The concept of 24/7 or 24/5 markets is no longer a theoretical debate, but an inevitable shift for financial markets.
Speaking at the The Future of Markets panel at FIA Boca on Monday, March 10, Dave Olsen, President and Chief Investment Officer, Jump Trading Group, said this shift appears to be “the inevitable reckoning.”
Over the past few years, extended trading hours have become more prevalent, especially in markets like Asia, while the rise of cryptocurrencies and blockchain technology has further accelerated this shift. But as markets extend their hours, both opportunities and risks emerge that must be carefully considered.
Emma Richardson, Global Head of Prime Platform, J.P. Morgan Securities pointed out, “There’s an opportunity to trade across multiple time zones, and the ability to calculate margin in real-time is critical.”
The push for longer trading hours has been driven by factors such as globalization, technological advancements, and increasing market demand. The rise of crypto and decentralized finance (DeFi) has also set a new expectation for continuous market access.
Despite the clear momentum toward always-on trading, managing risk remains a central challenge. Olsen emphasized that “risk doesn’t go away just because the market is closed—you still have exposure, whether you see it on the screen or not.” In a world where markets never stop, firms need new approaches to risk management, liquidity planning, and operational oversight. Liquidity management is a key concern. With traditional banking and collateral systems still operating on limited schedules, ensuring sufficient liquidity at all times is a complex issue.
Operational resilience is another factor. If exchanges and clearing houses are open 24/7, how do they balance the need for system maintenance with the demand for uninterrupted trading? Regulatory frameworks must also evolve. Protecting market integrity and ensuring proper oversight in a continuously operating environment will require new rules and standards.
The crypto markets have already provided a real-world test case for these challenges. As Olsen recalled: “Many of us cut our teeth a decade ago figuring out how to staff the weekends, move capital efficiently, and pre-stage collateral.” Lessons from crypto trading could inform the evolution of traditional markets, particularly in areas such as automation, risk monitoring, and staffing strategies.
Clearing and settlement remain significant hurdles. Without synchronized clearing and settlement, extended trading hours could create new liquidity bottlenecks. Some clearinghouses are already adapting. According to Brian Steele, Managing Director, President, Clearing & Securities Services, DTCC, the firm has announced plans to expand operations: ”Next year in Q2, we’ll see a clearing house running 24/5.”
However, questions remain about how to define a trading day consistently across markets, how to ensure collateral mobility, and whether existing technology infrastructure is robust enough to support a 24/7 framework.
Tokenization is emerging as a potential solution to some of these challenges. Richardson said that “When you think about mobilizing collateral efficiently, tokenization plays a huge role.” By representing assets as digital tokens on a blockchain, financial institutions could enable instant settlement, reduce counterparty risk, and improve collateral efficiency. Tokenization could also increase market access, allowing retail and institutional investors to trade seamlessly across different time zones. However, uncertainty remains about how tokenization will be implemented.
As markets move toward continuous trading, the industry must strike a balance between innovation and stability. Alicia Crighton, Co-Head of Global Futures, Goldman Sachs & Co. and Chair, FIA Board of Directors, who moderated the panel, made a crucial point: “Just because something is new doesn’t mean it’s great, and just because something is traditional doesn’t mean it’s broken.”
Traditional market structures—including exchanges, clearinghouses, market makers, and intermediaries—have long provided stability and risk management. The challenge is integrating new technology and extended hours without undermining these safeguards. Automated market makers and decentralized trading models could enhance liquidity, but they must address security and regulatory concerns. At the same time, regulatory harmonization is essential to ensure that continuous trading does not lead to market fragmentation across different jurisdictions.
The path forward may involve pilot programs in specific markets. Olsen suggested that by 2025, we could see a few markets experimenting with continuous trading, particularly in futures and equities. In the meantime, firms need to test operational models, develop new risk management frameworks, and work with regulators to shape policies that support both innovation and market stability.
Ultimately, this transition is about more than just technology—it requires a fundamental rethinking of market structure, risk management, and participant behavior. As Olsen put it: “Anybody who is ready for the weekend when things really move will have an advantage over those who aren’t.” The real question is not whether markets will move to 24/7 trading, but when—and how well prepared we are for the transition.
