The Changing Role of e-FX Sales and Why Experience Matters – Part One

In the latest in The Full FX’ Voice of Experience series, Zach Felshman takes a look – over two parts – at one of the crucial roles in our business, e-FX sales. In Part One Zach takes a look at the structural side of the issue

An e-FX business rarely loses revenue because it lacks another platform connection. More often, it loses revenue because nobody has established why clients route flow elsewhere, which problems are worth fixing, or where investment will generate the greatest return. That is the difference between an e-FX salesperson who only supports distribution and one who helps build the business.

FX is increasingly automated, data-rich and competitive – clients can compare liquidity, execution and services across banks and venues, often in real time. Knowing where a bank is connected is no longer enough. The advantage comes from understanding how clients trade, what their flow is worth, what the trading desk can improve and how to turn those insights into changed behaviour.

The central thesis is simple: experienced e-FX sales is not a platform-mapping function. It connects client behaviour to trading economics, technology investment, digital strategy and revenue growth. The best e-FX salesperson becomes the connective tissue between clients, sales, trading, technology, digital product teams and management.

Good e-FX sales means understanding why a client trades the way it does, how that behaviour translates into electronic revenue, what the trading desk can do with the information, and where technology can create a commercial advantage for both client and bank.

Where Should e-FX Sales Sit?

There is no single correct organisational model. Put e-FX sales too far inside trading and it can become focused on execution, pricing and flow while losing sight of the broader client relationship. Put it too far inside traditional sales and the salesperson may understand the client but lack influence over pricing, liquidity, technology or trading strategy.

The most effective model positions e-FX sales at the intersection of the client franchise, trading and the bank’s digital framework. It needs enough proximity to trading to understand flow economics, and enough proximity to clients to understand the commercial problem. It also needs enough influence with digital and technology teams to ensure capabilities are built around real demand.

That creates a feedback loop: Client → e-FX Sales → Trading, Digital and Technology → Client.

The salesperson brings client requirements and behaviour into the bank, while trading provides liquidity, pricing and risk-management capability. Digital and technology teams provide the workflows, APIs, algorithms, connectivity, data and controls needed to deliver that capability at scale, which e-FX sales then takes as the combined proposition back to the client.

A digital framework should not be treated as a separate technology agenda. It is the operating model through which the bank delivers electronic products, manages data, automates workflows and distributes liquidity. E-FX sales should help shape it, not simply consume it.

The role is not to ask technology to build every client request. It is to distinguish between a one-off preference; a recurring client need; a scalable product opportunity or a capability that improves the economics of the entire franchise. That distinction is one of the reasons experience matters.

What Should e-FX Revenue Actually Mean?

A bank should not evaluate electronic clients solely on notional volume or gross spread. A more useful framework considers a range of factors:

• Gross trading revenue
• Net margin after liquidity and hedging costs
• Technology and connectivity costs
• Credit and balance-sheet usage
• Operational support costs
• Client growth potential
• Cross-product value
• Strategic importance
• The incremental value of improving the relationship

This does not require a perfect profitability model for every client, but it does require avoiding a single metric for complex resource-allocation decisions.

A client generating large volumes at very low margin may consume substantial liquidity, credit and technology resources while contributing little incremental value. Another may generate less current revenue but have strong potential if the bank improves algorithmic execution, supports a new workflow or provides balance sheet solutions. Margin should therefore matter, but it should not be the only measure of value.

The key question is “What is the expected incremental return from investing in this client, capability or workflow?”

That brings balance-sheet and financing efficiency into the commercial framework. If electronic execution helps the bank manage risk, improve internalisation, reduce manual processing or use liquidity more intelligently, those benefits should influence evaluation. If a client values financing, credit or balance-sheet capacity alongside execution, the relationship should not be measured as though it were only a spot spread.

The economics may sit across several parts of the bank. Experienced e-FX sales can make that broader value visible.

Margin Should Influence Priority – But Not Dictate It

A client with low current margin is not necessarily a bad client. The bank may be losing economics because pricing is uncompetitive, the client is routing only a small share of potential flow, a workflow is missing, the client is growing rapidly, or financing and balance-sheet value are not reflected in e-FX measurement.

The relationship may also be strategically important because winning one part of the client’s business creates access to other products. Experienced e-FX sales should distinguish between low-value flow and underdeveloped flow, because they are not the same. The first may deserve fewer resources; the second may deserve more – that distinction can materially affect investment in trading, technology, digital and sales.

The Best Relationship is Not Sales Versus Trading

Sales wants to win the client, while trading wants to protect the economics. Both are right.

The solution is shared visibility around the value of the flow. Sales should understand what makes flow valuable to the desk, trading should understand what the client values. Equally, digital and technology teams should understand which capabilities can be delivered repeatedly and at scale.

The objective is not simply to maximise today’s revenue, it is to maximise the long-term value of the client relationship. Sales should be able to say, “This client is asking for tighter pricing, but I believe we can increase wallet significantly if we solve this specific execution issue.” Trading might respond, “We can improve pricing under these conditions, but we need the client to change its flow profile.” Digital might add,” We can support this workflow using an existing capability, but a bespoke build would not be scalable.”

That becomes a commercial negotiation rather than an internal argument, and e-FX sales sits at the centre of it.

Zach Felshman has worked in e-FX sales for almost 30 years, most recently at CIBC Capital Markets in New York