True enough, Eddie, but when a company [I]continues, over the long term[/I], to have adverse regulatory rulings/fines after adverse regulatory rulings/fines, one’s perhaps entitled to look askance, given that in such an increasingly competitive marketplace there are plenty of other equivalent, long-established and well regulated brokers who don’t have that kind of history at all?
I’m not condoning what they’ve done, but I can’t find anything pertaining to practice more recent than 2011 that has been punished or is under investigation. If anyone knows of more recent issues I’d like to hear of them.
Jason I already closed the account and switched brokers. Assuming all other claims could be explained… The one I simply can’t get passed is a trade whose stop loss was set to break even and the order was closed out -57.3 pips below. No matter what the spread or slippage is… If it’s that huge of a difference then I am not interested in your broker at all. That’s not positive slippage for me, maybe in your favor but not the client.
Hi Gellyware,
I’m sorry to see you go, but my offer still stands. Even though your account is closed, we would be happy to investigate the trades in question if you file a trade inquiry.
If there was an error in our trade execution, we will make the appropriate correction to your account. Either way, you can benefit from knowing the findings of the investigation by the Trade Services Team.
Positive slippage is always in favor of the client, and clients of FXCM experience positive slippage more frequently than negative slippage overall, as you can see from our trade execution stats.
To what equivalence are you referring? Can you name another broker in the world besides FXCM that is a publicly-traded company regulated on four continents executing $15.2 billion per day* in retail forex trading volume? And if so, is that broker also regulated in France like we are?
As I mentioned previously, FXCM is subject to a greater level of scrutiny than smaller, less-regulated forex brokers. We welcome this position of responsibility that comes with being an industry leader, and our clients who place 513,724 retail forex trades through us per day* are glad we do.
[I]* As of the latest publicly available data from October 2015[/I]
Can you name one that’s [I]had more fines imposed by regulators[/I]?
Sorry, but it comes across as [U]really[/U] ironic that you’re persistently promoting your company here on the strength of how many different regulators regulate it in different places, when there are links just above to all the adverse incidents you’ve had because of that, and all the fines you’ve had to pay.
If you’re trying somehow to “gloss over” the fact that your company has a long and extensive history of being fined by regulators, it’s not working. Other than that, I really don’t know what to say to you, Jason; I just don’t.
There is no correlation between size n service. Bigger is not always better. And from my experience FXCM is a market follower not a market leader. Marketing 101 for those who want to know the difference. With all due respect Jason, you’re just another marketer looking to sell their wares here at BP’s. Although I feel you get suxed into these unwarranted claims.
[QUOTE=“bobbillbrowne;732276”]There is no correlation between size n service. Bigger is not always better. And from my experience FXCM is a market follower not a market leader. Marketing 101 for those who want to know the difference. With all due respect Jason, you’re just another marketer looking to sell their wares here at BP’s. Although I feel you get suxed into these unwarranted claims.[/QUOTE] Who are you to say what is warranted or not? It’s not your claim or experience.
Is there is a thread for brokers’ fines by regulators ?
I have read that there is some fines by FCA to forex brokers in UK. Also some news about fines from CySEC. But all the information is from 10 different web pages, is there is any place i can read in one page ?
well, thanks alot for sharing this information about FXCM, I was almost thinking about joining this company, but now I have to think twice! If this is true, then some of my colleagues who already have accounts here are the saddest!
I love this… Tim, for 50 bucks you can trade. 1% risk on 50$ is…drumroll…50 cents. Gee Jason, thanks for the invite, you moron.
Merry Christmas and a healthy new year.
Na zdrowie,
Tim
My friend was trading with FXCM company and he did not received his withdrawal, so i will agree this is a scam company!
How do you know that Exness is a scam. Do you have any proof/cases/your negative experience?
yeah, how about Interactive Brokers? how about LMAX over in the UK? how about GAIN GTX? how about DukasCopy? how about Baxter-FX over in Australia (but that’s a prime broker; nonetheless, with 50K/USD you are in business, and Australian law has your back way more than in the states or even the UK)?
or how about RJOBrien, the oldest founding member of the CME? let’s see… RJO vs FXCM? mmhh… i wonder… which one has the better record? mmhhh… yeah, i thought so.
the fact that FXCM clients still have issues, to this freakin’ day, is not only unacceptable but downright disgusting. with today’s technology, there is absolutely not a single reason why retail clients should not have DMA (Direct Market Access) to institutional LPs. the only reason most retail brokers still fight this is because the retail clients they have penned in generate too little volume and hence the fees they would be charged by LPs would be higher and they neither want to pay them nor pass the cost on to their clients because the retail crowd would start howling ‘why is it so expensive compared to this other crapy broker?’.
what FXCM and all the rest should do is to finally educate their client base about the market structure and how this business works from the broker’s side. once people understand that, i bet a lot of the useless whining will evaporate and who knows, you might even not lose customers if you give them the access and execution quality you afford the 50K+/USD so-called ‘pro’ accounts.
personally, i would pay higher commissions fees if it meant i could get filled on institutional grade ESPs with my orders optimally routed to the best price across any and all of the major ECNs, both institutional and retail.
by institutional, my definition is: BATS Global Markets’s HotSpot, Currenex, Integral, FXAll, EBS, LMAX Pro and LMAX Institutional, SolidFX, FastMatch, GTX, XCDE, FCStone, FXSpotStream, SWFX (DukasCopy), to name a few.
and if in fact average ticket volume doesn’t come close to, i believe the minimum ticket size that is accepted even on an institutional ECN such as the one provided by EBS is 100K/base ccy, then why not route orders onto an internal EXN (not a typo, EXN not ECN) and have that match orders to other FXCM retail client orders, and even better should other FXCM client liquidity be lacking, then why not source it from other retail ECNs such as Dukascopy etc… why not integrate all this fragmented retail ECNs into 1 global marketplace if the institutional ECNs will remain off-limit?
i mean, there are quite a few ways to provide such a marketplace with no execution issues. just take a look at what LMAX built in-house. their engine tech is even open sourced. it’s stellar. i personally never had an issue execution wise, not even during this year’s SNB black swan event. how much did that end up costing FXCM? almost 300M/USD? jesus! one would think some IT overhaul is in order.
anyway… just my 2-cents.
There is no doubt you need to confirm few things before making statements like this about FXCM. Obviously, I cant see your charts but these may be possible reasons.
On Sunday candles often open with a large gap. Most brokers are closed for the weekend and liquidity is very low, so it can be difficult to open or close a position. Though, I don’t trade with FXCM, What I’ve heard from some people is that, trading days after sundays tend to have such messes
That claim is related to the period 2006-2010 and was related to managed accounts. FXCM had some companies manage their clients money, but after te effect those trading companies were not as good as was thought and the clients had to pay a lot of commission to those companies. It was said that FXCM should have been more careful in selecting such trading companies. It was not considered scam, just poor judgement in selecting counterparties on behalf of those managed accounts clients.
Differenct playing field and not direct related to giving us retail traders a hard time.
Did you actually read the case or did you just copied that they had a fine?
So you have no a problem with waiting for execution until the whole lot is filled with micro-lots by the retail traders? Poeh, when I think of it it already makes my head tumble. When that lot is filled the price is already invalid, so it needs to be requoted. Than all the traders need to agree on that new price, by that time the quote os already invalid. and so on. 
But I do agree with the rest of your mail.
Jason,
is that indeed ALL retail trades, so including the non-ECN style accounts?
Although, FXCM resolved this case, I am still quite skeptic about them. If they could deal with an unregistered firm, and then fail to report their financial data, it means they could be doing even more out there!