Platform Advisory
Bloomberg AIM advisory for buy-side teams selecting, implementing, recovering, or optimizing the platform. Start with implementation risk, then size the work: scan, diagnostic, sprint, delivery, or retainer.
Bloomberg AIM advisory path
Bloomberg AIM work can be a diagnostic, a focused advisory sprint, a full implementation, or an ongoing retainer. PBW routes the situation before selling the engagement.
Use when leadership has a concern, but needs fast triage before commissioning a full diagnostic.
02 AIM Readiness Diagnostic $7.5K-$9.5K | 10 business daysReview workflow, data, integration, compliance, UAT, and cutover readiness before the plan hardens.
03 AIM Data & Compliance Review Security master, compliance, FIX, and cutover riskUse when AIM security master mapping, compliance-rule behavior, FIX certification, or cutover assumptions need focused review.
04 Advisory or Delivery $25K-$150K | scoped executionMove into a sprint, implementation, optimization engagement, or fractional OMS retainer.
From the field
Implementation entered on a compressed timeline. Data readiness was assumed, not validated. The security master — the foundational reference data layer for compliance, reporting, and downstream settlement — had gaps that didn't surface until UAT Week 6. Go-live slipped eight weeks. Vendor professional services had already moved to their next project.
Full 7-dimension readiness assessment. End-to-end data mapping audit. Parallel-run plan redesigned with explicit go/no-go criteria signed off by trading desk and operations. Remediation costs were contained — the alternative was a full restart.
What goes wrong on AIM implementations
AIM's security master is the foundation for every downstream compliance rule, position calculation, and settlement instruction. Mapping gaps — wrong identifier mappings, missing corporate actions, stale reference data — don't surface until UAT or production. By then, you've already committed to a timeline.
Data readiness is Phase 1. We audit source data quality, map every identifier class, and validate against your actual portfolio before any configuration begins. Transformation scope is in the contract, not discovered at week six.
UAT is where implementation schedules die. Testing scripts built from implementation assumptions rather than actual trading workflows. Operations teams handed test cases they didn't write. Critical paths discovered late — custodian feeds, algo parameter behavior under real market conditions, settlement instruction formatting.
UAT protocol is co-designed with your trading desk and operations team from day one. Test cases reflect actual workflows, not implementation templates. We track test execution and defect resolution against the plan with written sign-off gates before production.
Position and transaction history from your legacy system is rarely clean. Multi-custodian structures, multi-fund hierarchies, legacy instrument identifiers with no clean mapping path to AIM's security master — the complexity is always underestimated. Parallel runs that should take four weeks run fourteen.
Data migration scope is sized from your actual custodian contracts, fund structure, and instrument universe — not from account count. We build the mapping framework before the migration begins, not during it. Parallel-run criteria are explicit and locked before rescheduling.
AIM's compliance engine is powerful and unforgiving. Rules built from generic templates pass UAT syntactically and fail in production — false positives that erode trader trust and get disabled. Real regulatory exposure, dressed as a technology problem.
Rules are built from your compliance team's written mandate, not from defaults. Every rule is tested against your actual portfolio history before go-live. Results are reviewed with compliance before sign-off — not handed off with a configuration export.
Broker and venue FIX sessions take weeks to certify. Broker technology teams have their own queue. Implementation plans that treat connectivity as a last-mile problem routinely miss go-live by a month or more. The fix at that point is expensive and visible.
Connectivity kickoff happens in week one. We have established relationships with most major prime broker technology teams. Certification timelines are tracked against the plan from day one — not discovered in week eight.
What we deliver
Full lifecycle AIM deployments for firms standing up their first institutional OMS. Covers requirements scoping, data migration from legacy systems, workflow design, connectivity to custodians and prime brokers, and UAT through go-live. Typical engagement: 12–18 weeks.
Connect AIM to the rest of your stack. FIX connectivity to execution venues, custodian position and cash feeds, IBOR/ABOR reconciliation, risk system integration, and compliance system data flows. We scope, build, and test — no handoffs to a vendor support queue.
For firms already live on AIM but underusing it. Workflow audit to identify manual touchpoints that should be automated. Portfolio-level compliance rule tuning. Order routing optimization. Typically a 4–6 week engagement that pays for itself in the first quarter.
AIM version migrations with no operational surprises. Full regression testing, configuration delta analysis, and a production cutover plan. We have managed upgrades across multiple major releases — the upgrade risks we watch for are not hypothetical.
What a typical engagement produces
Every engagement is scoped before work begins. These are the deliverables from a standard full-cycle AIM implementation — from discovery through post-go-live knowledge transfer.
Engagement sizing
Every engagement has explicit scope, defined deliverables, and a timeline you can explain to your COO. The person who scopes the engagement is the one who delivers it.
Not sure which tier fits? Use Start Here or compare the $1.5K Risk Scan against the AIM Readiness Diagnostic.
Free · 30 minutes · No obligation
A preliminary implementation risk readout · Platform-fit discussion · Likely engagement model · No obligation · No generic sales process
Engagement shape
Most AIM implementations fail for the same reason: the consultant who scoped the project hands it to a junior team, scope drifts, and go-live becomes a negotiation. PBW engagements do not work that way — the consultant who scoped the engagement is the one configuring, testing, and delivering it.
Every engagement is structured in phases with defined deliverables and explicit sign-off points. You know what you are getting before we write a line of configuration. The person who scoped the engagement delivers it.
Typical AIM implementation: 12–18 weeks from signed statement of work to production go-live. Optimization engagements: 4–6 weeks. Integrations sized by scope.
Two-week working session with your trading, PM, operations, and compliance teams. Output: requirements document, architecture diagram, integration inventory, and signed-off implementation plan.
AIM environment setup, workflow configuration, integration development, compliance rule implementation. Weekly status with written delivery against plan. No surprises at week 10.
Structured user acceptance testing with your trading desk and operations team. Issue log, resolution tracking, and formal sign-off before any production activity.
Managed production cutover. On-call support for the first two weeks post-go-live. Written runbooks your ops team can use independently after the engagement closes.
Go deeper
Risk readout on your current state. Platform-fit discussion against your trading desk, compliance mandate, and integration requirements. No obligation, no sales process — just a senior AIM practitioner's read on whether and how we can help.