Ravi Narain, MD of the National Stock Exchange, believes that the bourse under his control is not hollow, shallow or illiquid. But his ‘explanation’ only raises more questions
A few days ago, Moneylife quoted from answers provided by the minister of state for finance, Namo Narain Meena, which showed how hollow, shallow and illiquid was the Indian capital market (see: http://www.moneylife.in/article/72/8312.html and http://www.moneylife.in/article/72/8347.html).
We had pointed out that large chunks of trading is concentrated in the hands of a few hundred people - a fact that is completely hidden by the stupendous trading volumes of Rs12,000 crore plus (in the cash market) and Rs100,000 crore (or so, in the derivatives market).
Ravi Narain, managing director & CEO of the National Stock Exchange (NSE) has now dashed off letters to various people in government and the planning commission alleging that some "misleading news reports/articles have selectively quoted data from the above submission to try and denigrate the growth and development of the capital market in India."
We don't know who Mr Narain has referred to, but Moneylife has certainly quoted and reproduced the ENTIRE data in the answers by Mr Meena on 10th August in response to questions by two members of Parliament. Please see link to Parliament questions here: (http://164.100.47.4/newrsquestion/ShowQn.aspx).
Mr Narain then goes on to quote a host of numbers and figures (which we will present below) to try and mitigate the shock and surprise caused by Mr Meena's revelations in response to a question in Parliament.
However, before going into those, it is important to understand why Mr Meena's revelations in Parliament were so startling. The NSE, although it is a near monopoly (96% market share) and a first line regulator, has consistently fought the applicability of the Right to Information Act (RTI) to its activities. It filed a lawsuit in the Delhi High Court against the Chief Information Commissioner's order that the RTI Act was applicable to it. On losing the case, it has filed an appeal before the divisional bench. It is not open to media queries either, unless it wishes to respond. Even its annual report is not easily available in the public domain.
Here is what Mr Narain's letter says in summary:
Referring to our articles (without naming Moneylife), Mr Narain writes, "some of the news reports/ articles mentioned above stated that the Indian Capital Market growth was skewed, based on the contribution of a top few clients in the total trading activity. As you are no doubt aware, in any capital market, it is natural for large institutional investors to be the major contributors to the total volumes. When we consider that money invested by these institutional investors is made up of contributions from a large retail investor population, it becomes clear that the client base is by no means modest".
This claim is mere fudging of facts as we will show later.
Lastly it says that the top 10 brokerage firms on the NSE contribute to 24% of total trading activity, while on the New York Stock Exchange they contribute to 38% of trading, in Malaysia to 66% of trading etc. This shows that the Indian market is more widespread than in some mature and developing markets.
Now let us go back to what Mr Meena said in Parliament. His answer revealed that just 537 investors account for 70% of trading, 223 investors accounted for 60% of trading, of which over half were proprietary brokerage firms. And a massive 50% of NSE's derivatives trading turnover, the main pillar of the Indian stock market system, comes from just 106 investors of which 58 are proprietary traders! Mr Narain completely ignores the "proprietary trading" aspect, because it would expose that these are by no means an aggregation of the funds of retail investors.
In point 10, Mr Narain is making a new revelation by slicing the data to show the trading volumes of the top 10 brokers. In fact the minister only gave out information about the top 25 brokerage firms on the NSE, who he said accounted for 42% and 43% of the cash equity and equity stock futures and options turnover in the April-June 2010 period.
Will NSE be willing to go public with the names of these 25 brokerages first and give us a split of their proprietary trades and those done for their clients? That will probably require another question in Parliament. In fact, every answer given by the NSE chief only exposes how it is clutching at straws to justify its monopoly existence. For instance, what is the point of two lakh trading terminals when 90% of the cash market volume is generated by only 192,200 investors in an entire quarter, at Rs12,000 crore a day and 90% of derivatives trading comes from a mere 18,035 investors in an entire quarter, at a phenomenal Rs100,000 crore a day.
Frankly, if the NSE's selective statistics about other markets are to be believed, it must put out a like-to-like comparison based on the exact answers that Mr Meena provided in Parliament. But that will require the secretive bourse to reveal far more than it has ever done in the history of its 15-year existence.
Inside story of the National Stock Exchange’s amazing success, leading to hubris, regulatory capture and algo scam

Fiercely independent and pro-consumer information on personal finance.
1-year online access to the magazine articles published during the subscription period.
Access is given for all articles published during the week (starting Monday) your subscription starts. For example, if you subscribe on Wednesday, you will have access to articles uploaded from Monday of that week.
This means access to other articles (outside the subscription period) are not included.
Articles outside the subscription period can be bought separately for a small price per article.

Fiercely independent and pro-consumer information on personal finance.
30-day online access to the magazine articles published during the subscription period.
Access is given for all articles published during the week (starting Monday) your subscription starts. For example, if you subscribe on Wednesday, you will have access to articles uploaded from Monday of that week.
This means access to other articles (outside the subscription period) are not included.
Articles outside the subscription period can be bought separately for a small price per article.

Fiercely independent and pro-consumer information on personal finance.
Complete access to Moneylife archives since inception ( till the date of your subscription )

SEBI has done a really bad job by not bringing NSE under RTI Act. This is the bed-rock in investor-security. There is no guarantee that NSE will not go belly-up one day. If you can suspect a country like United States to go bankrupt or Euro Zone or other Sovereigns to go bankrupt, it is just as likely (more likely, actually) that NSE too can go bankrupt. Hiding its affairs from the state/people does not make is stronger or safer. The blame should lie entirely with SEBI for not having acted on the critical constituent of capital markets.
Personally, I do not think NSE will have any incentive to open itself up and upset its cozy nexus with brokers. And as long as the information - the most critical component in trading / investing - is selectively distributed Retail investors are NOT safe at all. They are like poultry or cattle, raised only to be slaughtered.
I have read extracts of Mr Narain letter widely reported in so called frontline media (ET, FE, BS, Hindu, CNBE, Mint), reporting is not balanced at all, moreover Mr Narains response is more arrogant than credible, and twisting Ms Dalal’s words out of context quite ‘hollow and shallow’ as if she does not know what she is writing about, but probably he has bitten more that what he can chew because in order to ridicule her he has ridiculed the minister. I hope that he can afford to anger a minister and get away with it. I will watch this space with great interest, hope and cynicism, all together.
All the best
take it further, request Hon. MP to ask for identities of these entities
i would sincerely thank Ms Sucheta Dalal and Moneylife for helping me out.
His comment illustrates something important - the wide gulf between theory and practice. People who write opinions based on sterile numbers will not understand the difference unless he/she actually goes through an adverse situation. We don't want to censure anyone but we are really amused by apparently well-argued positions which have no truck with what happens on the ground. These don't take forward the debate. Its just another opinion based on no facts
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
MINISTRY OF FINANCE
RAJYA SABHA
QUESTION NO 1669
ANSWERED ON 10.08.2010
TRADING IN NSE
1669 SHRI SUKH DEV DHINDSA
Will the Minister of FINANCE be pleased to satate :-
(a) the number of clients identities and PAN identities who trade actively in National Stock Exchange (NSE) and contribute 50 per cent, 60 per cent, 70 per cent, 80 per cent and 90 per cent of the total trading turnover on average daily basis in the Cash Equity and Equity Futures and Options segment;
(b) how many of these trades are proprietary trades; and
(c) the percentage of turnover on average daily basis contributed by top 25 brokers of (NSE) in the Cash Equity and Equity Futures and Options segment separately?
ANSWER
MINISTER OF STATE IN THE MINISTRY OF FINANCE (SHRI NAMO NARAIN MEENA)
(a) & (b): During the first quarter of the current financial year (Apr-Jun 2010), more than 30.90 lakh clients traded on the cash equity segment of NSE. About 52% of the Exchange turnover was contributed by retail, High Net-worth Individuals (HNI), corporate clients etc., while institutional clients contributed about 24% and proprietary traders contributed about 24% of the turnover. Of the above, about 1,92,200 clients (including 582 proprietary traders) contributed to 90%, 41,654 clients (including 499 proprietary traders) contributed 80%, 8,727 (including 4)3 proprietary traders) clients contributed 70%, 1,563 clients (including 271 proprietary traders) contributed to 60% and 451 clients (including 156 proprietary traders) contributed to 50% of the turnover of the Exchange. During the above period, more than 5.57 lakh clients traded on the Futures & Options segments of NSE. About 52% of the Exchange turnover was contributed by retail, HNI, corporate clients etc while institutional clients contributed about 12% and proprietary traders contributed about 36% of the turnover. Of the above, about 18,035 clients (including 520 proprietary traders) contributed to 90%, 2,188 clients (including 363 proprietary traders) contributed 80%, 537 (including 207 proprietary traders) clients contributed 70%, 223 clients (including 118 proprietary traders) contributed to 60% and 106 clients (including 58 proprietary traders) contributed to 50% of the turnover of the Exchange.
(c): The top 25 trading members of NSE accounted for about 42% and 43% of the cash equity and equity stock futures and options turnover respectively during the period April to June 2010.
This link does not work.
Also, some number error in this paragraph reproduced below.
Average trade size on NSE has gone up 80% from Rs 1,12,000 in 1996-97 to Rs23,000 in the first quarter of 2009-10 is evidence of increased retail participation.
Why do you say NSE is refuting its own data? They have just provided a credible explanation. But even before this explanation, was it not apparent that some 500 odd brokerages dominate the show? Was it not apparent that the the demat pool-account arrangement that brokerages run for their lakhs of clients is behind this 'skewed' numbers? Proprietary trading is also no sin. It contributes to market-making and volumes. Still, I know a couple of big brokerages that never do proprietary trades, even if it is due to the huge risks involved. Also, I sincerely think that you should never have brought up the issue of NSE not advertising in Money Life. That dilutes your arguments to a great extent. Please stick to your core competencies like exposing corrupt practices like circular trading etc. The need of the day is educating retail investors against gambling-class day trading and promoting long-term investments in well managed companies.
The issue is important because several companies use their advertising budgets to silence and punish independent publications. If you are indeed a non-partisan reader, this issue ought to have attracted your attention and agitated you as a concerned citizen.
Further, since you apparently do not spend time on this website, you have probably not noticed the existence of Moneylife Foundation, our not-for-profit affiliate, where we spend a lot of our personal time on "educating retail investors" in a non-partisan manner without hawking any particular product, company or service. Try attending our workshops sometime.
Also, instead of spending so much of your valuable time on defending the NSE here (it has a lot of resources to defend itself), please look at the mainline publications and how they have reported this issue. Ask them the same questions you are directing at us.
Finally, why don't you use your goodwill with the NSE to get some facts into the public domain? It will make you seem less like an advocate for the NSE.
Lets start with one simple question: How much did the NSE spend on advertising and seminars in the past three years? Who were the top 25 beneficiaries? How much money was disbursed to each of them?
We would like your enlightened comments on the NSE expending such a major effort to fight the applicability of the Right to Information Act.
best regards
Brokerage profession is of service provider and carrying their own trade is conflick of interest. Doctors and advocates or CA are not allowed to become even partner in trading firms. advocates cannot become partners. but indian brokers are very special they can enter in any business wait till govt allows foreigh brokerage houses to go retial and allow to open shops in rural area thing will change.
I hope i have not offended you but prey sebi reads my comments
I says NSE refutes its own data because the Minister of State for Finance did not do the job of an investigative journalist to dig up the information. His office would have asked the NSE and given parliament the exact same information they got from the exchange. Also if you bother to open the link to the Rajya Sabha question, it is clear that we have not been selective nor distorted the information. But you havent noticed that??? incidentally, just for future reference, what is your core competency?
Thanks for your reply. Sorry to have irritated you. I can understand the pressure in heading a magazine, that too against the tide. I have no vested interest towards NSE. I am just a small time investor, but a prudent one at that, who has made some small time money using both BSE & NSE infrastrucure. I am also a regular and avid reader of all things about investing including Money Life. No other core competencies or credentials, though I try to write a bit. Though many of your stories have been quite good, you have this tendency to go overboard a bit. Why not stick to the kind of fair balance stuck to by, say, Hindu Business Line? They had written on the same subject but explaining this crucial difference between proprietary trades and pool accounts. Why make a crusade out of everything? And when you - maybe inadvertently - put that line about NSE not providing advertising support to you, it occured to me as quite unfortunate. A journalist of your calibre and track-record cribbing about such things? My comment was out of respect for you. No other mal intentions.
Cheers!
I chose only that point because that is the crux of this debate - whether Indian capital markets is controlled by 500 odd individuals. What I am saying is these 500 odd brokers / brokerages are acting on behalf of their lakhs of retail customers through the demat pool accounts for arrangements like margin trading, BTST, short-term holds etc. I don't have any other issues raised in this article. But this single thing will remain the focus of this debate. Unfortunate that my suggestions to Money Life offended another person, even before ML is offended, or even if ML will never be offended with such constructive criticism!
Firstly, the NSE certainly has a point when they mention the fact that these 'large' investors are actually investing on behalf of many other smaller investors. So the situation is not as dire as you say it is.
On the other hand, some of their arguments do appear ill conceived and stupid, and displays a behaviour that does not go with it's projection as an institution that 'saved' investors from rapacious exchanges like the BSE etc. It is a projection that has a lot of weight, if you think back to the days of the BSE.
But has the saviour become the oppressor? Not yet. Although their secretive behaviour would certainly indicate that they have started of on that path.
A word about the media here. As always, the business media, with their totally one sided positive coverage of the NSE all these years, have been a big dissapointment. As usual.
Regards
kishore ghiya rajkot mob 9825217857
We think that all data needs to be public. Telling investors the names of brokers who dominate business is imperative. Telling them the names of really large brokerage firms that do not do prop trading is also crucial for investor protection. Incidentally, NSE's latest results are still not in the public domanin, although BSE's are.
It is protection of their interest and status only
Otherwise all trades by all participants should be open to all. Why anyone should be hungry to ask " what FII are buying or what Madhu Kela is buying. Why select few sud get that knowledge and not all ?
ANTI - NSE = NSE claims protection of a semi government body claiming its bye-laws to be statutory but for giving info under RTI, it is not a govt body.