Broadgate, part of Ortecha, helped a FTSE 250 asset manager select a new investment accounting platform by assessing its operating model, defining cross-asset requirements, and running a structured selection process. The result was a ~£500k annual cost reduction and a cloud-based platform with stronger data and analytics capability.
When a platform no longer supports the full shape of the business, the risk is not just inefficiency. It is making the wrong replacement decision.
Scope:
Operating model assessment across investment accounting
Cross-asset requirements definition
Vendor longlist and shortlist
Structured selection process and light tender
Interactive demos with business users
Transition planning support
Impact:
Selected platform aligned to all asset class requirements
~£500k annual reduction in platform and related costs
Simplified architecture through removal of ancillary products
Improved data and analytics capability
Smooth implementation experience
The issue was not that the platform had failed. It no longer fit the full business.
The existing investment accounting system could not properly support all of the asset classes the client needed to manage. This created gaps across operations. Teams were working around limitations. Data was harder to use consistently. Effort increased just to keep things running.
The risk was building quietly. Not from a single failure, but from a growing mismatch between the platform and the business it was meant to support.
This was not a routine system change. It was a decision with operational, financial and long-term implications.
The client needed an independent, experienced view to guide the selection. We brought a structured approach grounded in delivery experience. The focus was clear. Define what the business actually needs across asset classes. Then select the platform that fits it.
This was not about comparing vendors.
Our client needed to answer a more fundamental question. What should investment accounting look like for this business going forward?
That meant understanding:
Without that clarity, any selection process would risk choosing a platform that solved only part of the problem.
We started with the operating model. Not the technology.
We worked across the business to define requirements based on real usage. This included both current needs and future data and analytics ambitions. It created a clear, shared view of what the platform needed to support across all asset classes.
We then identified viable options, including both platform solutions and outsourcing routes. The client was choosing between operating models, not just products.
A focused shortlist was taken through a structured selection process. This included a light tender and interactive demos with business users. Stakeholders tested each option against real scenarios, building confidence in the final decision.
The objective was simple. Select a platform that works across the full business, not just part of it.
Our client selected a new investment accounting platform that met requirements across all asset classes and supported a cloud-based future.
The results were clear:
The transition was equally important. With clear planning in place, the implementation was described as one of the smoothest the client had experienced.
Platform decisions shape how a business operates for years.
If the platform only fits part of the business, the gaps show up everywhere. In cost. In workarounds. In data quality. In future change.
This work helped the client make the right decision first time. Not just selecting a new system, but choosing a platform that supports the full shape of the business.
The result is a stronger foundation for operations and future growth.
A UK‑based FTSE 250 investment manager operating across multiple asset classes in a highly regulated environment. As complexity increased, the organisation needed clearer foundations across technology, data and risk to support confident decision‑making.
Partner, Technology Transformation
Partner, Technology Transformation
