Sounds like US citizens can still trade with them, but GFS isn’t allowed to automatically transfer existing accounts. That’s how it reads to me.
GFS is keeping their office open for customers who want to trade futures with them.
The CFTC has just released their latest net capital figures. With I Trade FX and GFS Forex departing the U.S. market that leaves only a little more than a dozen firms left standing.
The following firms have net capital below $20 million
Easy Forex $15,552,000
Ikkon Royal $16,423,000
Alpari $16,557,000
MB Trading $17,031,000
Advanced Markets $19,686,000
The following firms have net capital above $20 million
Forex Club $21,354,000
CMS Forex $29,360,000
PFG $30,444,000
Interbank FX $38,393,000
FX Solutions $45,032,000
GFT Forex $87,169,000
Gain Capital $95,879,000
FXCM $113,463,000
Oanda $161,723,000
As always conduct your due diligence and make sure the firm you are trading with will be able to comply with the new $20 million capital requirement that is about to go into effect.
FXDD�s Ominous Anniversary
FXDD is making waves these days by refusing to adopt the NFA�s new hedging rule:
To our valued clients,
In our effort to provide the best solution for your trading regarding the NFA�s new rule on hedging, please know that we have been in contact with the NFA and have offered several solutions which we believe will accommodate almost all types of trading strategies and comply with the NFA rules. Our discussions with the NFA are ongoing and we will keep you advised. In the mean time, know that FXDD is making no immediate changes to any platforms and that you will be fully advised prior to any proposed changes.
The FXDD Team.
How can they do this? Simple. FXDD still isn�t licensed by the NFA.
It�s easy to thumb your nose at regulators when you don�t actually have to answer to them. FXDD applied to become a member of the NFA in April of 2008. One year later their application remains unapproved.
Should traders be concerned about this? Absolutely. Not only is FXDD unlicensed (and therefore in possible violation of U.S. law) but now they are actually thumbing their nose at the very regulator who they are seeking to get that license from.
This is not prudent behavior on FXDD�s part and traders should stay clear of this firm until they are actually authorized to operate inside the United States.
I asked them almost a year ago re. certification and they said it was pending. Nothing has changed since then I see. I got so tired of IBFX’s requotes and “server busy, try later” that I closed a small funded acct and opened a demo only with FXDD - I like the fact that their daily close is 16:00 CDT. I don’t have to wait up until midnight or thereabouts to trade a daily closing strategy. But I am afraid to open a funded acct. d.
Interesting post from Francesc at FX Street regarding FXDD�s decision not to implement the NFA�s new hedging rule. Jim Green, Managing Director at FXDD, wrote in to say that FXDD �was not fighting NFA.� They�re just having �constructive conversations� with NFA about the new hedging rule:
�Dear Francesc: It has been some time since we last communicated. Although FXDD enjoys the coverage it (usually) receives on FXstreet, your recent headline was somewhat misleading and I want to state for the record that FXDD is not fighting the NFA on the hedging rule. As you know, FXDD is pending with the NFA and we discuss our application with the designated parties at the NFA. Our discussions with the NFA should not be interpreted as �fighting.� We have had and continue to have very constructive conversations with the NFA in terms of the practical application of the new rule and, for purposes of the rule, what actions are permissible.
I respectfully ask that you clarify our position with your readership.�
Ok. FXDD may not believe they are fighting with NFA, but how else should NFA interpret FXDD�s decision not to implement the new hedging rule?
Of course, in fairness to FXDD, why should they implement a regulatory rule that will be harmful to their business if this same regulator continues to stall on their license application? This could be FXDD�s way of saying �give us a license, then we�ll implement your rules.�
But is it wise to take on NFA like this? This is why traders should sit on the sidelines until FXDD gets that license. They are playing a game of chicken with regulators. And in the current climate we are in where regulators are under enormous pressure to crack down on rogue financiers no trader wants to be in the middle of what could be one ugly head on collision.
They are both stuck in bankruptcy with creditors (and traders) waiting in a line that stretches around the block. Let that be a lesson to anyone who owns shares in General Motors or has an account with an unlicensed Swiss Broker.
Here are the details of the Crown Forex Bankruptcy:
Francesc’s Weblog � FINMA Opens Bankrupcy Process of Crown Forex S.A
Dear clients,
The Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority (FINMA) has rendered on May 18, 2009 a decision opening the bankruptcy of CROWN FOREX SA as of Tuesday May 19, 2009 at 08:00 am (Swiss time).
The decision will be published on May 29, 2009 at 10:00 am (Swiss time).
Philippe von BREDOW and Laurent WINKELMANN have been appointed as bankruptcy liquidators by the FINMA.
Effective immediately, as of the date and time of the bankruptcy opening, the activities of CROWN FOREX SA are suspended, the company, its Directors and officers are forbidden to make or receive payments, and all the clients� open positions are closed.
We thank you to communicate to the liquidators, until June 30, 2009, in writing the following :
- Account Number and relevant details;
- Open positions as of Tuesday 19 May 2009 at 08:00 (Swiss time), together with supporting documents thereof;
- Any additional claim you may have toward CROWN FOREX SA;
- Any debt you may have toward CROWN FOREX SA.
Sincerely
Philippe von BREDOW - Laurent WINKELMANN
NOTTER MEGEVAND & PARTNERS
Place Edouard-Clapar�de 3
1205 Gen�ve
SWITZERLAND
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
This is why traders need to beware opening an account with any Swiss broker that doesn�t have a banking license. Notable Swiss brokers like ACM, DukasCopy and MIG have all applied for licenses. But they do not yet have that license. Beware opening an account with these firms until they do, lest you end up like the poor sods at Crown Forex.
Michael Greenberg at Forex Magnates has released an interesting new survey on forex broker trading volumes (in the billions).
Top retail Forex brokers report well over $100B in daily traded volume | Forex Magnates
Monthly Trading Volume
- FXCM $560,000,000,000
- Oanda $338,000,000,000
- Saxo Bank $225,000,000,000
- Gain $200,000,000,000
- GFT $175,000,000,000
- ACM $150,000,000,000
- PFG $85,000,000,000
- IBFX $80,000,000,000
- Alpari $60,000,000,000
- IG Index $60,000,000,000
This is a useful tool for determining a broker�s size and stability (in addition to the net capital numbers.)
[B]The following firms have net capital below $20 million[/B]
Easy Forex $15,552,000
Ikkon Royal $16,423,000
Alpari $16,557,000
MB Trading $17,031,000
Advanced Markets $19,686,000
[B]The following firms have net capital above $20 million[/B]
Forex Club $21,354,000
CMS Forex $29,360,000
PFG $30,444,000
Interbank FX $38,393,000
FX Solutions $45,032,000
GFT Forex $87,169,000
Gain Capital $95,879,000
FXCM $113,463,000
Oanda $161,723,000
The CFTC has just released their latest net capital figures. These appear to be the finalists who have survived the net capital guillotine:
The following firms have net capital below $20 million
Easy Forex $15,549,000
Ikkon Royal $16,355,000
MB Trading $17,100,000
Advanced Markets $19,796,000
The following firms have net capital above $20 million
Alpari $20,975,000
Forex Club $21,795,000
CMS Forex $29,649,000
Interbank FX $36,507,000
PFG $36,843,000
FX Solutions $41,546,000
FXCM $60,472,000
GFT Forex $80,693,000
Gain Capital $90,801,000
Oanda $159,739,000
What! Can this be right? What has FXCM been up to? Been buying other companies or something I guess. If not it would be interesting to know why their capital has dropped like a stone.
Great info! Thanks for sharing. I’m also surprised for that FXCM change in capital, what could it be?
Apparently they’re doing so well they had to drop a huge chunk of cash to pay income tax…they’ll be back up in no time…
http://forums.babypips.com/analyst-arena/24497-fxcm-holdings-llc-releases-financial-data.html
I talked to one of their representatives today and he did not know what to anwer, I guess he didn’t see that question coming. He told me that maybe, and just maybe, many of FXCM customers are switching their accounts to their UK office because of the recent hedge restrictions and because of the money protection they have in the UK according to their regulatory institutions.
Even if that were so, the UK office portion is still included in the overall financial statements that are released…just an internal shuffle on the 'ol balance statement. 
That’s what I thought, I guess he had to came up with a quick answer:rolleyes:
Former SNC Investment CEO Peter Son has been hauled into court by federal regulators a year after he disappeared during an NFA investigation into missing funds covered on this thread back in October of 2008:
NFA Forex Dealer Dead Pool - Page 21 - Forex Forum - FXstreet.com
The feds are now confirming that Peter Son was running an $80 million ponzi scheme:
Among the SEC�s findings:
Son used investor funds to pay the mortgage on his $2.6 million home in Blackhawk, a gated community in Danville, California, his homeowner�s association dues, and his country club dues;
Son used SNCA investor funds to pay his wife a salary of $3,000 per month even though she did no work for SNCA;
Son and Chung Transferred SNCA investor funds to SNCI to help it meet regulatory requirements that it maintain certain levels of capital; and
Son and Chung transferred SNCA investor funds to SNCI�s Korean bank account, to Son�s Korean bank account, and to the Korean bank account of a Korean company under Chung�s control.
After covering these poorly capitalized firms for years I�m not the least bit surprised that SNC illegally used customer funds to meet their capital requirements back when they were still registered with the NFA. That�s why cap requirements had to be raised and thankfully the worst of these brokers are long gone in the U.S.
But let this be a lesson to the trading public to avoid opening an account with any poorly capitalized firm, or a firm that is not regulated and does not disclose their financials.
Yeah right…
FOREX GOLDEN SYSTEM
On July 31 the NFA�s FIFO order comes into effect. As of this moment the MT4 trading platform is not compliant with this rule and there is no guarantee that it will become compliant come the July deadline.
For firms that heavily rely on MT4 this is bad news. FXDD, which uses MT4 but are not regulated and therefore under no obligation to comply with NFA rules at present, are taking advantage of their unregulated status by telling NFA to get bent. As an unregulated firm they can do what they like (then again the whole issue of FXDD being unregulated is a serious red flag in and of itself. After all, the feds could basically raid the firm at anytime and shut them down overnight.)
But IBFX is (unfortunately for them) regulated solely by the NFA and their only trading platform at present is MT4. What is IBFX to do?
IBFX�s CEO seems confident and in �nothing to see here style� stated the following in an email to customers:
Forex Factory - View Single Post - All USA FX dealers may not be able to support MT4
To our valued clients,
As you may know, the National Futures Association (NFA), has implemented new First-in, First-out (FIFO) requirements that will be in effect as of July 31, 2009. We at Interbank FX have been working hard on a solution and are confident that our traders will be able to use our MetaTrader 4 platform with little or no interruption. They will also continue to be able to use their MT4 expert advisors.
The NFA is striving to ensure the highest levels of integrity from all market participants and their intermediaries. We want to assure you that Interbank FX strives to be 100% compliant with the NFA.
We are currently working on some informational and instructional videos regarding the FIFO requirements and our solution, however most of you will be able to continue trading without any impact to your platform or strategies. In our effort to provide the best solution for your trading, you will be fully advised prior to any proposed changes.
We thank you for your continued support and wish you the best of luck with your trading.
Best regards,
Todd Crosland
and the Interbank FX Team
That all sounds reassuring, but what if something isn�t worked out by July 31st?
Meta Quotes is under no obligation to jump through hoops for IBFX and the NFA. And if Meta Quotes chooses not to (or is technically unable to) make any major changes to MT4 then IBFX is in big, big trouble as they will be stuck with a platform that is basically illegal.
Would IBFX close? Would they halt trading? Would the NFA and CFTC step in? Would IBFX be granted an extension by regulators? Can they get a UK license in time? Can they roll out a new trading platform in time?
Finally, how on earth did IBFX allow itself to be put in such a vulnerable position where their entire company is at the mercy of an independent third party based in Russia?
These should be mandatory questions that every current and potential customer of IBFX should be asking.
You’re usually spot on, but here I disagree.
Firstly, of course Metaquotes has to jump through hoops to fix this problem for their customers, ie IBFX and others. It’s a simple matter of the customer is always right, and not helping out IBFX would likely translate into a Metatrader death sentence as brokers everywhere would jump ship realizing that Metaquotes allowed IBFX to get badly hurt.
Second, what do you mean by "Finally, how on earth did IBFX allow itself to be put in such a vulnerable position where their entire company is at the mercy of an independent third party based in Russia?"
What’s the difference to a company being at the mercy of Microsoft for instance? That’s todays outsorced world, nothing extraordinary about that as far as I can see. Is it the russian part that bothers you?
( The dental organisation I work for is 100% dependent on a Finnish software company. If they wanted to, they could basically wreck us beyond rescue.)
Thirdly, what guarantees are there that brokers with their own in house built platforms will be able to comply with FIFO on time? Most likely they don’t have the software muscles that Metaquotes likely has. Who knows, maybe those are the brokers that will end up deep in it, not IBFX.
MT4 is such a widely used program and so everyone knows that it doesn’t comply as of today, but what about other brokers in house programs that are less watched? Who knows what those brokers are sitting on? A FIFO bomb maybe…
The CFTC has just released their latest net capital figures. This is the current state of the U.S. retail fx industry:
Advanced Markets $20,722,000
Easy Forex $20,928,000
Ikkon Royal $21,247,000
MB Trading $21,360,000
Alpari $22,312,000
Forex Club $25,427,000
CMS Forex $29,788,000
Interbank FX $35,611,000
PFG $36,465,000
FX Solutions $48,262,000
FXCM $63,999,000
GFT Forex $79,368,000
Gain Capital $98,125,000
Oanda $159,062,000