Blog & News | TRG Screen

Market Data Matters: The December 2025 edition

Written by TRG Screen | 16-12-2025

This is the 10th edition of our industry newsletter with musings, observations and ideas regarding the challenges and opportunities facing market data management leaders.

Outsourcing of market data program administration: What shifted, what surprised in 2025...and what comes next

2025 was the year market data teams ran out of room to maneuver.

Spend rose faster than budgets. Audits multiplied. Licensing rules tightened. And the operational load inside most firms hit a level that simply wasn’t sustainable anymore.

Against that backdrop, outsourcing shifted from a tactical fix to a strategic rethink. But the reasons firms turned to external support, and the reasons others hesitated, were more nuanced than the headline trends suggest.

“This year felt different. The pressure wasn’t incremental. It wasn’t cyclical. It was structural. And we believe it signals a permanent shift in how market data must be managed.”

We sat down with Deepak Rajagopal (Global Head of Customer Care & Managed Services, TRG Screen) and Bernardo Santiago (CEO and Co-Founder, S4 Market Data, a new strategic TRG Screen partner) to unpack what really changed this year and what it means for 2026.

>>> ICYMI: TRG Screen and S4 Market Data Join Forces

Here are the themes that emerged.

The pressures that pushed outsourcing forward

Demand to scale without hiring

Market data teams are expected to advise on sourcing, challenge demand, manage consumption and prevent spend before it happens.

But this kind of work is impossible when teams are stuck in low-value admin, and management is no longer willing to add headcount for manual work that doesn’t move the business forward.

Deepak put it plainly:

 “There’s no joy in having an army of people doing commercial administration activities. No modern financial institution wants to operate like a back-office processing shop anymore.”

Outsourcing has increasingly become the mechanism that frees teams to do the work their stakeholders actually value.

AI changing the operating model

AI began taking over tasks once thought unavoidable:

  • invoice extraction
  • contract updates
  • reconciling triggers
  • usage checks


It doesn’t replace human oversight, but it has fundamentally changed what humans should be doing.

Once firms saw how quickly repetitive work could be automated, expanding internal headcount just to keep up with volume stopped making sense.

As Deepak noted:

“We’re past the point of people keying data. AI initiates the work, and humans verify and sign off. That completely changes what internal teams should be doing.”

For many firms, outsourcing is now the fastest route to an AI-enabled operating model they can’t build internally at the same pace.

Complexity broke the old operating model

Audits activity didn’t just increase; it came from new places. Providers that rarely audited began doing so with the support of third parties.

Bernardo highlighted the shift:

“You used to expect audits from the same handful of providers every few years. Now, audits come from everywhere.”

Suddenly, firms had to defend usage they couldn’t fully trace, justify renewals they didn’t see coming for various reasons, and explain consumption patterns that had spread across desks, regions and systems.

For many, this was the breaking point.

Why some firms still held back

The biggest blocker (and misconception) is fear of losing control – not an uncommon concern heard in B2B around virtually any managed service.

But outsourcing takes away the admin grind, not strategic decisions, not the business relationships, not the oversight. Some teams even worry it replaces them; it doesn’t.

It clears the noise that hides what’s really happening and lets teams focus on the judgment-heavy work only they can do.

The second hesitation is the belief that outsourcing must be all or nothing. In reality, the strongest results come from hybrid models where internal teams stay close to the business, and external partners absorb the operational drag.

And the third misconception is cost.

Bernardo made the distinction clear:

“People assume outsourcing adds cost. Mismanaging market data is what adds cost. Outsourcing usually just exposes what’s already leaking.”

But the more revealing insight was about opportunity cost, the value lost when teams are too stretched to look for it.

Deepak summed it up:

“Most firms compare salaries to vendor fees. What they miss is the value lost in the gaps – the savings no one catches because they’re too busy doing the basics, and the missed opportunity to deliver anything meaningful back to the business.”

The shift no one expected

The biggest behavioral reset of 2025 was the move away from piecemeal outsourcing.

For years, firms handed off one slice of the workflow; tasks like invoice processing, order administration, exchange declarations. But giving away one piece rarely solves anything because everything is interconnected.

If inventory isn’t accurate, invoices won’t reconcile. If usage isn’t governed, renewals become semi-educated guesswork. If sourcing isn’t aligned with demand, costs drift.

Deepak addressed it head-on:

 “What we have learned over the years is if you try to outsource just one piece, all you’re doing is shifting the bottleneck. These workflows are connected end-to-end… you either solve the whole chain or you solve nothing.”

This year, firms shifted from task-based outsourcing to outcome-based expectations, and they increasingly want partners who bring expert insight, not just capacity:

  • What risks are coming?
  • Where is spend creeping?
  • Which vendors are becoming more aggressive?
  • What does the broader market see that they don’t?

This was one of the most defining behavioral resets of the year.

The insights that surprised firms the most

The scale of visibility gaps

When usage and spend were surfaced clearly – rather than buried in tools, spreadsheets or assumptions – firms consistently found:

  • services no one realized were still active,
  • desks closed months ago still accruing cost,
  • duplicate requests for data already licensed,
  • and high-risk licenses receiving almost no oversight.


Deepak describes the typical reaction:

“The moment the data is visualized, you can see the shock. They realize instantly where money is leaking.”

The surprise wasn’t that issues existed.

It was how much leakage and exposure had quietly accumulated beneath the surface.

How quickly visibility turns into real savings

Once firms saw the data clearly, the speed of the impact surprised them.

Decisions that once dragged on - “let’s review this next quarter” - became instant:

"We’re not using that, cut it.”

“That desk closed months ago, shut it off.”

Some firms saw reductions within the first monthly cycle. Many had been carrying legacy costs for months or years without knowing it.

The surprise was in how quickly the savings materialized once the blind spots disappeared.

The risk sitting inside specialist data sets

Use-case restricted feeds and redistribution-sensitive feeds proved far more dangerous than expected.

Some feeds are so tightly licensed that a single misunderstanding can lead to a material liability, and these are often the ones receiving the least attention.

Bernardo was clear:

“These are the feeds that keep people up at night. Not because they’re expensive, but because one wrong move triggers liability.”

The bottom line

2025 marked a real inflection point. Market data management became too complex, too scrutinised and too costly to run the old way.

The firms making progress didn’t just outsource more, they rethought the operating model:

  • What must stay in-house?
  • What actually adds value?
  • What slows teams down?
  • And what risks are quietly building at the edges?


And as Deepak concluded:

“2026 will reward firms that act decisively. The question isn’t whether the operating model will change—it’s whether you’ll lead the change or be forced into it.”

2026 will reward the firms that answer those questions honestly, and act on them.

What the smartest firms are getting right about AI: Four behaviors separating early winners from everyone else

The firms pulling ahead with AI aren’t the ones with the deepest pockets or the loudest voice. They’re the ones rewiring how they work. The models aren’t the differentiator; everyone has them. The behaviors are.
 
The real advantage comes from how firms organize around AI; how they test, how they govern and how they push it into the messy, high-value parts of the work. Across the industry, the same patterns keep showing up.
 
These are the signals our experts see in the firms that will stay ahead.

1. They treat AI as a value engine (not a feature) and aim it at real problems

The firms making meaningful progress aren’t doing AI for the badge. They’re using it to attack the work that actually drags down efficiency: time-consuming manual tasks, slow approvals, entitlement checks that spiral, renewal prep that eats weeks and the points where client delivery gets delayed or diluted.

These firms care about impact and outcomes, not features or optics.

We’re already seeing this play out inside large institutions. And because they start where the business feels the pain - cost, delay, friction, exposure – the results land fast and in ways the business can measure fairly easily.

This is the dividing line: firms chasing use cases lose steam, and the firms that chase value pull ahead.

2. They move early and don’t wait for perfect

Those gaining ground just get started. They don’t spend months polishing the plan. They try things, stand them up quickly and learn inside real workflows.

They know some ideas won’t land, and they treat that as progress. They approach AI as something you build muscle for, not a project you plan endlessly and design to death.

We are already seeing the upside of this mindset in our conversations.

And because they don’t wait for perfection, they find the breakthroughs long before slower-moving firms even begin. Different firms will have different appetites for AI adoption. Some of them will spearhead, others will wait a little for value or security to be proven. But we think that, with enough time, most people will be on AI. It just makes sense from an ROI perspective.

In short: progress beats perfection. Every time. Strive for those fast micro steps that build toward increasing complexity.

3. They’re building AI-first roles (versus bolting AI onto old ones)

The smartest firms aren’t asking where AI ‘fits.’ They’re creating roles with AI at the heart of the job from day one. Dedicated roles that supervise, orchestrate, challenge, guide and enable AI-led processes – including the all-important AI upskilling and culture development across teams. Roles that understand when to trust the system, and when human judgment needs to override it.

We’ve seen several global institutions create AI-specific leadership positions – in a few cases at board level – to steer how AI contributes to customer value and operational outcomes. (It’s something we’ve done ourselves this year.)

It’s a clear signal of how seriously they’re taking the shift: they’re designing their organization for the world that’s coming, not the one they’re already in.

4. They treat data stewardship as non-negotiable

Under every credible AI program sits something unglamorous but essential: data that’s curated, maintained and understood by people who know the domain.

One of the strongest signals we are seeing is the increased importance of dedicated data stewards; the people who understand rules, policies and logic enough to curate the inputs AI relies on.

Winning firms give ownership to experts. They protect input quality. They keep the rules tight and current. They understand a simple truth: AI can only reason as well as the information it’s fed, and that information only stays reliable when domain experts are accountable for it.

This is the backbone of every dependable AI outcome.

Where this leaves the industry

The gap is starting to show.

Some firms are collecting AI features: a chatbot here, a summarizer there. Others are building capability: value-first adoption, disciplined experimentation, AI-shaped roles, real data foundations.

The firms acting now are the ones building the muscle memory they’ll need for what comes next. And at the pace this is moving, next is never far away.
 
If you're new to Market Data Matters, welcome! If you've read prior editions, you're likely noticing every edition now touches on AI. That's because it comes up in most of our client conversations and is very top of mind for executives on our customer advisory board. How does your company stack up against the 4 traits? 

And on the subject of outsourcing, have you and your team debated some of these same issues? If so, you're not alone. Look at your most painful processes. That's where outsourcing can usually help your team get unstuck, so you can deliver more business value. 

Thanks for taking time to read Market Data Matters! Don't forget to subscribe if you haven't yet.