warrant to six of its broker-dealer
clients at the time they made an equity investment in the
Company. The Company also had a Broker-Dealer Stock Option
program during 2001 and 2002. The Company accounts for the
warrant and option programs in accordance with
SFAS No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based
Compensation. Expense is
81
MARKETAXESS HOLDINGS INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
recognized on the measurement date based on the market value of
the warrant or option. Market value is determined using the
Black-Scholes option-pricing model.
|
|
|
Stock-Based Compensation for Employees |
The Company accounts for stock-based employee compensation plans
in accordance with Accounting Principles Board Opinion
(APB) No. 25, Accounting for Stock Issued
to Employees (APB No. 25), as permitted by
SFAS No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based
Compensation. In accordance with APB No. 25,
compensation expense is recognized for stock awards that have
intrinsic value on the date of grant. Unearned compensation is
amortized and charged to income over the vesting period.
Starting in July 2005, the Company will adopt
SFAS No. 123(R), Share-Based Payment,
(SFAS No. 123(R)) which requires previously granted
but unvested awards to be recorded as an expense on a prorated
basis over the remaining vesting period. See Note 9,
Stockholders Equity (Deficit).
The Company earns commissions from fixed-income trades executed
on its platform by broker-dealer clients. Commissions are
recorded on a trade date basis pursuant to standard transaction
fee plans.
Commissions are generally calculated as a percentage of notional
dollar volume of bonds traded on the platform and vary based on
the type and maturity of the bond traded. Under the transaction
fee plans, bonds that are more actively traded or that have
shorter maturities are generally charged lower commissions,
while bonds that are less actively traded or that have longer
maturities generally command higher commissions.
Prior to August 2003, all broker-dealer clients operated under a
standard transaction fee plan for the secondary trading of
U.S. high-grade corporate bonds. Under the standard
transaction fee plan, commissions are calculated as a percentage
of the notional dollar volume of the bonds traded on the
Companys platform, vary based on the type and maturity of
the bond, and are generally higher on bonds with longer
maturities. Under this plan, there is no fixed monthly fee and
no cap on the total amount of commissions payable by a
broker-dealer client. In August 2003, the Company offered its
broker-dealer clients the opportunity to switch from the
standard transaction fee plan to one of two new transaction fee
plans for secondary U.S. high-grade corporate bond trading.
These plans have a two-year term, which commenced on either
August 1, 2003 or September 1, 2003. The plans differ
in their monthly fees, amount of variable fees per trade, and
fee caps:
|
|
|
|
|
Plan 1: Under this plan, the broker-dealer pays a fixed
monthly fee for trading U.S. high-grade corporate bonds,
which provides the Company with a recurring revenue stream. In
exchange for paying the fixed monthly fee, the broker-dealer
pays variable fees per trade that are lower than those in the
standard transaction fee plan. There is no cap on the aggregate
commissions payable by the broker-dealer client under this plan. |
|
|
|
Plan 2: Under this plan, the broker-dealer pays a fixed
monthly fee for trading U.S. high-grade corporate bonds
that is higher than that in Plan 1. In exchange for paying the
higher fixed monthly fee, the broker-dealer pays variable fees
per trade that are lower than those in Plan 1 and the standard
transaction fee plan, and the aggregate commissions payable by
the broker-dealer client are capped on a monthly and an annual
basis. |
Broker-dealer clients who selected either Plan 1 or Plan 2 for
U.S. high-grade corporate bond trading had the opportunity
to switch to the other transaction fee plan in the second year.
Currently, 13 broker-dealer clients are operating under
Plan 1, one is operating under Plan 2 and four are
operating under the standard transaction fee plan. The four
remaining broker-dealer clients execute trades through the
platform exclusively for European high-grade corporate or
emerging markets bonds and are not therefore eligible to
participate in
82
MARKETAXESS HOLDINGS INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
the U.S. high-grade corporate bond transaction fee plan.
Currently, seven broker-dealer clients who are also stockholders
are operating under Plan 1, one broker-dealer client who is
also a stockholder is operating under Plan 2 and one
broker-dealer client who is also a stockholder is operating
under the standard transaction fee plan. The fee caps were set
to take effect at volume levels significantly above those being
transacted at the time the new transaction fee plans were
introduced but will limit revenue growth in the future for
U.S. high-grade corporate bond trading from the
broker-dealers that have selected these plans if the higher
volume levels at which the fee cap is triggered are reached. In
accordance with Plan 1 and Plan 2, fixed monthly fees
aggregated $18,500 and $7,000 for the years ended
December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively, and are reported
as a component of commission income on the Consolidated
Statements of Operations.
The fee cap of Plan 2 sets an upper limit on the potential
revenues for U.S. high-grade corporate bond trading from
the Companys broker-dealer clients that select that
transaction fee plan. The one dealer-client on this Plan did not
reach the monthly or annual cap.
On the Companys European platform, each product traded
carries a broker-dealer transaction fee based on a fee schedule
tied to the type and the maturity of the bond traded. This fee
schedule applies a tiered fee structure, which reduces the fees
per trade upon the attainment of certain specified amounts of
monthly commissions generated by a particular broker-dealer and
does not carry a fixed monthly fee or fee cap.
Distinct standard fee structures are in effect for transactions
in sovereign and corporate bonds issued in emerging markets and
new issues traded on the Companys platform. Broker-dealer
clients pay a commission for transactions in sovereign and
corporate bonds issued in emerging markets based on the type and
the amount of the security traded. Commissions for transactions
in more active sectors of the emerging markets are generally
lower. Broker-dealer clients pay a commission for new issue
transactions that is based on the allocation amount and a
percentage of the new issue selling costs paid by the issuer to
the Companys broker-dealer client. The commission is
generally lower on larger allocation amounts. Broker-dealer
clients pay a commission for U.S. Treasury securities
transactions that is based on a flat fee per million.
The Company charges certain of its institutional investor
clients an information services fee and a monthly user access
fee (the fees) for the use of its trading platform
quarterly in arrears. The fees charged to institutional investor
clients are reduced or eliminated if institutional investor
clients meet certain minimum quarterly trading volumes.
Revenues associated with the Companys commission and fee
arrangements are recorded in Accounts Receivable, net, to the
extent they have been or will be invoiced, and have not been
collected at December 31, 2004.
The Company enters into agreements with its broker-dealer
clients pursuant to which the Company provides access to its
trading platform through a non-exclusive and non-transferable
license. Broker-dealer clients, other than those that previously
made equity investments in the Company, pay an initial license
fee, which is typically due and payable upon execution of the
broker-dealer agreement. The initial license fee varies by
agreement and at a minimum is intended to cover the initial
set-up costs incurred to enable a broker-dealer to begin using
the Companys platform. Revenue is recognized in the first
three months of the agreement in the estimated amount of the
set-up costs incurred (50% in the first month, 40% in the second
month and 10% in the third month), and the remaining amount is
deferred and recognized ratably over the initial term of the
agreement, which is generally three years.
In 2004, the Company entered into agreements with four new
broker-dealer clients. One of the agreements may require a
registration process in a jurisdiction outside the United
States. Once the registration process in such jurisdiction is
completed, or the Company has determined that registration is
not required, the Company will commence the license fee
amortization described above.
83
MARKETAXESS HOLDINGS INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
In 2003, the Company entered into an agreement with a
broker-dealer client that included an upfront fee, of which $500
would be refunded to the broker-dealer client contingent on its
aggregate commissions for the six-month period commencing
July 1, 2003 placing it among the Companys top five
broker-dealer clients in terms of commissions for that period.
During the defined six-month period, the broker-dealer client
did not meet the refund criteria and, accordingly, the Company
recorded the upfront fee as license fee revenue at the end of
the six-month period. This is the only such refundable agreement
entered into by the Company.
Income taxes are accounted for using the asset and liability
method in accordance with SFAS No. 109,
Accounting for Income Taxes (SFAS No.
109). Deferred income taxes reflect the net tax effects of
temporary differences between the financial reporting and tax
bases of assets and liabilities and are measured using the
enacted tax rates and laws that will be in effect when such
differences are expected to reverse. The effect on deferred tax
assets and liabilities of a change in tax rates is recognized in
income in the period that includes the enactment date. A
valuation allowance is recognized against deferred tax assets if
it is more likely than not that such assets will not be realized
in future years.
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of
America requires management to make estimates and assumptions
that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and
disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of
the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues
and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could
differ from those estimates.
|
|
|
Foreign Currency Forward Contracts |
The Company follows SFAS No. 133, Accounting for
Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities, and enters
into foreign currency forward contracts to hedge its net
investment in the U.K. Subsidiaries. Accordingly, gains and
losses on these transactions are deferred and included in
Accumulated other comprehensive (loss) income.
Basic earnings per share (EPS) is calculated by
dividing the net income (loss) available to common stockholders,
which includes the effect of dividends accrued on the redeemable
convertible preferred stock, by the weighted average number of
common shares outstanding. Common shares outstanding includes
common stock and restricted stock units for which no future
service is required as a condition to the delivery of the
underlying common stock. Diluted EPS includes the determinants
of basic EPS and, in addition, reflects the dilutive effect of
the redeemable convertible preferred shares and the common stock
deliverable pursuant to in-the-money stock options and warrants
outstanding.
|
|
|
Recent Accounting Pronouncements |
In December 2004, the FASB issued SFAS No. 123(R),
Share-Based Payment, which is a revision of
SFAS No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based
Compensation, and supersedes APB Opinion No. 25,
Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees, and
requires that the cost resulting from all share-based payment
transactions be recognized in the financial statements. This
statement establishes fair value as the measurement objective in
accounting for share-based payment arrangements and requires all
entities to apply a fair-value based measurement method in
accounting for share-based payment transactions with employees,
with limited exceptions. SFAS No. 123(R) requires all
share-based payments to employees, including grants
84
MARKETAXESS HOLDINGS INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
of employee stock options and restricted stock, to be recognized
in the income statement based on their fair values and
previously granted but unvested awards to be recorded as an
expense on a prorated basis over the remaining vesting period.
Pro forma disclosure is no longer an alternative. The new
standard will be effective for public entities in the first
interim period beginning after June 15, 2005. The Company
will apply the modified prospective application, without
restatement, commencing July 1, 2005. The Company expects
the adoption of SFAS No. 123(R) will have a material
impact on the Companys Consolidated Statements of
Operations. See Note 9, Stockholders Equity
(Deficit).
In May 2003, the FASB issued SFAS No. 150,
Accounting for Certain Financial Instruments with
Characteristics of both Liabilities and Equity
(SFAS No. 150). SFAS No. 150
establishes standards for how an issuer classifies and measures
certain financial instruments with characteristics of both
liabilities and equity and imposes additional disclosure
requirements. It requires that an issuer classify a financial
instrument that is within its scope as a liability (or an asset
in some circumstances), because that financial instrument
embodies an obligation of the issuer. Initially,
SFAS No. 150 was effective for all financial
instruments entered into or modified after May 31, 2003,
and was otherwise effective beginning July 1, 2003. In
November 2003, the FASB deferred the effective date of the
statement with respect to mandatory redeemable financial
instruments of certain nonpublic entities and for certain
mandatory redeemable non-controlling interests. The
implementation of SFAS No. 150 did not have a material
effect on the Companys Consolidated Financial Statements.
In November 2002, the FASB issued FASB Interpretation
(FIN) No. 45, Guarantors Accounting
and Disclosure Requirements for Guarantees, Including Indirect
Guarantees, of Indebtedness of Others.
FIN No. 45 specifies the disclosures to be made about
obligations under certain issued guarantees and requires a
liability to be recognized for the fair value of a guarantee
obligation. The recognition and measurement provisions of the
interpretation apply prospectively to guarantees issued after
December 31, 2002. Adoption of the recognition and
measurement provisions did not have a material effect on the
Companys Consolidated Financial Statements. See
Note 10, Commitments and Contingencies.
Certain reclassifications have been made to the prior
years financial statements in order to conform to the
current year presentation. Such reclassifications had no effect
on previously reported Net income (loss).
|
|
3. |
Net Capital Requirements and Customer Protection
Requirements |
The Companys U.S. subsidiary, MarketAxess Corporation
(known prior to February 2002 as Trading Edge, Inc.
(Trading Edge)), maintains a registration as a
U.S. securities broker-dealer. Pursuant to the Uniform Net
Capital Rule under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
MarketAxess Corporation is required to maintain minimum net
capital, as defined, equal to the greater of $5 or
62/3%
of aggregate indebtedness. A summary of MarketAxess
Corporations capital requirements is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Net capital
|
|
$ |
19,391 |
|
|
$ |
15,100 |
|
Required net capital
|
|
|
864 |
|
|
|
662 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Excess amount over required net capital
|
|
$ |
18,527 |
|
|
$ |
14,438 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ratio of aggregate indebtedness to net capital
|
|
|
0.67 to 1 |
|
|
|
0.66 to 1 |
|
MarketAxess Corporation claims exemption from SEC
Rule 15c3-3, as it does not hold customer securities or
funds on account, as defined.
85
MARKETAXESS HOLDINGS INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
MarketAxess Europe is subject to certain financial resource
requirements of the FSA. A summary of these financial resource
requirements is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Financial resources
|
|
$ |
12,488 |
|
|
$ |
3,368 |
|
Resource requirement
|
|
|
4,393 |
|
|
|
901 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Excess financial resources
|
|
$ |
8,095 |
|
|
$ |
2,467 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MarketAxess Corporation and MarketAxess Europe Limited are
subject to U.S. and U.K. regulations as broker-dealers which
prohibit repayment of borrowings from the Company or affiliates,
paying cash dividends, making loans to the Company or affiliates
or otherwise entering into transactions that result in a
significant reduction in regulatory net capital or financial
resources, respectively, without prior notification to or
approval from such broker-dealers principal regulator.
|
|
4. |
Furniture, Equipment and Leasehold Improvements |
Furniture, equipment and leasehold improvements, net, are
comprised of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Computer and related equipment
|
|
$ |
10,825 |
|
|
$ |
7,720 |
|
Office hardware
|
|
|
2,921 |
|
|
|
2,895 |
|
Furniture and fixtures
|
|
|
1,377 |
|
|
|
1,169 |
|
Accumulated depreciation
|
|
|
(11,203 |
) |
|
|
(10,131 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total furniture and equipment, net
|
|
|
3,920 |
|
|
|
1,653 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Leasehold improvements
|
|
|
2,212 |
|
|
|
2,157 |
|
Accumulated amortization
|
|
|
(1,053 |
) |
|
|
(772 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total leasehold improvements, net
|
|
|
1,159 |
|
|
|
1,385 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total furniture, equipment and leasehold improvements, net
|
|
$ |
5,079 |
|
|
$ |
3,038 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5. |
Software Development Costs |
Software development costs, net, are comprised of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Software development costs
|
|
$ |
16,704 |
|
|
$ |
13,116 |
|
Accumulated amortization
|
|
|
(11,117 |
) |
|
|
(9,003 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total software development costs, net
|
|
$ |
5,587 |
|
|
$ |
4,113 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Company accounts for software development costs under the
provisions of SOP No. 98-1. During the year ended
December 31, 2004 and 2003, software development costs
totaling $3,588 and $3,330, respectively, were capitalized.
Non-capitalized software costs and routine maintenance costs are
expensed as incurred and are included in Employee compensation
and benefits, Technology and communications and Professional and
consulting fees on the Consolidated Statements of Operations.
86
MARKETAXESS HOLDINGS INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
In November 2004, the Company determined that its trading
platform software developed by the Company with input from
Moneyline, a stockholder, would be retired by March 31,
2005. Therefore, the Company accelerated depreciation of this
software. During the fourth quarter of 2004, the Company
recorded additional depreciation in the amount of $148. As of
December 31, 2004, the net book value of the legacy
software was $221.
The Company prepares a consolidated tax return with its
U.S. subsidiary, MarketAxess Corporation.
The Companys provision (benefit) for income taxes,
included in the Consolidated Statements of Operations as
determined in accordance with SFAS No. 109, is as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended | |
|
|
December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Current:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal
|
|
$ |
(230 |
) |
|
$ |
190 |
|
|
State and local
|
|
|
169 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign
|
|
|
141 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current provision for income taxes
|
|
$ |
80 |
|
|
$ |
190 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal
|
|
$ |
(28,307 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
State and local
|
|
|
(9,302 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign
|
|
|
(3,801 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred income tax (benefit)
|
|
|
(41,410 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision (benefit) for income taxes
|
|
$ |
(41,330 |
) |
|
$ |
190 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The difference between the Companys reported provision
(benefit) for income taxes and the amount computed by
multiplying pre-tax income by federal statutory rates is as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended | |
|
Year Ended | |
|
|
December 31, | |
|
December 31, | |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Federal tax at statutory rate
|
|
$ |
5,887 |
|
|
$ |
1,538 |
|
Permanent differences
|
|
|
323 |
|
|
|
141 |
|
State and local taxes net of federal benefit
|
|
|
1,595 |
|
|
|
707 |
|
Foreign taxes
|
|
|
(269 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Alternative minimum taxes
|
|
|
298 |
|
|
|
190 |
|
Net operating loss carryforwards
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,372 |
|
Change in valuation allowance
|
|
|
(46,116 |
) |
|
|
(3,758 |
) |
Reversal of prior year overstatement
|
|
|
(1,018 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Tax credits
|
|
|
(1,630 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
(400 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision (benefit) for federal income taxes
|
|
$ |
(41,330 |
) |
|
$ |
190 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
87
MARKETAXESS HOLDINGS INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
The Company is subject to the Alternative Minimum Tax
(AMT) that is imposed at the U.S. federal
level. The Company can utilize 90% of its net operating loss
carryforwards against taxable income and the remaining 10% of
taxable income is subject to the AMT tax at a rate of 20%. The
Company has available tax credits, as detailed below, that are
utilized to eliminate the AMT liability.
The Company has available various tax credits that can be used
to reduce or eliminate current or future tax liabilities. A
summary of these credits and their expiration dates is as follows
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, | |
|
|
| |
Expires Beginning December 31, |
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
2008
|
|
$ |
38 |
|
|
$ |
38 |
|
|
2009
|
|
|
79 |
|
|
|
79 |
|
|
2017
|
|
|
61 |
|
|
|
61 |
|
|
2018
|
|
|
132 |
|
|
|
132 |
|
|
2019
|
|
|
92 |
|
|
|
92 |
|
|
2020
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
2022
|
|
|
123 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2023
|
|
|
447 |
|
|
|
220 |
|
|
2024
|
|
|
356 |
|
|
|
647 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total tax credit carryforwards
|
|
|
1,331 |
|
|
|
1,272 |
|
Less: valuation allowance
|
|
|
(288 |
) |
|
|
(288 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net tax credit carryforwards
|
|
$ |
1,043 |
|
|
$ |
984 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2004, the Company utilized $298 of its
Liberty Zone tax credits to reduce its AMT liability.
In 2001, the Companys subsidiary, MarketAxess Corporation,
had an ownership change within the meaning of Section 382
of the Internal Revenue Code (Section 382). As
a result of Section 382 and pertinent tax provisions, the
utilization of $288 of research activity credits that expire in
the years beginning 2017 through 2020 may not be utilized and
accordingly, an allowance for these credits has been established.
88
MARKETAXESS HOLDINGS INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
The following is a summary of the Companys gross deferred
tax asset, reduced to a net deferred asset by a valuation
allowance:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Deferred tax assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net operating loss carryforwards
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S.
|
|
$ |
40,912 |
|
|
$ |
45,861 |
|
|
|
Foreign
|
|
|
3,801 |
|
|
|
5,021 |
|
|
Depreciation
|
|
|
926 |
|
|
|
432 |
|
|
Deferred option compensation expense
|
|
|
2,456 |
|
|
|
1,637 |
|
|
Warrant expense
|
|
|
10,959 |
|
|
|
9,828 |
|
|
Allowance for doubtful accounts
|
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restructuring charges
|
|
|
1,375 |
|
|
|
1,473 |
|
|
Charitable contributions carryforwards
|
|
|
49 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tax credits
|
|
|
1,331 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deferred tax assets
|
|
|
61,874 |
|
|
|
64,252 |
|
|
Valuation allowance
|
|
|
(18,136 |
) |
|
|
(64,252 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net deferred tax assets
|
|
|
43,738 |
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred tax liability:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capitalized software development costs
|
|
|
(2,328 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred tax assets, net
|
|
$ |
41,410 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The rollforward of the valuation allowance is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Valuation allowance at beginning of period
|
|
$ |
64,252 |
|
|
$ |
68,010 |
|
Charge to decrease valuation allowance attributable to:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net operating losses and temporary differences
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S.
|
|
|
(41,095 |
) |
|
|
(4,051 |
) |
|
|
Foreign
|
|
|
(5,021 |
) |
|
|
293 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Valuation allowance at end of period
|
|
$ |
18,136 |
|
|
$ |
64,252 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred income taxes reflect the net tax effects of temporary
differences between the financial reporting and tax bases of
assets and liabilities and are measured using the enacted tax
rates and laws that will be in effect when such differences are
expected to reverse. The effect on deferred income tax assets
and liabilities of a change in tax rates is recognized in income
in the period that included the enactment date. A valuation
allowance is recognized against deferred tax assets if it is
more likely than not that such assets will not be realized in
future years.
The ultimate realization of deferred income tax assets is
dependent upon the generation of future taxable income during
the periods in which the temporary differences become
deductible. A valuation allowance is recorded when it is more
likely than not that some portion or all of the gross deferred
income tax assets will not be realized in future years. The
Company recorded a valuation allowance against its deferred
income tax
89
MARKETAXESS HOLDINGS INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
assets arising from net operating loss carryforwards and tax
credits. As described below, certain of the Companys net
operating loss carryforwards are subject to significant
limitations on an annual basis pursuant to the Internal Revenue
Code.
As of December 31, 2004, the Company had net operating loss
carryforwards for income tax purposes of $102,445. The
U.S. net operating loss carryforwards as of
December 31, 2004 totaling $89,719 will begin to expire in
2017 and the U.K. net operating loss carryforwards as of
December 31, 2004 totaling $12,726 do not expire. In 2000
and in 2001, MarketAxess Holdings Inc. and MarketAxess
Corporation respectively, had an ownership change within the
meaning of Section 382. As a result of Section 382 and
pertinent tax provisions, the utilization of $39,141 of the
Companys net operating loss carryforwards existing at the
date of the ownership change is subject to significant
limitations. In addition, the Companys net operating loss
carryforwards may be subject to additional annual limitations if
there is a 50% or greater change in the Companys
ownership, as determined over a rolling three-year period.
During the year ended December 31, 2004, the Company
reduced the valuation allowance by $46,116 to $18,136 based on
managements reassessment of the factors impacting the
valuation allowance previously recorded. Such factors include
seven consecutive quarters of profitable operations in the U.S.
and six consecutive quarters of profitable operations in the
U.K., managements expectation of continuing future
profitable operations, managements anticipation that the
Company would be able to utilize certain net operating loss
carryforwards in 2004 and the Companys ability to utilize
certain of the net operating loss carryforwards in future years
prior to expiration. The Company believes it is likely, but
subject to some uncertainty, that approximately 76% of the net
operating losses will be utilized prior to their expiration in
2017. In addition, the Company has temporary differences
(defined as the tax effect of the difference between the
financial reporting basis and the tax reporting basis of certain
balance sheet items) of $13,503 available as of
December 31, 2004.
As of December 31, 2003, the gross deferred tax asset was
$64,252, reduced to a net deferred tax asset of zero by a
valuation allowance of $64,252. The Companys first
profitable quarter was the second quarter of 2003. While the
Company was forecasting increasing revenues and net income for
2004 and 2005, as evidenced by the projections used for the
valuations of the Companys common stock as of
December 31, 2002 and 2003, management exercised judgment
in assessing the positive evidence of the three quarters of
profitability and the forecast future year earnings against the
negative evidence of accumulated losses, the uncertainty of
attainment of forecast future year earnings and the potential
likelihood of the realization of the utilization of net
operating loss carryforwards. For the year ended
December 31, 2003, net income was $4,213, bringing the
accumulated losses to $113,794. Additionally, $40,563 of the
Companys net operating loss carryforward for financial
income tax reporting purposes of $137,049 is subject to
Section 382 limitations. Accordingly, a 100% valuation
allowance against the deferred income tax assets was deemed
appropriate as of December 31, 2003. The net operating
losses will be carried forward to future years. In addition, the
Company had temporary differences of $13,371 available as of
December 31, 2003.
As of December 31, 2002, the gross deferred tax asset was
$68,010, reduced to a net tax deferred asset of zero by a
valuation allowance of $68,010. While the Company was
forecasting increasing revenues and a reduced loss for 2003, as
well as net income for 2004, as evidenced by the projections
used for the valuation of the Companys common stock as of
December 31, 2002, management exercised judgment in
assessing the positive evidence of the forecast future year
earnings against the negative evidence of accumulated losses,
the uncertainty of attainment of forecast future year earnings
and the potential likelihood of the realization of the
utilization of net operating loss carryforwards. For the year
ended December 31, 2002, the net loss was $36,075, bringing
the accumulated losses to $118,006. Additionally, $40,563 of the
Companys net operating loss carryforward for financial tax
reporting purposes of $131,459 is subject to Section 382
limitations. Accordingly, a 100% valuation allowance against the
deferred tax assets was deemed appropriate as of
90
MARKETAXESS HOLDINGS INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
December 31, 2002. In addition, the Company had temporary
differences of $12,450 available as of December 31, 2002.
A summary of the Companys net operating loss carryforwards
and their related expiration dates is as follows:
Net operating loss carryforward U.S.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expire Beginning December 31, |
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
2017
|
|
$ |
186 |
|
|
$ |
1,694 |
|
|
2018
|
|
|
5,541 |
|
|
|
5,541 |
|
|
2019
|
|
|
14,580 |
|
|
|
14,580 |
|
|
2020
|
|
|
22,099 |
|
|
|
28,087 |
|
|
2021
|
|
|
27,908 |
|
|
|
35,365 |
|
|
2022
|
|
|
19,405 |
|
|
|
19,404 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total net operating loss carryforwards U.S.
|
|
|
89,719 |
|
|
|
104,671 |
|
Net operating loss carryforwards Foreign
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No expiration date
|
|
|
12,726 |
|
|
|
16,738 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total net operating loss carryforwards
|
|
$ |
102,445 |
|
|
$ |
121,409 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2004, the Company has net operating loss
carryforwards of $13,452 that relate to a single return
loss year, within the meaning of the Internal Revenue
Code, relating to MarketAxess Corporation that are subject to
annual utilization limits.
The following Stockholder Broker-Dealer clients are related
parties: ABN Amro, Banc of America Securities, Bear Stearns, BNP
Paribas, Credit Suisse First Boston, Deutsche Bank, JPMorgan,
Lehman Brothers and UBS. In addition, Moneyline, a stockholder
which provided certain software development services to the
Company and has a revenue-sharing agreement with the Company, is
also considered a related party.
As of and for the year then ended, the Company had the following
balances and transactions with the Stockholder Broker-Dealer
Clients or their affiliates:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$ |
86,711 |
|
|
$ |
14,164 |
|
Accounts receivable
|
|
|
7,225 |
|
|
|
5,204 |
|
Accounts payable, accrued expenses and other liabilities
|
|
|
530 |
|
|
|
389 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Commissions
|
|
$ |
39,307 |
|
|
$ |
33,023 |
|
|
$ |
12,291 |
|
Information and user access fees
|
|
|
461 |
|
|
|
203 |
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income
|
|
|
380 |
|
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
118 |
|
Other
|
|
|
515 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
91
MARKETAXESS HOLDINGS INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
In addition, short-term investments and securities provided as
collateral consist of $9,097 and $18,390 of U.S. government
obligations on deposit with a related party in its role as a
custodian for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003,
respectively.
The Company is contingently obligated for two letters of credit
from a related party for $403 and $1,061 as of December 31,
2004 in relation to the lease of office space for its
subsidiaries, which expire on February 28, 2010 and
November 13, 2005, respectively. See Note 10,
Commitments and Contingencies.
As described above, the Company has an agreement with Moneyline
to assist in developing the Companys U.S. high-grade
corporate bond and European trading platform software. In
consideration for Moneylines contribution of its licensed
technology, the Company issued to Moneyline on April 19,
2000, 175,443 shares of Series B convertible preferred
stock with a fair value of $1,500 that at the time of the
initial public offering converted to 584,810 shares of
common stock. In the event that Moneyline materially breaches
the agreement, the Company has the right at any time thereafter,
at its option, to purchase the stock then held by Moneyline at a
price of $3.00 per share. The agreement does not have a
termination date but may be terminated under certain conditions.
Amounts capitalized under the agreement, which are based on the
fair value of the shares issued, are amortized over the useful
life of the developed software, which was three years.
In consideration of Moneylines provision of services under
the agreement, the Company paid Moneyline a variable monthly
fee. In addition, Moneyline is entitled to share in a portion of
the Companys quarterly net revenues, as defined in the
agreement, resulting from trading on the Companys
U.S. high-grade corporate bond and European trading
platforms. Moneylines share of the revenues of the Company
ranges from one to six percent, depending on the amount of the
quarterly net revenues earned by the Company. In May 2004, the
Company ceased using the software relating to the legacy
U.S. high-grade trading platform developed with the
assistance of Moneyline and began using internally-developed
software.
As of and for the year then ended, the Company had the following
balances and transactions with Moneyline:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of | |
|
|
December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Software development costs, net of amortization
|
|
$ |
222 |
|
|
$ |
1,339 |
|
Accounts payable, accrued expenses and other liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
389 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Professional and consulting fees
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
378 |
|
|
$ |
1,450 |
|
Moneyline revenue share
|
|
|
1,240 |
|
|
|
1,806 |
|
|
|
708 |
|
As of December 31, 2004 and 2003, the Company had loans
outstanding to certain employees of $278 and $203, respectively.
These loans are recorded in Accounts receivable on the
Consolidated Statements of Financial Condition for the
respective years. Approximately $96 of loans were repaid in
January 2005.
|
|
|
Redeemable Convertible Preferred Stock |
Upon completion of the Companys initial public offering,
all outstanding shares of convertible preferred stock were
converted into 14,484,493 shares of common stock and
4,266,310 shares of non-voting common stock.
92
MARKETAXESS HOLDINGS INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
Series A On April 19, 2000, the
Company issued 1,822,785 shares of Series A redeemable
convertible preferred stock (Series A Preferred
Stock) at $13.17 per share for total consideration of
$24,000.
Series C On June 20, 2000, the
Company issued 607,595 shares of Series C redeemable
convertible preferred stock (Series C Preferred
Stock) at $17.28 per share for total consideration of
$10,500.
Series D On August 22, 2000 and
August 30, 2000, the Company issued 100,000 and
100,000 shares, respectively, of Series D redeemable
convertible preferred stock (Series D Preferred
Stock) at $25.00 per share for total consideration of
$5,000.
Series E On September 11, 2000 and
September 13, 2000, the Company issued 607,595 and
607,595 shares, respectively, of Series E redeemable
convertible preferred stock (Series E Preferred
Stock) at $20.98 per share for total consideration of
$25,500.
Series F On March 23, 2001, the
Company issued 1,126,219 shares of Series F redeemable
convertible preferred stock (Series F Preferred
Stock) at $40.00 per share for total consideration of
$45,049. As defined in the Sixth Amended and Restated
Certificate of Incorporation, the Series F Preferred Stock
had a liquidation preference price of $56.26. The Series F
Preferred Stock was issued in connection with the acquisition of
Trading Edge.
Series G On February 7, 2001, the
Company issued 100,000 shares of Series G redeemable
convertible preferred stock (Series G Preferred
Stock) at $35.00 per share for total consideration of
$3,500.
Series H On July 2, 2001, the
Company issued 65,000 shares of Series H redeemable
convertible preferred stock (Series H Preferred
Stock) at $45.00 per share for total consideration of
$2,925. The owner of Series H Preferred Stock received an
additional 43,333 shares of common stock of the Company
upon conversion of the Series H Preferred Stock into shares
of common stock prior to the initial public offering, as
described below.
Series I On April 4, 2002, the
Company issued 300,000 shares of Series I redeemable
convertible preferred stock (Series I Preferred
Stock) at $28.00 per share for total consideration of
$8,400.
Together, the Series A, C, D, E, F, G, H and I preferred
stock were classified as the Senior Preferred Shares. The Senior
Preferred Shares were convertible into common stock at the
option of the holder on a 3.33-for-one basis except for
Series H, which had a higher conversion rate as discussed
above. The Senior Preferred Shares were converted into shares of
common stock prior to the initial public offering. The Senior
Preferred Shares had voting rights equivalent to one vote for
each share of common stock into which the Senior Preferred
Shares could be converted.
Dividends accrued on the Senior Preferred Shares at the rate of
8% per annum and were payable only upon the liquidation,
dissolution or winding up of the Company or the redemption of
the Senior Preferred Shares. Cumulative accrued but unpaid
dividends were forfeited upon conversion of the Senior Preferred
Shares into common stock. The Company accrued dividends on the
Senior Preferred Shares and reflected such accrued dividends as
an increase to the redemption value of such shares.
The liquidation preference of the Senior Preferred Shares was
equal to the original issue price of the respective class of
Senior Preferred Shares plus all cumulative accrued but unpaid
dividends.
The Senior Preferred Shares were redeemable at a redemption
price equal to the liquidation preference of the shares. The
redemption rights of the Senior Preferred Shares were effective
only upon a majority vote of the holders of the Senior Preferred
Shares on or after March 31, 2005.
93
MARKETAXESS HOLDINGS INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
The combined aggregate amount of redemption requirements for the
Senior Preferred Shares was as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, | |
|
|
| |
Year Ended December 31, |
|
2004 |
|
2003 | |
|
|
|
|
| |
2005
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
177,973 |
|
|
|
|
Convertible Preferred Stock |
Shares of Series B Convertible Preferred Stock were
convertible into common stock on a 3.33-for-one basis and only
in connection with an initial public offering of the
Companys stock. Dividends on the Series B Convertible
Preferred Stock accrued at the rate of 8% per annum and
were subordinate to dividend payments on the Senior Preferred
Shares. Shares of Series B Convertible Preferred Stock had
a liquidation preference equal to the original issue price plus
all cumulative accrued but unpaid dividends. The liquidation
preference was subordinate to that of the Senior Preferred
Shares. Cumulative accrued but unpaid dividends were forfeited
upon conversion of shares of Series B Convertible Preferred
Stock into common stock. As such, the Company did not accrue
dividends, as liquidation of the shares of Series B
Convertible Preferred Stock was not anticipated.
|
|
9. |
Stockholders Equity (Deficit) |
As of December 31, 2004, the Company had 110,000,000
authorized shares of common stock and 10,000,000 authorized
shares of non-voting common stock. As of December 31, 2003,
the Company had 120,000,000 authorized shares of common stock
and 450,060 authorized shares of non-voting common stock. Common
stock entitles the holder to one vote per share of common stock
held. Non-voting common stock is convertible on a one-for-one
basis into shares of common stock at any time subject to a
limitation on conversion to the extent such conversion would
result in a stockholder, together with its affiliates, owning
more than 9.99% of the outstanding shares of common stock.
On March 30, 2004, the Companys Board of Directors
authorized, and on November 1, 2004 the Company
effectuated, a one-for-three reverse stock split of shares of
common stock and non-voting common stock to be effective prior
to the closing of the Companys initial public offering.
All references in these financial statements to the number of
shares of common stock and non-voting common stock of the
Company, securities convertible or exercisable therefor and per
share amounts have been restated for all periods presented to
reflect the effect of the common stock reverse stock split.
|
|
|
Restricted Common Stock and Common Stock Subscribed |
In 2004 and 2003, the Company had 1,939,734 shares and
1,937,141 shares, respectively, of common stock that were
issued to employees. Included in these amounts, in 2001, the
Company awarded 64,001 shares and 289,581 shares to
employees at $.003 and $3.60, respectively, per share. The
common stock subscribed was issued in 2001 in exchange for
three-year promissory notes (64,001 shares) and eleven-year
promissory notes (289,581 shares), which bear interest at
the applicable federal rate and are collateralized by the
subscribed shares. The promissory note due in 2004 was repaid on
January 15, 2005. Compensation expense in relation to the
excess of the fair value of such awards over the amount paid
will be recorded over the vesting period. The awards vest over a
period of either one and one-half or three years and are
restricted as to transferability based on the vesting schedule
set forth in the award agreement. The eleven-year promissory
notes (289,581 shares) were entered into in connection with
the loans of approximately $1,042 made to the Companys
Chief Executive Officer in 2001. These loans were made prior to
the passage of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
94
MARKETAXESS HOLDINGS INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
In April 2000, the Board of Directors initiated a warrant
program that commenced on February 1, 2001. Under this
program, the Company has reserved for issuance
5,000,002 shares of common stock. The warrant was issued to
the holders of Series A, C, E and I redeemable convertible
preferred stock (the Warrant Holders). The Warrant
Holders are entitled to purchase shares of common stock from the
Company at an exercise price of $.003 through and including
November 30, 2008.
The warrant was issued to the Warrant Holders at the time that
they made an equity investment in the Company. The warrant
program has two distinct pieces, a U.S. and a European portion,
under which the aggregate number of shares underlying the
warrant to be allocated in each three-month period was fixed.
Allocations under this program commenced on May 1, 2001 for
the U.S. portion and June 1, 2002 for the European
portion and were based on each broker-dealer clients
respective commissions as a percentage of the total commissions
from the six participating Warrant Holders, calculated on a
quarterly basis. The final share allocations under the warrant
program occurred on March 1, 2004.
Shares allocated under the warrant program were expensed on a
monthly basis at fair market value in accordance with
SFAS No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based
Compensation. The Company determined fair market value of
the shares issuable upon exercise of the warrant using the
Black-Scholes option-pricing model. To assist management in
determining fair market value of the shares issuable,
independent valuations of the Companys common stock were
undertaken as of December 31, 2001, December 31, 2002,
September 30, 2003 and December 31, 2003. A number of
factors were considered in the valuations, including the
Companys current financial condition, its future earning
capacity, the market price of publicly quoted corporations in
similar lines of business and the values of prior sales of
preferred stock. The Company issued preferred stock that is
convertible to common stock on a 3.33-for-one basis during 2001
for prices ranging from $35.00 per share to $45.00 per
share and during 2002 at $28.00 per share.
In March 2001, when the Company acquired Trading Edge, the
Company assumed outstanding warrant agreements with a
broker-dealer client. The broker-dealer client did not meet
trading requirements during the measurement periods, which ended
on December 31, 2002 and 2003. As a result, no shares were
issued pursuant to these warrants.
In March 2001, in connection with the acquisition of Trading
Edge, the Company also assumed warrants issued by Trading Edge
which were converted into warrants exercisable to
purchase 7,967 shares of the Companys common
stock.
The Companys warrant activity is summarized as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-Average | |
|
|
Shares | |
|
Exercise Price | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Outstanding at December 31, 2002
|
|
|
3,466,300 |
|
|
$ |
0.303 |
|
Allocated
|
|
|
1,312,500 |
|
|
$ |
0.003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at December 31, 2003
|
|
|
4,778,800 |
|
|
$ |
0.222 |
|
Allocated
|
|
|
229,169 |
|
|
$ |
0.003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at December 31, 2004
|
|
|
5,007,969 |
|
|
$ |
0.211 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
95
MARKETAXESS HOLDINGS INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
The following tables summarize information regarding the
warrants:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
|
Shares of Common | |
|
|
|
|
Stock Issuable upon | |
|
Weighted-Average | |
|
|
Exercise of | |
|
Remaining | |
|
|
Outstanding | |
|
Contractual Life | |
Exercise Price |
|
Warrants | |
|
(In Years) | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
$130.65 |
|
|
7,967 |
|
|
|
0.6 |
|
$ 0.003
|
|
|
5,000,002 |
|
|
|
3.9 |
|
In calculating the fair market value of the warrant allocations,
the following assumptions were used:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Weighted Average Allocation Date Fair Market Value of Common
Stock
|
|
$ |
16.52 |
|
|
$ |
5.15 |
|
|
$ |
3.68 |
|
Dividend Yield
|
|
|
0.00 |
% |
|
|
0.00 |
% |
|
|
0.00 |
% |
Weighted Average Expected Life (years)
|
|
|
4.38 |
|
|
|
5.38 |
|
|
|
6.38 |
|
Weighted Average Risk Free Interest Rate
|
|
|
2.18 |
% |
|
|
1.84 |
% |
|
|
2.96 |
% |
Expected Volatility
|
|
|
34.43 |
% |
|
|
40.28 |
% |
|
|
46.78 |
% |
Warrant-related expense is accrued quarterly based on the
pro-rated number of shares to be allocated under the warrant
program and the fair market value of the Companys common
stock. For the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and
2002, the Company accrued for 229,169, 1,048,612 and
2,347,222 shares at a weighted average fair market value of
$16.52, $5.15, and $3.68, respectively.
|
|
|
Broker-Dealer Stock Options |
During 2001 and 2002, the Company had a broker-dealer option
program. The broker-dealer clients that were party to this plan
were ABN Amro, Banc of America, Bear Stearns, JPMorgan, Credit
Suisse First Boston, Deutsche Bank, Lehman Brothers and UBS. The
options were allocated to these eight broker-dealer clients on a
quarterly basis from February 1, 2001 through January 2002
at an exercise price of $12.60 per share. Allocation of the
options among the eight broker-dealer clients was based on a
pre-determined formula, which measured each broker-dealers
share of commissions paid to the Company for that three-month
period compared to the total commissions paid to the Company by
the eight broker-dealer clients for such period. As of
December 31, 2002, there were outstanding 198,407 options
expiring one year from the issuance date. All options that were
allocated in 2001, totaling 287,811, expired during 2002. The
options allocated in 2002, totaling 198,407, expired on
January 31, 2003. The Company did not record any expense as
the fair value of the Companys common stock was below the
strike price on each of the allocation dates.
The Companys 2000 and 2001 Stock Incentive Plans (the
2000 and 2001 Plans) provide for the grant of
options or restricted stock as incentives and rewards to
encourage employees, officers and directors to participate in
the long-term success of the Company. The 2000 and 2001 Plans
provide for the granting of up to 5,082,274 shares of the
Companys common stock at the fair value or at a value
other than fair value (determined by the Board of Directors or a
committee thereof) on the date the option is granted. The
options vest over a three-year period, at a rate of one-third
after one year from the grant date and with the remaining
two-thirds vesting on an equal monthly basis over the remaining
two-year period. Options expire ten years from the date of
grant. For the year ended December 31, 2003, options to
purchase 1,443,350 shares of common stock were
granted, options to purchase 471,891 shares of common
stock were cancelled and 18,334 options to purchase shares of
common stock were exercised. For the year ended
December 31, 2004, options to
96
MARKETAXESS HOLDINGS INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
purchase 989,117 shares of common stock were granted, options to
purchase 209,948 shares of common stock were cancelled and
options to purchase 79,827 shares of common stock were exercised.
In 2004, the Company adopted the 2004 Stock Incentive Plan
(2004 Plan) to enable it to offer certain of the
Companys key employees, consultants and non-employee
directors equity-based awards in the Company. The terms of the
2004 Plan are substantially the same as those in the 2000 and
2001 Plans, except as follows: the maximum aggregate number of
shares available for grant is different; the Compensation
Committee (the Committee) has flexibility to grant
stock appreciation rights, performance shares, performance units
or other stock-based awards (in addition to stock options and
restricted stock); and rights of first refusal and repurchase
rights do not apply to awards granted under the 2004 Plan. A
committee appointed by the Board of Directors, which will
consist of at least two non-employee directors, will administer
the 2004 Plan. With respect to the application of the 2004 Plan
to non-employee directors, the entire Board of Directors will
act as the committee. The 2004 Plan permits the Company to grant
stock options (incentive stock options and non-qualified stock
options), stock appreciation rights, restricted stock,
performance shares, performance units and other stock-based
awards (including, without limitation, restricted stock units)
to certain key employees, consultants and non-employee directors
(to the extent permitted by law), as determined by the Committee
in its sole discretion. Up to 2,400,000 shares of the
Companys common stock, plus 611,839 shares of common stock
transferred to the 2004 Plan from the 2000 and 2001 Plans on
November 2, 2004, may be issued under the 2004 Plan
(subject to adjustment to reflect certain transactions and
events specified in the 2004 Plan). The 2004 Plan provides the
Committee with authority and flexibility to determine the terms
and conditions of the awards at the time of grant. The 2004 Plan
is intended to constitute a plan described in Treasury
Regulations Section 1.162-27(f)(1), pursuant to which the
deduction limits under Section 62(m) of the Internal
Revenue Code do not apply during the applicable reliance period.
For the year ended December 31, 2004, options to purchase
88,337 shares of common stock were granted.
In February 2003, the Board of Directors authorized the grant of
1,000,000 options with an exercise price of $2.70 per share
to a senior officer. Of this amount, 111,111 options were
granted from the 2001 Plan. The remaining amount was authorized
by the Board of Directors outside of the Plans. The vesting of
this grant is over a 35-month period.
In November 2003, two directors were granted 8,334 stock options
each at an exercise price of $7.92 per share that vested at
the time of issuance. The fair value of the two stock option
grants was estimated on the date of the grant using the
Black-Scholes option pricing model with the following
assumptions: zero dividend yield, a volatility factor of 45%,
risk-free rate of return of 1.9% and expected lives of one
month. This calculation resulted in an expense of $51 included
in the Employee compensation and benefits line item in the
Consolidated Statements of Operations for the year ended
December 31, 2003.
In November 2004, upon the completion of the initial public
offering, the Company granted to six directors options to
purchase 10,000 shares of common stock each, at an
exercise price of $11.00 per share. The grants vest in two
equal installments on the six-month and twelve-month
anniversaries of the grant date. The fair value of the grants
was estimated on the date of the grant using the Black-Scholes
option pricing model with the following assumptions: zero
dividend yield, a volatility factor of 25%, risk-free rate of
return of 2.8% and expected lives of a half-year and one year.
This calculation resulted in an expense of $14 that is included
in Employee compensation and benefits in the Consolidated
Statements of Operations for the year ended December 31,
2004.
97
MARKETAXESS HOLDINGS INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
The Companys stock option activity for employees, officers
and directors is summarized as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-Average | |
|
|
Shares | |
|
Exercise Price | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Outstanding at December 31, 2002
|
|
|
3,166,778 |
|
|
$ |
3.02 |
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
1,443,350 |
|
|
$ |
2.95 |
|
|
Cancelled
|
|
|
(471,891 |
) |
|
$ |
3.74 |
|
|
Exercised
|
|
|
(18,334 |
) |
|
$ |
3.87 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at December 31, 2003
|
|
|
4,119,903 |
|
|
$ |
2.91 |
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
1,077,454 |
|
|
$ |
13.86 |
|
|
Cancelled
|
|
|
(209,948 |
) |
|
$ |
6.38 |
|
|
Exercised
|
|
|
(79,827 |
) |
|
$ |
2.89 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at December 31, 2004
|
|
|
4,907,582 |
|
|
$ |
5.17 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following table summarizes information regarding the stock
options granted:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
|
Options Outstanding | |
|
Options Exercisable | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
Weighted-Average | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Remaining | |
|
Weighted-Average | |
|
Number | |
|
Weighted-Average | |
Range of Exercise Prices |
|
Outstanding | |
|
Contractual Life | |
|
Exercise Price | |
|
Exercisable | |
|
Exercise Price | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
$ 2.10 - $ 3.60
|
|
|
3,744,044 |
|
|
|
7.42 |
|
|
$ |
2.79 |
|
|
|
2,976,403 |
|
|
$ |
2.82 |
|
$ 4.05 - $ 7.92
|
|
|
144,253 |
|
|
|
7.45 |
|
|
|
5.41 |
|
|
|
120,343 |
|
|
|
4.91 |
|
$ 9.51 - $11.00
|
|
|
143,838 |
|
|
|
9.82 |
|
|
|
10.40 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$13.95 - $19.60
|
|
|
875,447 |
|
|
|
9.02 |
|
|
|
14.42 |
|
|
|
1,667 |
|
|
|
13.95 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
|
Options Outstanding | |
|
Options Exercisable | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
Weighted-Average | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Remaining | |
|
Weighted-Average | |
|
Number | |
|
Weighted-Average | |
Range of Exercise Prices |
|
Outstanding | |
|
Contractual Life | |
|
Exercise Price | |
|
Exercisable | |
|
Exercise Price | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
$2.10 - $3.60
|
|
|
3,956,055 |
|
|
|
8.41 |
|
|
$ |
2.80 |
|
|
|
2,034,206 |
|
|
$ |
2.85 |
|
$4.05 - $7.92
|
|
|
163,848 |
|
|
|
8.62 |
|
|
|
5.70 |
|
|
|
88,049 |
|
|
|
4.78 |
|
The Company applies APB No. 25 in accounting for the Plans,
and has adopted the disclosure-only provisions of
SFAS No. 123 with respect to options granted to
employees of the Company. All options were issued at what the
Companys Board of Directors determined to be the
then-current fair market value. To assist in determining fair
market value of the options granted, independent valuations of
the Companys common stock were undertaken as of
December 31, 2001, December 31, 2002,
September 30, 2003 and December 31, 2003. A number of
factors were considered in the valuations, including the
Companys current financial condition, its future earning
capacity, the market price of publicly quoted corporations in
similar lines of business and the values of prior sales of
preferred stock. The Company issued preferred stock that is
convertible to common stock on a 3.33-for-one basis during 2001
for prices ranging from $35.00 per share to $45.00 per
share and during 2002 at $28.00 per share.
98
MARKETAXESS HOLDINGS INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
Had compensation expense for the Companys Plans been
determined based on the fair value at the grant dates for awards
to employees under the Plans, consistent with
SFAS No. 123(R), the Companys Net income (loss)
for the year would have been increased or decreased to the pro
forma amount as indicated below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Net income (loss)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As reported
|
|
$ |
58,646 |
|
|
$ |
4,212 |
|
|
$ |
(36,076 |
) |
|
Compensation expense
|
|
|
1,965 |
|
|
|
1,646 |
|
|
|
749 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro forma
|
|
$ |
56,681 |
|
|
$ |
2,566 |
|
|
$ |
(36,825 |
) |
Basic net income (loss) per common share
|
|
$ |
6.90 |
|
|
$ |
(2.20 |
) |
|
$ |
(14.39 |
) |
Diluted net income (loss) per common share
|
|
$ |
1.91 |
|
|
$ |
(2.20 |
) |
|
$ |
(14.39 |
) |
Basic net income (loss) per common share pro forma
|
|
$ |
6.62 |
|
|
$ |
(2.70 |
) |
|
$ |
(14.62 |
) |
Diluted net income (loss) per common share pro forma
|
|
$ |
1.85 |
|
|
$ |
(2.70 |
) |
|
$ |
(14.62 |
) |
In calculating the fair market value of the options granted, the
following assumptions were used:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Weighted-Average Grant Date Fair Market Value of Common Stock
|
|
$ |
16.37 |
|
|
$ |
4.19 |
|
|
$ |
3.68 |
|
Dividend Yield
|
|
|
0.00 |
% |
|
|
0.00 |
% |
|
|
0.00 |
% |
Weighted-Average Expected Life (years)
|
|
|
3.00 |
|
|
|
3.00 |
|
|
|
3.00 |
|
Weighted-Average Risk-Free Interest Rate
|
|
|
2.74 |
% |
|
|
1.84 |
% |
|
|
2.96 |
% |
Weighted-Average Expected Volatility
|
|
|
28.25 |
% |
|
|
40.28 |
% |
|
|
46.78 |
% |
|
|
10. |
Commitments and Contingencies |
The Company leases office space under non-cancelable lease
agreements expiring at various dates through 2011. These leases
are subject to escalation based on certain costs incurred by the
landlord.
Minimum rental commitments under such leases, net of sublease
income, are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, |
|
Minimum Rentals | |
|
|
| |
2005
|
|
$ |
2,060 |
|
2006
|
|
|
2,270 |
|
2007
|
|
|
2,246 |
|
2008
|
|
|
2,246 |
|
2009
|
|
|
2,246 |
|
Thereafter through 2011
|
|
|
5,772 |
|
The rental expense for the years ended December 31, 2004,
2003 and 2002 was $1,782, $1,879 and $2,037, respectively, which
is included in General and administrative expenses in the
Consolidated Statements of Operations.
Rental expense has been recorded based on the total minimum
lease payments after giving effect to rent abatement and
concessions, which are being amortized on a straight-line basis
over the life of the lease, and sublease income.
99
MARKETAXESS HOLDINGS INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
The Company has entered into sublease agreements for four of its
properties. The following table summarizes information regarding
the sublease provisions:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sublease Loss Provision as of: | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
Commencement | |
|
Termination | |
|
Sublease | |
|
December 31, | |
|
December 31, | |
Location |
|
Date | |
|
Date | |
|
Rental | |
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Santa Monica, CA
|
|
|
July 1, 2001 |
|
|
|
October 31, 2004 |
|
|
$ |
26 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
28 |
|
New York, NY
|
|
|
February 1, 2002 |
|
|
|
April 30, 2006 |
|
|
|
71 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
May 1, 2006 |
|
|
|
April 14, 2011 |
|
|
|
77 |
|
|
|
1,344 |
|
|
|
1,463 |
|
London, U.K.
|
|
|
May 9, 2002 |
|
|
|
March 25, 2010 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Washington, DC
|
|
|
March 19, 2003 |
|
|
|
July 11, 2004 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31 |
|
As provided for in the London sublease agreement, the sublessee
has exercised its early termination option and as provided for
in the agreement will pay the Companys U.K. subsidiary an
early termination fee of $225 in May 2005. The Company is not
anticipating subleasing the space but will occupy the space.
The Company is contingently obligated for standby letters of
credit that were issued to landlords for office space. The
Company uses a U.S. government obligation as collateral for
these standby letters of credit and for the Companys
foreign currency forward contracts. This collateral is included
with Securities and cash provided as collateral on the
Consolidated Statements of Financial Condition and had a fair
market value as of December 31, 2004 and 2003 of $3,299 and
$3,200, respectively.
During 2003, MarketAxess Corporation cleared certain of its
transactions through two clearing brokers on a fully-disclosed
basis. Pursuant to the terms of the agreements between
MarketAxess Corporation and these clearing brokers, the clearing
brokers had the right to charge MarketAxess Corporation for
losses resulting from a counterpartys failure to fulfill
its contractual obligations. As the right to charge MarketAxess
Corporation had no maximum amount and applied to all trades
executed through the clearing brokers, MarketAxess Corporation
believed there was no maximum amount assignable to this right.
At December 31, 2003, MarketAxess Corporation recorded no
liabilities with regard to this right. These clearing broker
arrangements were terminated in June 2003 and February 2004,
respectively.
In December 2004, MarketAxess Corporation commenced operating an
anonymous matching service for its broker-dealer clients.
MarketAxess Corporation executes trades on a riskless principal
basis, which are cleared and settled by an independent clearing
broker. The securities clearing agreement that MarketAxess
Corporation maintains with the independent clearing broker
commenced in December 2004. Under the securities clearing
agreement, MarketAxess Corporation maintains a collateral
deposit with the clearing broker in the form of cash or U.S.
government securities. MarketAxess Corporation is exposed to
credit risk in the event a contra-party does not fulfill its
obligation to complete the transaction. MarketAxess Corporation
uses various procedures to manage its credit exposure, including
a review of the credit standing and the establishment of credit
limits for each contra-party.
As of December 31, 2004 and 2003, MarketAxess Corporation
had $500 and $307, respectively, of securities and cash on
deposit with clearing brokers included in Securities and cash
provided as collateral on the Consolidated Statements of
Financial Condition.
In the normal course of business, the Company enters into
contracts that contain a variety of representations, warranties
and general indemnifications. The Companys maximum
exposure under these arrangements is unknown, as this would
involve future claims that may be made against the Company that
have not yet occurred. However, based on experience, the Company
expects the risk of loss to be remote.
The Company has provided a funding guarantee to its U.K.
Subsidiaries in the normal course of business to enable them to
meet obligations to individual creditors through March 31,
2005 to the extent these
100
MARKETAXESS HOLDINGS INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
subsidiaries cannot meet such obligations themselves. As the
maximum obligation under this arrangement is unknown, and as the
U.K. Subsidiaries are consolidated into the Company, no separate
accrual for such guarantee has been made.
The Companys operations as an electronic, multi-dealer to
client platform for the trading of fixed-income securities
constitute a single business segment pursuant to
SFAS No. 131, Disclosures about Segments of an
Enterprise and Related Information. Because of the highly
integrated nature of the financial markets in which the Company
competes and the integration of the Companys worldwide
business activities, the Company believes that results by
geographic region are not necessarily meaningful in
understanding its business.
|
|
12. |
Restructuring Charges |
During the year ended December 31, 2002, a portion of
restructuring charges recorded in 2001 in the amount of $674 was
determined not to be required and was reversed as noted in the
Consolidated Statements of Operations.
SFAS No. 128, Earnings Per Share, requires
the presentation of basic and diluted EPS in the Consolidated
Statements of Operations. Basic EPS is computed by dividing the
net income (loss) attributable to common stock, which includes
the effect of dividends accrued on the redeemable convertible
preferred stock, by the weighted-average number of shares of
common stock outstanding for the period. Diluted EPS is computed
using the same method as basic EPS, but in the denominator,
shares of common stock outstanding reflect the potential
dilution that could occur if convertible securities or other
contracts to issue common stock were converted into or exercised
for common stock. In 2003 and 2002, securities that could
potentially dilute basic EPS in the future but that were not
included in the computation of diluted EPS, because to do so
would have been anti-dilutive for the periods presented, include
redeemable convertible preferred shares and the common stock
deliverable pursuant to in-the-money stock options and warrants.
In 2004, after giving effect to the conversion of redeemable
convertible preferred stock and convertible preferred stock into
14,484,493 shares of common stock and 4,266,310 shares
of non-voting common stock was included in the computation of
diluted EPS.
Basic and diluted earnings per share were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Basic and diluted net income (loss) per common share
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$ |
58,646 |
|
|
$ |
4,212 |
|
|
$ |
(36,076 |
) |
Less: preferred stock dividends
|
|
|
(9,639 |
) |
|
|
(11,455 |
) |
|
|
(11,282 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) attributable to common stock
|
|
$ |
49,007 |
|
|
$ |
(7,242 |
) |
|
$ |
(47,358 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$ |
6.90 |
|
|
$ |
(2.20 |
) |
|
$ |
(14.39 |
) |
|
Diluted
|
|
$ |
1.91 |
|
|
$ |
(2.20 |
) |
|
$ |
(14.39 |
) |
Weighted-average basic shares outstanding
|
|
|
7,097,682 |
|
|
|
3,288,464 |
|
|
|
3,290,326 |
|
Weighted-average diluted shares outstanding
|
|
|
30,638,644 |
|
|
|
3,288,464 |
|
|
|
3,290,326 |
|
101
MARKETAXESS HOLDINGS INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
|
|
14. |
Supplemental Cash Flow Disclosure of Non-Cash Activities |
The following is a description of non-cash activity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Accrued and undeclared dividends on redeemable convertible
preferred stock
|
|
$ |
9,639 |
|
|
$ |
11,455 |
|
|
$ |
11,282 |
|
Warrant-related expense
|
|
|
2,524 |
|
|
|
5,400 |
|
|
|
8,624 |
|
Stock option issuance to directors
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock issuance to employees
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional paid-in capital
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,543 |
|
|
|
1,193 |
|
|
|
15. |
Accounting for Foreign Currency Forward Contracts and Hedging
Activities |
Assets and liabilities denominated in non-U.S. currencies
are translated at rates of exchange prevailing on the date of
the Consolidated Statements of Financial Condition, and revenues
and expenses are translated at average rates of exchange for the
fiscal period. Gains or losses on translation of the financial
statements of a non-U.S. operation are included, net of
hedges, in Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss).
The Company has determined that SFAS No. 133,
Accounting for Derivatives Instruments and Hedging
Activities, allows for investments in foreign operations
to qualify for hedging treatment. The Company enters into
foreign currency forward contracts with a related party to hedge
its exposure to variability in foreign currency cash flows
resulting from the net investments in its U.K. Subsidiaries. The
Company assesses each foreign currency forward contract to
ensure that it is highly effective at reducing the exposure
being hedged. The Company designates each foreign currency
forward contract as a hedge, assesses the risk management
objective and strategy, including identification of the hedging
instrument, the hedged item and the risk exposure and how
effectiveness is to be assessed prospectively and
retrospectively. These hedges are primarily for a three-month
period and are used to limit exposure to foreign currency
exchange rate fluctuations. A summary of the foreign currency
forward contracts is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Notional value
|
|
$ |
8,311 |
|
|
$ |
4,231 |
|
|
$ |
860 |
|
Fair value
|
|
|
8,333 |
|
|
|
4,328 |
|
|
|
879 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized (losses) gains
|
|
|
(22 |
) |
|
|
(97 |
) |
|
|
(19 |
) |
Realized (losses) gains
|
|
|
(339 |
) |
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
92 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net change
|
|
$ |
(361 |
) |
|
$ |
(108 |
) |
|
$ |
73 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16. |
Savings Retirement Plan and Annual Performance Incentive
Plan |
The Company, through its U.S. subsidiary, MarketAxess
Corporation, offers its U.S. employees the opportunity to
invest in a defined contribution 401(k) plan (the 401(k)
Plan). The 401(k) Plan is available to all full-time
employees of the Company. The Company made no contributions to
the 401(k) Plan for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003
and 2002, although it has discretion to do so in the future.
The Company adopted the MarketAxess Holdings Inc. 2004 Annual
Performance Incentive Plan (the 2004 Bonus Plan) for
certain of the Companys designated key executives to
provide bonus awards to such individuals as an incentive to
contribute to the Companys profitability. The Compensation
Committee (the
102
MARKETAXESS HOLDINGS INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
Committee) or such other committee appointed by the
Board of Directors will administer the 2004 Bonus Plan, and this
Committee will select the key executives eligible to participate
in the 2004 Bonus Plan each year. For the year ending
December 31, 2004, no bonus awards were made from the 2004
Bonus Plan.
|
|
17. |
Business Interruption |
On September 11, 2001, following the terrorist attacks on
the World Trade Center complex, the Companys New York
office space as well as its primary data center were
inaccessible, lacked power and were without phone and data
communications capabilities. These events caused the temporary
relocation of employees and data centers to backup facilities.
The Company incurred additional costs in establishing alternate
facilities and experienced a decrease in revenues in the three
months ended December 31, 2001. The Company has received
insurance proceeds and World Trade Center recovery grants
totaling $1,193, of which $526 relates to reimbursement of the
additional costs incurred and $667 relates to loss of revenues.
Such amount is included in the Companys 2002 Consolidated
Statements of Operations in Other income.
|
|
18. |
Customer Concentration |
During the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003, no
single broker-dealer client accounted for more than 10% of total
revenue. During the year ended December 31, 2002, three of
the Companys broker-dealer clients each accounted for 11%
of total revenue.
|
|
19. |
Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss) |
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) is composed of
cumulative currency translation adjustments. Cumulative currency
translation adjustments reflect gains or losses on foreign
currency translation from operations for which the functional
currency is a currency other than the U.S. dollar and are
reflected as a component of Stockholders equity
(deficit) in the Consolidated Statements of Financial
Condition. The following table presents the currency translation
adjustment balances for the periods presented:
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2002
|
|
$ |
127 |
|
Net change
|
|
|
(108 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2003
|
|
|
19 |
|
Net change
|
|
|
(361 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2004
|
|
$ |
(342 |
) |
|
|
|
|
103
|
|
Item 9. |
Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on
Accounting and Financial Disclosure |
None
|
|
Item 9A. |
Controls and Procedures |
(a) Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and
Procedures. Our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer have evaluated the effectiveness of our disclosure
controls and procedures (as such term is defined in
Rule 13a-14(c) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
as amended (the Exchange Act)) as of
December 31, 2004 (the Evaluation Date). Based
on such evaluation, such officers have concluded that, as of the
Evaluation Date, we had sufficient procedures for recording,
processing, summarizing and reporting information that is
required to be disclosed in our periodic filings under the
Exchange Act.
(b) Changes in Internal Controls. Since the
Evaluation Date, there have not been any significant changes in
our internal controls or in other factors that could
significantly affect such controls.
|
|
Item 9B. |
Other Information |
None
PART III
|
|
Item 10. |
Directors and Executive Officers of the Registrant |
The information required by this item other than the following
information concerning the Companys code of ethics is
incorporated herein by reference to the sections entitled
Proposal 1 Election of Directors
and Executive Compensation Section 16(a)
Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance in the
Companys definitive Proxy Statement for the Annual Meeting
of Shareholders to be held in the second quarter of 2005 (the
Proxy Statement). The Company intends to file the
Proxy Statement within 120 days after the end of its fiscal
year.
The Company has adopted a code of ethics as defined
by applicable rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission
and the NASDAQ Stock Market, which is applicable to its chief
executive officer, chief financial officer, controller and other
senior financial and reporting persons and its directors. This
code is part of the Companys broader Code of Business
Ethics and Conduct and is publicly available on the
Companys website at http://www.marketaxess.com. If the
Company makes any amendments to the code of ethics for its
senior officers, financial and reporting persons or directors
(other than technical, administrative, or other non-substantive
amendments), or grants any waivers, including implicit waivers,
from a provision of this code to such persons, the Company will
disclose the nature of the amendment or waiver, its effective
date and to whom it applies on its website or in a report on
Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
|
|
Item 11. |
Executive Compensation |
The information required by this item is incorporated herein by
reference to the section entitled Executive Compensation
and Related Information in the Companys Proxy
Statement.
|
|
Item 12. |
Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and
Management and Related Stockholder Matters |
The information required by this Item 12 with respect to
the security ownership of certain beneficial owners and
management is incorporated herein by reference to the section
entitled Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners
and Management in the Companys Proxy Statement.
The information required by this Item 12 with respect to
the securities authorized for issuance under equity compensation
plans is incorporated herein by reference to the section
captioned Securities Authorized
104
for Issuance Under Equity Compensation Plans in
Item 5 of this Report on Form 10-K, Market for
Registrants Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and
Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities.
|
|
Item 13. |
Certain Relationships and Related Transactions |
The information required by this item is incorporated herein by
reference to the section entitled Certain Relationships
and Related Transactions in the Companys Proxy
Statement.
|
|
Item 14. |
Principal Accounting Fees and Services |
The information required by this item is incorporated herein by
reference to the section entitled Principal Accounting
Fees and Services in the Companys Proxy Statement.
105
PART IV
|
|
Item 15. |
Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules |
(a) Financial Statements and Schedules
The financial statements are set forth under Item 8 of this
Annual Report on Form 10-K. Financial statement schedules
have been omitted since they are either not required, not
applicable, or the information is otherwise included.
(b) Exhibit Listing
|
|
|
|
|
Number |
|
Description |
|
|
|
|
3 |
.1* |
|
Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation |
|
3 |
.2* |
|
Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation to be in
effect upon the closing of this offering |
|
|
3 |
.3* |
|
Amended and Restated Bylaws |
|
|
3 |
.4* |
|
Form of Amended and Restated Bylaws to be in effect upon the
closing of this offering |
|
|
4 |
.1* |
|
Specimen Common Stock certificate |
|
|
4 |
.2* |
|
Sixth Amended and Restated Registration Rights Agreement |
|
|
4 |
.3* |
|
Form of Dealer Warrant |
|
|
4 |
.4* |
|
See Exhibits 3.1, 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 for provisions defining
the rights of holders of common stock and non-voting common
stock of the registrant |
|
|
10 |
.1* |
|
Employment Agreement, dated as of May 3, 2004, by and
between MarketAxess Holdings Inc. and Richard M. McVey |
|
|
10 |
.2(a)* |
|
Restricted Stock Purchase Agreement, dated as of June 11,
2001, by and between MarketAxess Holdings Inc. and Richard M.
McVey |
|
|
10 |
.2(b)* |
|
Full Recourse Secured Promissory Note, dated June 11, 2001,
by Richard M. McVey in favor of MarketAxess Holdings Inc. |
|
|
10 |
.2(c)* |
|
Non-Recourse Secured Promissory Note, dated June 11, 2001,
by Richard M. McVey in favor of MarketAxess Holdings Inc. |
|
|
10 |
.2(d)* |
|
Stock Pledge Agreement, dated as of June 11, 2001, by and
between MarketAxess Holdings Inc. and Richard M. McVey |
|
|
10 |
.2(e)* |
|
Restricted Stock Purchase Agreement, dated as of July 1,
2001, by and between MarketAxess Holdings Inc. and Richard M.
McVey |
|
|
10 |
.2(f)* |
|
Full Recourse Secured Promissory Note, dated July 1, 2001,
by Richard M. McVey in favor of MarketAxess Holdings Inc. |
|
|
10 |
.2(g)* |
|
Non-Recourse Secured Promissory Note, dated July 1, 2001,
by Richard M. McVey in favor of MarketAxess Holdings Inc. |
|
|
10 |
.2(h)* |
|
Stock Pledge Agreement, dated as of July 1, 2001, by and
between MarketAxess Holdings Inc. and Richard M. McVey |
|
|
10 |
.3* |
|
Stock Option Agreement, dated February 7, 2003, by and
between MarketAxess Holdings Inc. and Richard M. McVey |
|
|
10 |
.4* |
|
Contract of Employment, dated February 11, 2003, by and
between MarketAxess Europe Limited and Iain Baillie |
|
|
10 |
.5* |
|
Letter Agreement, dated as of January 25, 2001, by and
between MarketAxess Holdings Inc. and John Vande Woude |
|
|
10 |
.6* |
|
MarketAxess Holdings Inc. Amended and Restated 2000 Stock
Incentive Plan |
|
|
10 |
.7* |
|
MarketAxess Holdings Inc. Amended and Restated 2001 Stock
Incentive Plan |
|
|
10 |
.8* |
|
Amendment No. 1 to the MarketAxess Holdings Inc. Amended
and Restated 2001 Stock Incentive Plan |
|
|
10 |
.9* |
|
Amendment to the MarketAxess Holdings Inc. 2001 and 2000 Stock
Incentive Plans |
|
|
10 |
.10* |
|
MarketAxess Holdings Inc. 2004 Stock Incentive Plan |
106
|
|
|
|
|
Number | |
|
Description |
| |
|
|
|
|
10 |
.11* |
|
MarketAxess Holdings Inc. 2004 Annual Performance Incentive Plan |
|
|
10 |
.12* |
|
Form of Indemnification Agreement |
|
|
21 |
.1* |
|
Subsidiaries of the Registrant |
|
|
23 |
.1** |
|
Consent of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP |
|
|
31 |
.1** |
|
Certification by Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Exchange
Act Rule 13a-14(a), as adopted pursuant to Section 302
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 |
|
|
31 |
.2** |
|
Certification by Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Exchange
Act Rule 13a-14(a), as adopted pursuant to Section 302
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 |
|
|
32 |
.1** |
|
Certification by Chief Executive Officer pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 |
|
|
32 |
.2** |
|
Certification by Chief Financial Officer pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 |
|
|
* |
Incorporated by reference to the identically-numbered exhibit to
the registrants Registration Statement on Form S-1,
as amended (Registration No. 333-112718). |
107
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Act of 1933, as
amended, the registrant has duly caused this Form 10-K to
be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly
authorized, in the City of New York, State of New York, on this
30th day of March, 2005.
|
|
|
MARKETAXESS HOLDINGS INC. |
|
|
|
Richard M. McVey |
|
President and Chief Executive Officer |
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Act of 1933, as
amended, this Form 10-K has been signed by the following
persons in the capacities and on the dates indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signature |
|
Title(s) |
|
Date |
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Richard M. McVey
Richard
M. McVey |
|
President, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board of
Directors (principal executive officer) |
|
March 30, 2005 |
|
/s/ James N.B. Rucker
James
N.B. Rucker |
|
Chief Financial Officer (principal financial and accounting
officer) |
|
March 30, 2005 |
|
/s/ Stephen P. Casper
Stephen
P. Casper |
|
Director |
|
March 30, 2005 |
|
/s/ William Cronin
William
Cronin |
|
Director |
|
March 30, 2005 |
|
/s/ David G. Gomach
David
G. Gomach |
|
Director |
|
March 30, 2005 |
|
/s/ Ronald M. Hersch
Ronald
M. Hersch |
|
Director |
|
March 30, 2005 |
|
/s/ Wayne D. Lyski
Wayne
D. Lyski |
|
Director |
|
March 30, 2005 |
|
/s/ Jerome S. Markowitz
Jerome
S. Markowitz |
|
Director |
|
March 30, 2005 |
|
/s/ Nicolas S. Rohatyn
Nicolas
S. Rohatyn |
|
Director |
|
March 30, 2005 |
|
/s/ John Steinhardt
John
Steinhardt |
|
Director |
|
March 30, 2005 |
108