FIGI - 24% of Asset Managers?

A recent article in The Trade News makes some bold assertions.  Let's examine:

"A large proportion of investment management firms have said incorrect securities identification is responsible for a significant portion of failed trades, leading them to opt for a standardised symbology framework."

Well, define "large" and "significant" and then we can make progress...

"Research from TABB Group found 40% of buy-side firms said problems with securities identification lead to between 1%-5% of trade failures, while 10% of firms said it can cause between 6% and 10% of trade failures."

That makes sense so far...

"...24% of buy-side firms expect to pay less for licences as they move towards an open financial instrument global identifier methodology (FIGI)"

Now this is interesting...

We have looked at FIGI in 2015 in "Bloomberg Open Symbology, F2 & FIX Interactive Interface Definition Language - game-changer?", indirectly in "The market data product that the global financial services industry really wants...." and again indirectly in "ISIN+MIC is not enough" and then "Openfigi+ cURL = ?"

Unless something changed, not convinced by these numbers from TABB via The Trade News.

As we previously wrote "The devil is in the details and instrument symbology is all about details..."