Kyle Voigt: Hey, good morning. I like the addition of that chart on flat five that shows the volume growth from some of these newer user segments. I guess the one that I wanted to hone in on that’s all record volume in the quarter was this hedge fund clients and growth there. Just wondering if you could provide a bit more color as to how that’s ramped over the last couple years and where you’re seeing a lot of the growth from – is that from systematic funds or is it from credit hedge funds? And also if you could comment on whether you’re continuing to see growth in the number of those hedge fund clients being onboarded on to the platform as we can – try to think about whether this growth from this segment has momentum and is sustainable as we look ahead?
Chris Concannon: Yes, no, it’s an exciting area, Kyle, that we’ve spent a lot of time on. We have a team dedicated to our hedge fund segment and particularly focused on the systematic fund complex. That’s an area that’s exciting to me because I’ve known these clients from my equity and FX days and they’re all ramping up and gearing up to take advantage of the current fixed income market structure. All to all is a key ingredient to them. They are both – they both cross the spread, but more importantly, they are providers of liquidity and see that as a huge opportunity to launch some of their trading strategies in the fixed income market. In an environment where you only cross spread, it’s very difficult for systematic hedge funds to engage their strategies in that market.
And our all-to-all platform provides them with the ability to both provide liquidity as well as cross spread at a much more reasonable cost. And that’s the key part of their trading strategy. I would say there’s a healthy pipeline of new entry from the systematic fund group. I think we’re still early days. We’ve seen some fund groups have substantial success in the U.S. credit market across both high-yield and high-grade, and they’re certainly expanding that success into other product areas. But I’d say it’s a healthy pipeline, and we’re still a long way off from a more mature entry of that segment.
Kyle Voigt: That’s really helpful. And if I can ask just a follow-up on the muni business. Just wondering if you could talk about the transition of the MuniBrokers business and what that means for revenues and revenue captures – revenue captures rates as we go through that transition. And then maybe you provide some updated thoughts on kind of the long-term potential revenue capture that you see for that muni bond business. I think it was just under maybe $200 per million in the quarter. But I recall that when you launched into the muni space, I think the opportunity at that time felt like the fee capture rates could be closer to $400 or $500 per million. So just wondering maybe if we can get an updated kind of view in terms of long-term, what the fee capture opportunity is and then maybe what the market share opportunity is as you see it today, too.
Chris Concannon: Sure. First, on overall muni, the muni business is thriving. We did hit a record market share in the muni market, so again another record for the quarter. We’re super excited about the integration of MuniBrokers. Our vision of the MuniBrokers acquisition was, one, collection and acquisition of data to help us build our data products across all our products; but also it was the acquisition of more liquidity and more transaction volume, so not only the MuniBrokers business, but also integrating a large quantity of that business into our MarketAxess pool of liquidity. We’ve started that final step of integration and are very excited about the outcome so far, but it’s not a big bang integration. It’s a multistep integration over the course of the next quarter. With regard to capture, I’ll let Chris jump in and answer the capture question.
Chris Gerosa: Hi, Kyle. And just a reminder, the MuniBroker fee model was a subscription-based model. And it ranged anywhere from $60 to $80 per million. And our plan is to convert that volume into Open Trading, where we’ll capture our Open Trading team model. And minding everyone, this is a tax-exempt muni product, which typically ranges between $150 to $200 per million. So we’re looking to capture that either fee card as we transition that volume into our platform.
Kyle Voigt: Great, thank you.
Operator: Thank you. We’ll go next now to Alex Blostein of Goldman Sachs.
Alex Blostein: Hi, guys. Good morning. Thanks for the question. I wanted to jump in a little bit on the high-yield business. Chris, I think, you gave an update on high-grade market share. So I was wondering if you could comment on high yields as well in April. And bigger picture, we’ve seen just more volatility in the market share within high yield over the last, call it, 6 to 9 months. Maybe you could just kind of comment what is the bigger driver of market share shifts we’ve seen month-to-month, and sort of what do you think about is the ideal environment for high-yield share to sort of accelerate on a more consistent basis?
Chris Concannon: Sure. First of all, we obviously saw a record volume and record revenue in our high-yield market in the first quarter. So again, a number of records in the first quarter. As we look at April, obviously, volumes – and TRACE volumes are down substantially across both high grade and high yield. So it’s a more challenging market. And then – but overall, the high-yield market, I’m super excited about. We continue to make headway in the high-yield market. Our OT penetration is a key ingredient in high yield. We saw 51% of our high-yield volume be through Open Trading liquidity, which obviously is where we’re gaining a great deal of market share. But overall, we see high-yield participants enjoying that alternative liquidity, particularly when the market continues to get stressed.
So when there’s volatility in the high-yield market, Open Trading does spike, as I mentioned in my opening remarks. So to the extent there’s additional volatility, to the extent we see high-grade bonds dropping into the high-yield market, we’ll continue to see that volatility throughout the course of the year. And that volatility does — has historically led to higher market share for our Open Trading.
Alex Blostein: Okay. Got you. And I guess the dynamic in March with the decline in high-yield market share was almost too much volatility. Is that kind of how you describe it?
Chris Concannon: Well, there was clear volatility in March throughout and more importantly there’s a number of distressed bonds that we don’t trade in Open Trading during those times. But yes, we saw substantial volatility in March, which also led to some of those spike market shares in our Open Trading solution.
