The Future of Trading

State Street Industry Dialogue

Foreword

The investment industry is experiencing

substantial changes. At State Street, we

have a panoramic view of market trends,

given our role serving institutional

clients of all regions, sizes and types.

The changing mindset in relation

to the front office is one such shift

we are watching closely. There is a

growing openness to re-thinking how

trading is handled. While some firms

have been evolving their models for

years, others are just beginning to

explore new options. The experience

of managing businesses through the

COVID-19 pandemic has been a catalyst

for many to engage in this process.

For others, international expansion

or regulatory challenges are key

drivers to finding new solutions

for execution and reporting.

We invited experts from three major

consultancies to join us in a discussion

about this transformation underway

in the front office. They offered their

knowledge gained from helping their

clients solve problems and lay a stronger

foundation for future business growth.

We are grateful for their insights and

hope that you find them helpful to

consider for your business as well.

2

3

Shane SwansonSenior Analyst,

Head of Equities Practice,

Market Structure and Technology,

Greenwich Associates

Jason MoorheadUK Asset and Wealth Management

Consulting Lead and Global Digital

Transformation Lead, PwC

Daniel MorganSenior Vice President,

Global Head of Portfolio Solutions,

State Street Global Markets

Moderator

Rian AkeyGlobal Head of Operational

Risk Solutions and Analytics,

Aon Hewitt

Speakers

Dan: Welcome to our panel discussion.

Let’s start by acknowledging that outsourced

trading can mean many different things.

Jason, how would you define it?

Jason: Yes, it can have several connotations.

Some of our asset owner clients are looking

for a partner who can handle what is a non-

core part of their business. For example, we’ve

seen this trend recently in the United Kingdom,

with local government pension schemes

expressing more interest in outsourced solutions.

In other cases, asset managers are

realizing that for certain asset classes or

geographic markets, the in-house resource

level or skill base for the trading operation

just isn’t there. A manager might be seeking

to increase foreign market exposure or

pursue a liability-driven investment strategy.

So, they will look often externally for

support in tackling a specific problem.

Shane: I agree with that, Jason. There is

a spectrum of definitions and motivations.

These arrangements can range from simple

execution (essentially a traditional broker

relationship) all the way to full enterprise,

where your entire front-to-back operations

are delegated to a partner that is fully

integrated with your own systems.

A lot of these deals have been driven by a

need to beef up business continuity. We’ve seen

over the past couple years how exogenous

events can exert a strain on systems throughout

our industry. So, having a trusted provider

to take on some of that burden can be a key

benefit of an outsourced trading relationship.

I’d also add that the regulatory aspect of

expanding international trading is a key

driver of outsourcing. We see this a lot in

our research, where firms are simply not as

competent or comfortable with the regulations

in a new market. So, rather than trying to

build out that capability themselves, they

rely on a trusted partner to handle that.

Rian: This dynamic is especially true for

smaller managers, where there may be more

resource constraints. There may be issues

ultimately with segregation of duties or

capabilities – just based on having a small

headcount. A firm may not have sufficient

volume to merit a dedicated trading desk.

Motivations and Governance

“ We often see outsourced trading implemented either opportunistically for a larger organization or holistically, for a smaller firm – approaching it not just as a cost savings but also as a risk management strategy.”

— RIAN AKEY

4

Dan: Rian, your firm performs diligence on

investment managers and their outsourced

vendors to inform your recommendations

to clients. Has your process changed at all

in response to the increased levels of

outsourcing in front office functions?

Rian: I see it more as an adaptation or

extension of what we have been doing.

In our industry, the outsourcing journey

started with support functions, such as IT

or compliance and then moved into

the back office, followed by the middle

office. We’re now seeing this accelerate

and extend to the front office.

The key for us is how to think about the

risk transfer aspect. As I mentioned,

we like outsourcing arrangements when

they solve concerns around segregation

of duties, governance or the capability

limitations of a smaller firm. But you have

to balance those benefits with some new

challenges related to hand-offs or what

happens when something does go wrong.

So there’s always a trade-off, I think and

that’s part of our assessment – what is the

net effect? It can’t be just about saving

money for the manager or the portfolio.

There must be a net improvement in the

operational quality or at least a neutral

outcome there to justify the decision.

In general, we do see some latency in how

investment managers handle their overall

vendor selection and monitoring processes.

Historically, this is an area that was deemed

lower risk and may not have received much

attention. This is changing now. It’s important

to be able to articulate why you selected one

provider over another. And again, it can’t be

about cost only. We’re looking for credible

policies and procedures that are guiding not

just your selection of that provider but also

ongoing monitoring to make sure that the

market is not moving on you, to make sure that

your service levels and your key performance

indicators are being met over the long term.

Dan: That’s a critical point. The responsibility

overall can’t be outsourced, even though the

function itself may be.

Rian: Right. Also, people shouldn’t

underestimate the expertise required to provide

effective oversight of outsourcing relationships.

For example, sometimes we see firms outsource

their technology to a vendor but the day-to-day

interaction is supervised by someone with no

background or experience in it. This makes it

difficult to know whether the vendor is steering

you on the right path. This is relevant for trading

too. It’s important to have the right expertise

to properly manage outcomes and understand

the nuances, especially if it’s a relatively

sophisticated kind of outsourcing framework.

5

Dan: Certainly, and the extent of challenge

will differ by firm size. A large asset manager

or asset owner may have a whole team to help

provide oversight, but if you’re a small firm,

you have to think carefully about how this

will be handled.

Rian: Yes, absolutely. You may want people

with a background in trading to oversee that

relationship and be able to approach it in a

more strategic way instead of a tactical one.

Shane: You made an important point,

which is that you have to establish clear

parameters on the front end. What is the

relationship? What are you going to

monitor? What are you going to manage?

How are you going to document it? Who is

responsible for review and what steps will

be taken afterwards?

I’m a recovering lawyer and throughout

my career I’ve always believed you have

to tell people exactly what you’re going to

do. You have to do it. You have to prove that

you did it. And you have to document all

of that. It may sound excessive, but if you

don’t set it up correctly as you go into the

relationship and instead try to address gaps

on the back end, you’ve already lost. You must

approach the initiative thoughtfully up front,

so you have the opportunity to do it well.

Jason: It’s essential to retain competence

within the organization to be able to

undertake this process and document

exactly what’s happening and what checks

you’re doing. If you look at the first

generation of outsourcing, it was a frequent

criticism that in-house teams were just

re-doing what the external vendor had done,

so outsourcing acquired a bad name. It’s a

fine art to make sure that what you’re doing is

appropriate but not an unnecessary duplication.

As outsourcing evolves and becomes even

more prevalent, knowing how to strike this

balance will be a key competitive differentiator.

“It’s important to have the right expertise to properly manage outcomes and understand the nuances, especially if it’s a relatively sophisticated kind of outsourcing framework.”

— RIAN AKEY

6

Dan: Shane, your firm provides valuable

research on the state of the industry and

frequently polls the community around

the topic. Can you comment on what your

latest research has shown in terms of how

the investment community is viewing

outsourced trading?

Shane: Absolutely. Over the last couple

of years, we’ve interviewed nearly 200 asset

owners and asset managers ranging from

under US$5 billion to over US$50 billion

in assets. We’ve asked them an array of

questions around outsourced trading to

get a view of how opinions are trending.

We’ve seen some interesting changes since

2019. When we ask ‘does outsourced trading

only apply to small or new funds,’ the

percentage who agree has shrunk massively

from 2019 to 2020. In 2019, forty five percent

thought it was only for small or new funds

and it has dwindled to 29 percent in 2020.

And when we look at this again in 2021,

we expect that might go down even more.

The other interesting result was when we

asked if outsourced trading is a good fit for

buy side firms to help manage their volume

and meet best execution. The positive

response to that actually grew significantly

from 20 percent in 2019 to 32 percent in

2020. So, those two trends make sense to

us as outsourced trading becomes better

understood. Obviously, 2020 was enormous

for growth as firms’ systems were stressed

to the limit. Outsourced trading was a

natural fit to alleviate this pressure.

However, understanding is not yet universal.

Another finding, which we were somewhat

befuddled by, is that around 10 percent of

respondents in both 2019 and 2020 responded

that they were unaware of outsourced trading.

They did not know what it was. And our sample

was large, spanning managers of all sizes.

And even though bigger managers showed

higher levels of awareness than smaller firms,

plenty of them were still unaware of outsourced

trading as a possibility for them. So, this is

good news for providers of outsourced trading

services as there’s untapped demand out there.

Dan: It’s a good reminder for the industry

that the educational component of this issue

is certainly not over. There’s more work to be

done in building awareness of the solutions

available. Did anything else interesting

emerge from your research?

Shane: We saw that international trading

was by far the biggest area where firms

were focused on using outsourced trading,

followed by expansion into different asset

classes and building capacity to supplement

the work of their own trading desks.

Industry Shifts in Perception and Organizational Structures

7

Jason: Right now, achieving greater efficiency

is the major objective we hear from clients.

Over the last few years, the conversation

around trade execution has evolved significantly.

It began with people recognizing that trading

wasn’t necessarily a core competency for

their organization, and they were weighing

the expense and difficulty of maintaining it.

Some firms started off by centralizing their

trading activities in expensive financial centers

like London or New York, but started to

reassess whether this truly offers a competitive

advantage. They began to weigh the options

of transferring the function to a lower cost

location or taking the outsourcing route. In other

cases, particularly in Europe with its regulatory

mandates around best execution, we’ve seen

examples where people have not been able to

prove best execution in the way they had hoped,

so that sparked an exploration of outsourcing.

Overall, we’re seeing a real shift in mindset here.

The acceptance of outsourcing execution has

been growing. It’s often strongest with people

who are evaluating their wider operating model

anyway and want to see what else they might be

able to achieve up and down the value chain.

Dan: Building on the idea of industry

shifts, we’re also observing a change

in the organizational structures.

Traditionally, the execution or dealing

desk was part of the chief investment

officer hierarchy. However, we’re seeing

more instances now where that function

actually reports into the chief operating

officer. What do you make of this?

Jason: Yes, it’s a notable shift. There’s a

growing realization that the skill of portfolio

management and strategy is distinct from

the operational element of placing the order

for execution. There is a greater openness to

re-examining how trade execution is handled.

Rian: We frequently hear this explanation

that flow trading belongs within the

operational function and I’d offer a challenge

to that. My biggest concern ties back to the

classic segregation of duties conundrum,

looking at what happens when there’s a

problem or error. If someone on the trading

desk makes an honest mistake, the first

check to that mistake should be operations.

And now potentially, that could be reporting

into the same functional lead. So both people

are now going to the same person to escalate

that problem, which is not ideal. So, we worry

less about the issue of where the function

should sit within an organization and more

about whether there are appropriate checks

and balances in place for these situations.

“ Over the last few years, the conversation around trade execution has evolved significantly.”

— JASON MOORHEAD

8

There’s another layer to this for smaller

firms. Often, you’ll see a trading-focused

person with a dual role. She’s also the

chief compliance officer because they

don’t have scope for a dedicated one.

So, now you have a single person in charge.

Generally, we look at three key functions of

an investment management firm. You’ve got

your risk-taking functions or the front office.

Then, there’s your initial check on the front

office, which is operations and your other

support functions. Finally, you have your control

functions like risk management, compliance

and audit. So now, you have the potential

ability of one person who has oversight of all

three of those functional areas of the firm.

That’s a problem. We would be highly

critical of that from a segregation of duties

or governance standpoint, even if it’s just

trade execution. And that’s because, possibly

99 percent of the time there’s not a problem,

but for that 1 percent when something needs

to escalate, now you’ve got one person with

a potentially massive conflict of interest.

Jason: That’s a very interesting point and

I agree with your view that a pure efficiency

lens isn’t always the best way to do things,

given there are certain controls that need

to be in place. Firms need to look at this

holistically, with a solid risk and compliance

framework underpinning the decision.

“ The acceptance of outsourcing execution has been growing.”

— JASON MOORHEAD

9

Partner Selection

Dan: What are the most important

considerations when looking for

the right partner for outsourcing,

particularly on the execution side?

Shane: First, you have to identify your

needs and map them to vendors’ capabilities.

It’s important to get very detailed in the due

diligence process to understand exactly

how the reporting works, how outcomes

are measured, how feedback is collected

and actioned and crucially, how your needs

will be handled during a crisis. In other

words, will you have a dedicated contact

to speak with when you need to reach

someone urgently? Those are some key

issues you need to understand thoroughly

as you evaluate potential partners.

Dan: On this point of coverage, if you’re

a smaller manager looking to outsource,

naturally you are expecting a better outcome

by being able to leverage the size and scale

of that external service provider. And to

some degree, this end of the market has

been underserved, when we consider the

post-crisis trend of large, sell-side banks

essentially prioritizing only the biggest,

most profitable clients. This has created

something of a void for small- to mid-

sized institutions seeking services.

Jason: For me, the most important factor

is the approach to the relationship from

both the client and provider – it must be a

true partnership to achieve optimal results.

There needs to be a mutual understanding

and both sides must continue to do the

ongoing work of communication, particularly

as it relates to the strategic vision and

not just the day-to-day operational needs.

This will allow better decision-making

that supports long-term objectives.

Rian: Yes, and this ties back to Shane’s

earlier point on crisis scenario planning.

There are two big categories of crisis that

we think about – the kind that is unique

to your firm and the kind that affects the

broader market. The latter is a much thornier

situation because you might find that your

firm is competing against the outsourcing

“ The most important factor is the approach to the relationship from both the client and provider – it must be a true partnership to achieve optimal results.”

— JASON MOORHEAD

10

provider’s other clients for support. It must

be evident in the diligence process that the

service provider has thought through a variety

of outlier scenarios and has detailed plans

and controls for maintaining service. Again,

most of the time everything is going to go

well. But adverse events certainly happen

and can cluster together. We urge our clients

to always consider these possibilities as

part of their business continuity planning.

Jason: I fully agree. But even the best

laid plans can be disrupted by unforeseen

circumstances or regulatory actions.

I’ve certainly seen this during my career,

such as when I helped to wind down

Lehman Brothers’ European prime brokerage

and private client business. In that situation,

the assets were ultimately subject to UK

trust asset law and some parties didn’t

fully understand the implications of that or

even the underlying nuances of their prime

brokerage or lending agreements. So, a

strong element of pragmatism or flexibility is

important to maintain when events like that

unfold, layered on top of that foundation of the

strong relationship and detailed planning.

Dan: Certainly, and I think as the industry

has matured, the hiring of external providers

has become much more sophisticated.

This helps clients to gain clear answers to

the sort of questions that the three of you

have raised around governance, infrastructure

and capabilities. What is your view of the

different service models available now in

the market? Providers vary widely by size

and profile, ranging from small specialists

to large, diversified banks. How do you help

your clients navigate all these options?

Rian: There are trade-offs in considering

different provider types. For example, you

may have a small, nimble provider who can

be opportunistic and agile but they don’t have

a credible cyber security policy or a solid

control framework in place. We also look

at the ancillary services that go along with

trading. Some providers that are better equipped

to support downstream workflows will be

more attractive to clients. I tend to think about

control, repetition, scalability as the most

important factors – all attributes you would

ordinarily associate with a larger organization.

Shane: The client’s individual needs dictate much

of the selection process. For example, if a firm

is looking to get a foothold in a new market but

has no international experience whatsoever,

that issue will guide the partner selection.

Expertise is paramount. Process is important

but that part is easier to engineer if you have

the right kind of expertise as a starting point.

“ Expertise is paramount. Process is important but that part is easier to engineer if you have the right kind of expertise as a starting point.”

— SHANE SWANSON

11

Dan: Right. When you think about understanding

United States’ equity market structure – that

alone is a full-time job! You need to keep

track of order types, venues, exchanges and

so forth. The complexity skyrockets when

you go global and it can be overwhelming

for a firm without that inherent expertise.

Jason: Some clients care deeply about the

‘brand name’ of a provider, as they perceive

that as a marker of safety. However,

when we help them start digging into the

fundamentals, we often see that another

provider who has a lesser known brand

may in fact be the better option, given their

areas of specialty. So, we encourage people

to have an open mind on this issue.

Dan: Over the past five to seven years,

I’ve witnessed an interesting trajectory

of talent in our industry. Essentially, we’ve

seen the shrinkage of the of the buy side

trading desk, due to a host of structural

factors. The steady electronification of

trading has meant that a lower level headcount

is now needed to look after those asset

classes. That, combined with a long period of

low turnover and the overall market stability

associated with quantitative easing – even

interrupted as it was by the spike in volatility

with COVID-19 in the first quarter of 2020–

has resulted in a certain displacement of

industry trading talent. We on the provider

side have benefited from that, as individuals

with deep buy-side experience have sought

new positions with firms like ours.

Back to the point Rian made on ancillary

services, which of these do you feel

are most important for firms to offer

as part of their suite of solutions?

Jason: It’s a bit difficult to generalize because

there is such a wide spectrum of needs and

interests. We work with some clients who are

seeking a full front-to-back capability and the

conversation around outsourced trading will

arise in the course of that wider exploration.

Others are acutely focused on the quality of

regulatory reporting, given the challenges they

have faced in that area and the existence of an

immediate gap to fill. And for a separate group

of firms – they’re not concerned with any specific

service today but are pursuing a long-term

vision and building the organizational capacity

for where they want to go. This is where that

concept of forging a strategic partnership with

your outsourcing provider is especially critical.

Shane: Due to my equity background, I always

start from a best execution perspective.

When looking at providers, we like to gauge

how sophisticated they are on the execution

analysis, spanning pre- to post-trade.

Dan: It’s a good point, and in fact, much of our

industry itself has grown up in equity space.

And of course, trading there is the easiest to

outsource because it’s so electronic and

mature from a market structure perspective.

But I see our industry adapting beyond equities,

with fixed income catching up rapidly.

12

Dan: Looking at the future of our industry,

how far do you think outsourced trading

will go? How quickly do you see the industry

moving toward maturity and how will it

be impacted by the disruption of the

COVID-19 experience?

Shane: The pandemic was a major catalyst

for change. Firms realized they could operate

with some or all of their staff remotely.

And it drove major adoption of cloud-based

technologies, ushering in all kinds of governance

and maintenance issues. But paired with

that was a realization that there are service

providers who are well suited to handle this

excess demand. They have capacity and can

provide it across a swathe of operations.

This experience has prompted people to start

exploring possible new areas that outside

partners can handle for them. So, I think it’s a

growth area and will accelerate even more over

the next three to five years, in asset classes

beyond equities and in markets beyond the US.

Rian: My view is more mixed. You’re always

going to have certain types of portfolio

managers or asset management groups for

whom outsourced trading is not going to be

a fit. To me, there’s something of an alpha/beta

divide there, with the differences in mentality

between flow trading and prop trading.

I think you’ll see more adoption though if

firms see a clear link between outsourced

trading and a quicker reaction time to new

regulations. How quickly can providers

onboard downstream capabilities that

accommodate those needs? If they can find

a way to help managers more nimbly adapt

when a new regulation or requirement

comes out, that will be a great selling

point for outsourced trading.

Jason: From a European and UK perspective,

I think that efficiency play of people looking

at trade execution will be where you’ll see the

most movement in the in the foreseeable future.

But equally, there is still that education process

to go through for front-office outsourcing.

And it will take time – possibly five years–

before more people get comfortable with

the concept, especially for asset managers

who have strongly-held beliefs around how

trading is done. So, it may take time but I

think eventually it will become as common

as middle-office outsourcing is today.

Dan: That’s interesting. It does

takes time. This is not a typical broker

onboarding – it’s more than that. And it

takes time, diligence and governance.

Shane: We’re in a transitional phase for

outsourced trading. It’s advanced beyond

infancy into a mid-maturity phase right now.

We’ll see some stumbling blocks, as always.

But hopefully, if people learn from prior

experience and undertake the right level

of due diligence, it will be possible to

avoid major missteps.

Dan: Very true. I’d like to thank each of you for

a very productive and insightful conversation.

Looking Ahead

13

Transition Management and Brokerage Marketing Materials Disclaimer – North America and APAC

State Street Global Markets® is the business name and a registered trademark of State Street Corporation® used for its financial markets businesses and that of its affiliates. This document is for marketing and/or informational purposes only, it does not take into account any investor’s particular investment objectives, strategies or tax and legal status, it does not purport to be comprehensive nor is it intended to replace the exercise of an investors own careful independent judgement regarding any corresponding investment decision. This document and the information herein does not constitute investment, legal, or tax advice and is not a solicitation to buy or sell securities or other investments, to participate in any trading strategy, and does not constitute investment research. It is not intended to constitute any binding contractual arrangement or commitment by State Street Bank and Trust company or any of its affiliates to provide any products or services.

You should make your own assessment and evaluation of the communication in the light of your needs and circumstances. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. There are risks trading foreign exchange, equities, fixed income or derivative instruments or in investments in non-liquid or emerging markets. Derivatives generally involve leverage and are therefore more volatile than their underlying cash investments.

Any information provided has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable at the time of publication, nonetheless, we cannot guarantee nor do we make any representation or warranty as to their accuracy and you should not place any reliance on such information. State Street Global Markets hereby disclaims all liability, whether arising in contract, tort or otherwise, for any losses, liabilities, damages, expenses or costs arising, either direct or consequential, from or in connection with the use of or any reliance placed upon the information herein.

The communication and information or any portion thereof may not be reprinted, sold or redistributed without the prior written consent of State Street Global Markets. This communication is not intended for retail clients, nor for distribution to, and may not be relied upon by, any person or entity in any jurisdiction or country where such distribution or use would be contrary to applicable law or regulation.

United States. This communication is being distributed in the United States by State Street Bank and Trust Company, authorized and regulated by the Federal Reserve Board and /or State Street Global Markets, LLC, which is regulated by the SEC and a member of FINRA, the NYSE, NFA, MSRB and SIPC. Transition Management Services are offered through State Street Bank and Trust Company; securities products and services are offered through SSGM, LLC.

Canada. This communication, when made available in certain provinces and territories of Canada, is made available by State Street Global Markets Canada, Inc. a member of the Investment Industry Regulatory Organization of Canada.

APACSingapore. This communication is being disseminated by State Street Bank and Trust Company, Singapore Branch (“SSBTS”), which holds a wholesale bank license by the Monetary Authority of Singapore. In Singapore, this communication is only distributed to accredited, institutional investors as defined in the Singapore Financial Advisers Act (“FAA”). Note that SSBTS is exempt from Sections 27 and 36 of the FAA. When this communication is distributed to overseas investors as defined in the FAA, note that SSBTS is exempt from Sections 26, 27, 29 and 36 of the FAA. This advertisement has not been reviewed by the Monetary Authority of Singapore.

14

State Street CorporationOne Lincoln Street, Boston, MA 02111

www.statestreet.com

©2021 State Street Corporation and/or its applicable third party licensor

All Rights Reserved

3617988.1.1.GBL. Expiration date: 6/30/2022

South Korea/Taiwan. The activities that are being discussed are carried out from off-shore; State Street is not licensed to carry on this business within South Korea/Taiwan. Any of the services discussed in these materials are undertaken by State Street Bank and Trust Company in an offshore capacity and are not provided within South Korea/Taiwan.

Japan. This communication is being distributed in Japan by State Street Trust and Banking Co., Ltd. (“SSTB”). SSTB is regulated by the Financial Services Agency of Japan (“FSA”). SSTB is licensed under Article 4 of Banking Act and is registered as Registered Financial Institution with the FSA as Kanto Zaimu-kyokucho (Tokin) No. 648 under Article 33-2 of Financial Instruments and Exchange Act, and also is a member firm of Japan Securities Dealers Association and Japan Investment Advisers Association.

Peoples Republic of China (“PRC”). State Street Bank and Trust Company is not licensed or carrying on business in the PRC in respect of any activities described herein and any such activities it does carry out are conducted outside of the PRC. These written materials do not constitute, and should not be construed as constituting: 1) an offer or invitation to subscribe for or purchase securities or futures in PRC or the making available of securities or futures for purchase or subscription in PRC; 2) the provision of investment advice concerning securities or futures; or 3) an undertaking by State Street Bank and Trust Company to manage the portfolio of securities or futures contracts on behalf of other persons.

Australia. This communication is made available in Australia by State Street Bank and Trust Company ABN 70 062 819 630, AFSL 239679 and is intended only for wholesale clients, as defined in the Corporations Act 2001.

SSGM LLC has an exemption from the requirement to hold an Australian financial services licence under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) in respect of the financial services it provides to wholesale clients in Australia. SSGM LLC is regulated by the Securities and Exchange Commission of the United States under US laws and regulations, which differ from those in Australia.

Please read our Privacy Statement at https://www.statestreet.com/utility/australia/privacy-statement.html. Our Privacy Statement provides important information about how we manage personal information.

Please contact your State Street representative for further information. PS TMBR NA A 2021-01

To learn how State Street looks after your personal data, visit: http://www.statestreet.com/utility/data-processing-and-privacy-notice.html.