r/deal-flow

Anyone else finding the KYB process for new OTC block liquidity providers increasingly cumbersome, especially for non-US entities? We've been evaluating a few medium-tier firms lately, trying to diversify execution, and the paperwork required feels disproportionate to the typical daily notional we'd run through them initially. It's not just the volume of documents, but the repeated requests for information already submitted, or slight variations on the same proof of address/activity. Starts to eat into the perceived benefit of competitive spreads when the operational overhead stacks up. Curious if this is just our experience or a broader trend impacting deal flow.

Anyone else hitting consistent walls when trying to onboard an EU-regulated entity with a non-EU liquidity provider, specifically around the KYB process? It feels like we're always furnishing the same documents multiple times, sometimes to the same provider, with minor shifts in the exact 'flavor' of due diligence they require. \n\nIt’s less about the volume of docs and more about the moving goalposts, making what should be a straightforward integration a multi-week exercise in bureaucratic ping-pong. Are there any particular jurisdictions or types of LPs that are generally more streamlined for EU entities, or is this just the price of doing business across these regulatory borders these days?

Anyone else hitting consistent snags with prop firm payout processing lately? Seems like the onboarding for KYC/KYB is a breeze, but then once you're actually pulling profits, the timelines stretch, and the hoops multiply. I'm talking about firms that promote quick withdrawals but then take weeks, citing 'internal audits' or 'bank holidays' that weren't an issue during deposit. It's not just one firm; seeing a pattern develop. Wondering if it's a new industry-wide trend or just bad luck on my end. Hard to scale when you're waiting on capital that long.

Curious if others are still finding the onboarding process for prop firm capital particularly glacial, especially when it comes to the KYB/AML side for new entities. We're well-established, clean record, yet every new integration feels like pulling teeth with requests for documents already provided, redundant attestation, and seemingly arbitrary delays. It's not just the initial setup, but sometimes even changes in signatories or beneficial owners trigger another full-blown, multi-week review cycle. This friction point is starting to genuinely impact our ability to diversify capital sources efficiently.

Are certain jurisdictions or firm types proving more agile in their due diligence, or is this just the new baseline for risk aversion across the board? I'm less concerned with the specific forms than the timeline and the apparent lack of internal process streamlining within some of these firms' compliance departments. It feels like a significant drag on deal flow when you have a good strategy but are perpetually stuck in regulatory purgatory trying to get funded.

Noticing a significant ramp-up in due diligence requirements for prop firm accounts pushing into 7-figure allocations, even with established track records. Curious if others are experiencing similar bottlenecks, specifically around source of wealth attestations or novel documentation requests beyond standard AML/KYC.

Running into persistent bottlenecks with onboarding new counterparties for larger OTC block trades, especially on the crypto side. The KYC/AML process, while necessary, seems to vary wildly in its demands and execution across different prop firms and even with some traditional banking institutions trying to bridge into the digital asset space. It's not just the initial paperwork; it's the back-and-forth, the inconsistencies in document requests, and the lack of clarity on estimated approval times that really grind deal flow to a halt. Are others experiencing similar operational drag? How are you mitigating the impact on time-sensitive opportunities, particularly when liquidity might be fragmented and you're trying to secure better pricing for clients beyond exchange order books? Curious if there are best practices or particular 'fast-track' approaches some of you have found effective without compromising compliance.

Anyone else finding the KYB process for new prop firm integrations particularly arduous lately, specifically for firms dealing in structured product flow? We're seeing increasing friction around proving liquidity sources and the underlying client agreements, even with established track records. It feels like a significant drag on getting new relationships operational, impacting potential deal flow turnaround. Are others experiencing this, or is it isolated to certain jurisdictions/asset classes?

Hey everyone, wondering if anyone else has been experiencing more friction lately with onboarding to new prop firms, especially around the KYB process. It seems like the scrutiny has ramped up considerably, and what used to be a couple of days now drags on for weeks sometimes. Also, on the fee side, are you finding any particular models or structures (e.g., fixed spreads, tiered commissions, or subscription-based access) that are proving more transparent or cost-effective for active traders? The landscape feels like it's shifting, and I'm curious about others' experiences and what they've found to be the 'least worst' option for managing costs without sacrificing execution quality.

We're currently expanding our operations, needing deeper liquidity pools across several jurisdictions, particularly for less liquid crosses and some of the more niche digital assets. The onboarding process with new prop firms and even some prime brokers has been surprisingly arduous, requiring repeat submissions of KYB docs that are essentially identical to what we've already provided to existing partners within the same group. It's creating significant delays.

Anyone else experiencing this redundant KYB friction when trying to integrate new liquidity providers for specialized assets, even when the parent company is well-established? Seems like an unnecessary drag on deal flow.

Anyone else hitting consistent walls trying to onboard an EU-regulated entity with non-EU liquidity providers? The KYB seems to be a never-ending loop of 'just one more document' even after providing everything upfront. It's becoming a significant drain on resources.

We're a multi-entity firm, each with distinct legal structures, operating in several jurisdictions. When engaging new payment service providers (PSPs) or even traditional banking partners, the Know Your Business (KYB) process consistently bogs us down. Each entity, despite being under a common parent, often requires its own full onboarding, duplicating effort for documentation and verification across the board.

Has anyone found efficient ways to streamline this with various providers? Are there specific PSPs or banks that offer a more integrated, parent-company level KYB process for complex corporate structures, rather than treating each subsidiary as a completely fresh application? The cumulative time sink is starting to impact our ability to onboard new financial partners swiftly, especially when dealing with slightly more niche liquidity solutions.

Anyone else seeing increased friction, specifically around enhanced KYB/AML for businesses dealing in less conventional asset classes, even when fully regulated? It's making new PSP integrations a multi-month ordeal and cutting into potential deal flow.

Anyone else finding KYC/AML processes significantly more cumbersome lately, especially for new prop firm accounts or institutional liquidity providers? The documentation requests seem to be getting more granular, extending onboarding timelines considerably. Curious if firms are seeing similar trends or if it's just my recent experience.

We've been vetting a few new LPs to diversify execution and mitigate single-provider risk, particularly on some less liquid crosses where we've seen slippage widen recently. The KYB process has been surprisingly inconsistent across the board. Some are incredibly streamlined, almost entirely digital, while others still require a stack of notarized documents and weeks of back-and-forth. It's creating a bottleneck internally, and I'm curious if others are experiencing similar inefficiencies when trying to integrate new partners, or if we're just hitting a few laggards.

Anyone else hit a brick wall trying to onboard with some of the smaller payment service providers when you're pushing serious FX volume? I'm talking a scenario where the fees look great on paper, but the KYB process turns into a multi-month saga of endless document requests and a compliance team that seems to be operating in a different time zone. It's frustrating because the larger players like Stripe or Wise have their own drawbacks (spreads/volume limits), but at least you can get through the door without feeling like you're applying for a security clearance. Just curious if others have found a sweet spot with a PSP that handles decent volume and has a streamlined, sensible onboarding for non-institutional players.

Alright, so we're running a boutique quant strategy, not exactly a multi-billion-dollar hedge fund, but certainly beyond a solo retail trader. We've been shopping around for a new prime broker or even just a solid PSP that can handle decent volume without gouging on spreads and, crucially, reliably process payouts. The issue isn't finding options; it's the absolute gauntlet of KYB and onboarding, even for relatively straightforward corporate structures.

It feels like every institution has ramped up their due diligence to a point where you need to submit your grandmother's dental records just to get a demo account. We get it, regulations are tighter, AML/CTF is serious, but the sheer inefficiency and often contradictory requests between different departments within the same firm are maddening. Documents they swear they received disappear, requests for the same piece of information three different ways, the whole nine yards. It's burning serious ops hours that could be spent, you know, actually trading. Has anyone found a broker or PSP that's managed to streamline this process for smaller, legitimate firms, or are we all just destined to spend a quarter of our time chasing paper trails?

Been expanding our operations recently, and with that comes the usual deep dive into payment service providers. We're running into a persistent challenge with payout reliability, especially when dealing with higher-than-average volume spikes. It's not just the speed of the payouts, which many promise, but the consistency and transparency when a payment gets flagged or delayed. Some new entrants seem fantastic on paper with competitive spreads and low fees initially, but once you start pushing serious flow, the back-office support for reconciliation or unblocking funds can be abysmal.

I'm curious to hear others' experiences, particularly those handling significant daily transaction volumes, say, seven figures plus across multiple currencies. How do you vet new PSPs for their true payout robustness, beyond just the marketing collateral? Are there specific questions or red flags you look for regarding their banking relationships, rather than just their tech stack? We've learned the hard way that a slick UI doesn't always translate to solid backend liquidity or efficient compliance processes when the rubber meets the road. Would appreciate any insights on due diligence strategies that go beyond the typical KYB/AML checks to truly assess operational resilience.

Anyone else hit significant friction when onboarding a corporate entity that's effectively multi-jurisdictional for its ultimate beneficial ownership (UBO)? We're talking multiple layers of holding companies, some offshore, and then individual UBOs spanning three different continents. The KYC/KYB for a standard regulated broker or PSP can become an absolute nightmare.

It feels like every provider has a slightly different interpretation of what's really needed, or their tech stack just isn't built to handle the complexity without endless email chains and document requests that were already provided. It delays everything. We're currently reviewing a new setup for managing our $FX block trades and it’s becoming a significant bottleneck. Any pointers on how to streamline this process, beyond just having everything perfectly collated beforehand?

Anyone else hitting major friction points with onboarding new crypto liquidity providers for mid-cap tokens? We're talking established firms, good volume, proper KYC/AML. It feels like every provider has a different set of hoops, and the timelines are just ridiculous. We're bleeding opportunity on spreads waiting 4-6 weeks for full integration. Curious if this is just our experience or a widespread industry pain point.

We're an established EU-based HFT desk, primarily trading $EURUSD and various major indices. Increasingly, we're finding that the KYC/KYB process for new brokers, particularly those outside of traditional tier-1 banking institutions, has become an absolute quagmire. We're talking 6-8 weeks for what should be a straightforward institutional onboarding, often with redundant requests for documents already provided, or demands for obscure certifications that seem to change midway through the process. This eats into deployment time and, frankly, opportunity cost. Is anyone else experiencing this level of operational friction lately, or have we just been unlucky with a string of less-than-efficient compliance departments? Curious to hear if there are specific regions or types of regulated entities that seem to navigate this more smoothly.

Running into a few new PSPs lately; some offer remarkably fast onboarding, almost too fast. Wondering if anyone has found a sweet spot where the KYB/AML is thorough enough to prevent later headaches, but doesn't drag out the initial setup for weeks.

Starting to feel like KYB is the new choke point. Trying to onboard several new prop firms and PSPs for various strategies, and the average turnaround from initial contact to live funding is stretching past 6-8 weeks. It's not just the docs, it's the back-and-forth, the re-submission of information that was already provided, the 'our compliance team is reviewing' black hole. We're talking established entities, not fly-by-nights. This isn't just an annoyance, it's actual opportunity cost with capital sitting idle. Is this just the current state of play, or am I hitting a bad patch? What's your experience been recently with time-to-live for new institutional accounts?

Anyone else finding the KYC/AML process for new institutional accounts increasingly cumbersome when trying to set up OTC block trade lines? We've had a few promising deals stall out simply because getting through the onboarding for a new counterparty, especially smaller, agile prop shops, feels like navigating a bureaucratic maze. It's slowing down deal flow unnecessarily.

It feels like every new prop firm or brokerage onboarding process is taking weeks, even with all documents in order. The back-and-forth on minor details is killing potential deal flow and capital deployment.

We're a multi-strategy prop desk operating with around $50M AUM, focusing heavily on quant arbitrage strategies. Lately, we've been trying to diversify our prime broker relationships to optimize for tighter spreads on certain FX pairs and broaden access to specific derivatives markets. The onboarding process with several tier-2 and even some smaller tier-1 banks has been surprisingly cumbersome. The KYB requirements, while understood, seem disproportionate to our risk profile and often involve redundant information requests across different departments within the same institution. It's a significant time sink for our compliance team.

Anyone else experiencing similar friction when trying to establish new relationships, especially with an emphasis on speed to market for active trading strategies? Curious if there are specific regions or types of institutions that seem more streamlined in their due diligence.

Anyone else finding the KYC/AML process for new broker/venue onboarding to be increasingly convoluted for mid-cap prop desks? We're not talking about retail accounts here, but legitimate entities with established track records. The due diligence requests from various tier-1 and tier-2 providers seem to be diverging significantly, and the timelines are extending. It's creating unnecessary friction and delaying liquidity access, which directly impacts our ability to capitalize on transient pricing inefficiencies. Curious if others are experiencing similar bottlenecks and how they're managing.

Anyone else finding it increasingly difficult to onboard with prime brokers or even just larger PSPs when seeking payouts in anything other than USD, especially for AUM under, say, $50M? The KYB seems to bottleneck heavily once you mention local currency accounts in certain jurisdictions, even if fully regulated there. It's like they have the capability but just don't want the hassle for smaller clients, pushing us to use less favorable FX routes.

We're an EU-based prop firm consistently facing significant friction during the KYB process with US-based prime brokers, even after providing comprehensive documentation and having clean regulatory records. It often feels like a black box, with repeated requests for the same information, vague reasons for delays, and a general lack of transparency in the estimated onboarding timeline. Has anyone else encountered this persistent bottleneck, particularly around demonstrating beneficial ownership or intricate corporate structures? Are there specific types of documentation or pre-emptive measures you've found effective in streamlining this process, or is it just the cost of doing business across these jurisdictions?

Just went through a rather painful KYC/AML process with a new EU-regulated FX broker. While I appreciate the necessity, the document requirements felt excessive for a relatively small retail account. Multiple proofs of address, bank statements with specific transaction types highlighted, and a video verification that felt more like an interrogation.

Anyone else experiencing this level of scrutiny lately, especially with the increased regulatory push in Europe? It makes me wonder if smaller firms are overcompensating, or if this is the new normal. Takes a good few days just to get trading, which can really eat into quick setup opportunities.

Anyone else hitting major friction with KYB for new prop accounts, particularly for larger FX books? Seems like every new broker integration becomes a month-long battle getting through compliance, even with established corporate entities. We're talking substantial liquidity needs here, and the delay in setting up new lines is costing real alpha. Are there specific jurisdictions or types of brokers that are more streamlined?