MAXEX vs MIAC Analytics
Secondary & Capital Markets head-to-head · axis by axis, same rubric for both
Secondary & Capital Markets
Secondary & Capital Markets
| Axis | MAXEX | MIAC Analytics |
|---|---|---|
| Production impact | 4.4 | 3.0 |
| Functionality & depth | 3.9 | 3.6 |
| Integrations & ecosystem | 3.4 | 2.3 |
| Adoption & support | 3.7 | 2.5 |
| Return on spend | 3.8 | 2.8 |
| Overall | 4.0 | 3.0 |
MAXEX wins 5 of 5 axes. Same rubric, same weights, no sponsorships.
What the rubric says
MAXEX and MIAC Analytics are both scored in Secondary & Capital Markets. MAXEX carries an overall of 4, MIAC Analytics an overall of 3. The widest gap between them is Production impact, at 1.4 of a point. That axis measures whether the tool moves volume, pull-through or cycle time. MAXEX takes it, 4.4 to 3.
Where the five axes separate
On Production impact the record favours MAXEX, 4.4 against 3. On Adoption and support the record favours MAXEX, 3.7 against 2.5. On Integrations and ecosystem the record favours MAXEX, 3.4 against 2.3. On Return on spend the record favours MAXEX, 3.8 against 2.8. On Functionality and depth the record favours MAXEX, 3.9 against 3.6.
In Secondary & Capital Markets the rubric weights Production impact heaviest, at 35 percent. That is why the two overalls sit where they do.
How the weights turn axes into a score
Production impact carries 35 percent of the Secondary & Capital Markets score. It measures whether the tool moves volume, pull-through or cycle time. Functionality and depth carries 30 percent of the Secondary & Capital Markets score. It measures whether it handles the messy loans and not just the clean file. Integrations and ecosystem carries 15 percent of the Secondary & Capital Markets score. It measures how well it reaches the rest of the stack. Adoption and support carries 10 percent of the Secondary & Capital Markets score. It measures whether the team adopts it and gets unstuck. Return on spend carries 10 percent of the Secondary & Capital Markets score. It measures what the spend returns, which is not the same as being cheap.
Pricing posture
MAXEX does not publish pricing. Its listed model is transaction-based exchange fees, not published. MIAC Analytics does not publish pricing. Its listed model is quote only; software licences and advisory engagements priced separately.
Deployment and who each one targets
Deployment for MAXEX: Cloud exchange with centralized clearing and settlement. Deployment for MIAC Analytics: Licensed software and hosted analytics, with advisory and brokerage services alongside. Segment focus for MAXEX: Mortgage banks selling non-agency product, and the institutions buying it. Segment focus for MIAC Analytics: Servicers and investors valuing MSRs and whole loans, plus lenders wanting hedge advisory. The two entries name different buyers.
What each record credits
MAXEX: Tradeweb’s February 2026 release counts roughly 400 lenders and over 30 institutional investors. MAXEX: The same release states loan sales into more than 250 private-label securitizations. MAXEX: One seller agreement kills per-counterparty legal negotiation, the real non-agency bottleneck. MAXEX: Backed by J.P. MIAC Analytics: Independent since 1989, established enough on valuation and brokerage for ASC 820 work. MIAC Analytics: CORE models cover prepayment, credit frequency, loss severity and term structure. MIAC Analytics: MarketShield unites hedging analytics, loan-level pricing, spec pool valuation and execution oversight. MIAC Analytics: Reports 300-plus clients worldwide, with staff in four US locations plus London and India.
What each record holds against them
MAXEX: Fees are not published; the exchange takes its cut inside the transaction. MAXEX: No LOS integrations named, so tape preparation and delivery stay manual. MAXEX: Homepage volume and participant counters show zero placeholders, not live figures. MAXEX: Strongest in non-agency; a mostly agency seller gets a much weaker case. MIAC Analytics: No integrations named at all, so feeding position and pipeline data is on you. MIAC Analytics: No ownership or investor disclosure published. MIAC Analytics: Over 25 products with thin public documentation, so scope stays unclear before sales calls. MIAC Analytics: Analyst-grade tooling with a matching learning curve; generalists will not pick it up.
Which one fits which shop
Best fit for MAXEX: A lender that needs a reliable jumbo or non-QM exit without negotiating ten separate counterparty agreements. Best fit for MIAC Analytics: A servicer that needs an independent ASC 820 valuation and the models behind it.
What each entry concludes
MAXEX: MAXEX is a digital exchange for residential whole loans. MAXEX: One seller agreement and standardized contracts replace bilateral counterparty relationships, with a single clearinghouse behind the trade. MAXEX: Sign once and you reach the whole buyer network instead of maintaining separate documents per institution. MAXEX: It earns its keep in non-agency product, jumbo through non-QM and DSCR, where liquidity is genuinely fragmented. MAXEX: A standing bid in that market has real value. MIAC Analytics: MIAC has done mortgage valuation and analytics since 1989, split about evenly between software and services. MIAC Analytics: MarketShield covers pipeline hedging analytics, loan-level pricing, spec pool valuation and execution oversight. MIAC Analytics: Around it sit the CORE behavioural models plus collateral management, securitization, CECL and due diligence tools. MIAC Analytics: Services span independent fair value opinions, due diligence, asset sales and hedge advisory, the usual first engagement. MIAC Analytics: Choose MIAC when the number has to hold up with an auditor and independence matters.
The short answer
MAXEX finishes ahead on the published rubric, 4 to 3. The margin comes mostly from Production impact. Same rubric, same weights, no sponsorships.
Both tools are scored on the same weighted rubric, production impact carries the most weight. Comparisons are never sponsored. Disclosure →