Zerodha Highlights OMS/RMS Risks as CoinDCX Backs In-House Stack

A public exchange between India’s leading brokerage & crypto exchange founders has sparked a wider discussion on the hidden complexity behind trading platforms, particularly the decision to build or outsource core trading infrastructure.

Nithin Kamath, Founder & CEO of Zerodha, recently highlighted that most stock brokers in India do not fully own their technology stack. Instead, they rely on third-party vendors for critical systems such as Order Management Systems (OMS) & Risk Management Systems (RMS), which form the backbone of any brokerage operation.

• OMS/RMS: The Heart of Brokerage Operations
• The High-Risk Nature of Building In-House
• CoinDCX Responds With a Crypto-Native Perspective
• The Broader Industry Question

OMS/RMS: The Heart of Brokerage Operations

Kamath described OMS/RMS platforms as the functional equivalent of core banking systems used by banks, typically supplied by large technology vendors. If these systems fail, trading operations effectively come to a standstill.

He noted that vendors such as Omnesys, 63 Moons, Kambala, & Rupeeseed dominate this segment, with Omnesys reportedly holding a significant share of the market. Because these systems sit at the center of every trade, risk check, & margin calculation, even brief disruptions can have cascading effects across the brokerage ecosystem.

One of the lesser-known things about stock brokers is that most brokers don't actually own their entire tech stack. There's usually a third-party vendor providing the core order management system (OMS) and risk management system (RMS). Think of OMS/RMS as being similar to the…

— Nithin Kamath (@Nithin0dha) December 22, 2025

The High-Risk Nature of Building In-House

According to Kamath, Zerodha has been working for nearly four years to develop its own OMS/RMS stack internally. He described the process as extremely hard & operationally complex, especially for a broker with millions of active clients.

Migrating live client positions while ensuring uninterrupted trading introduces serious business risk. A single mistake during transition could result in incorrect trades, margin miscalculations, or clients being unable to exit positions at critical moments.

Regulatory volatility further compounds the challenge. Frequent rule changes must be integrated into the system without breaking existing functionality, turning each update into a potential failure point. Kamath likened the effort to “rebuilding a plane while flying it,” particularly for large brokers handling lakhs of daily trades.

CoinDCX Responds With a Crypto-Native Perspective

Responding to Kamath’s observations, Sumit Gupta, Co-founder of CoinDCX, said that CoinDCX has taken a different path. Gupta stated that the exchange’s OMS/RMS & broader trading infrastructure were built entirely in-house over several years.

He credited CoinDCX’s engineering team for running these systems seamlessly in a 24×7 crypto market, where trading never pauses unlike traditional equity markets. Gupta added that CoinDCX plans to continue investing in deeper OMS/RMS improvements & further strengthening its exchange stack in the coming year.

At CoinDCX this was all built in house over several years. Kudos to our team for pulling it off and make it run seamlessly that too in a 24x7 market like crypto. 🫡

This year we will continue to focus on doing further improvements in our OMS/RMS and do deeper in enhancing… https://t.co/DGjgRROKHY

— Sumit Gupta (CoinDCX) (@smtgpt) January 5, 2026

The Broader Industry Question

Kamath noted that incentives are often misaligned, as clients rarely ask whether a broker owns its entire tech stack. At the same time, vendor costs have not scaled proportionately with the rapid growth in trading volumes, making the immediate financial case for in-house development less obvious.

While crypto-native platforms like CoinDCX may find it easier to architect systems from scratch, established stock brokers face significantly higher migration risks due to their scale & regulatory obligations. As markets grow more technology-driven, the debate over owning versus outsourcing critical trading infrastructure is likely to intensify across both traditional finance & crypto sectors.

If you find any issues in this blog or notice any missing information, please feel free to reach out at yash@etherworld.co for clarifications or updates.

Related Articles

1. India to Change Crypto Strategy as Global Trends Shift
2. An Indian bank enabling crypto services with UNICAS
3. India’s Consultation Paper on Cryptocurrency; RBI DG Statement
4. Jio x Aptos: How India’s Giant Is Turning Web3 Into Everyday Utility
5. Amravati to Put All Government Records on Polygon Blockchain