Some forex firms closing soon?!

Quote from sim03:

Correct.

It's also a moot point. FXDD is unregulated... not a member of the NFA and not registered with the CFTC. As relatively little as those things mean for traders' protection when your money is at stake, they are better than nothing. Tradition Group and FXDD apparently can't be bothered with that pesky US regulatory framework in OTC foreign exchange.

That $786,000 ($784,791, to be exact, as of June 30, 2007 CFTC Report) in the OP reflects the capital of "Tradition Securities and Futures Inc.", the FCM; not FXDD, the FDM. That figure has nothing to do with FXDD capital, which is unknown, as it's always been. This has already been covered on ET in the "Proposed NFA Capital Requirement" thread.

Don't hold your breath for FXDD either setting aside more capital (than what?) any time soon, in response to the forthcoming NFA (NFA who?) $5M capital requirements, or telling you how much capital they do have. That's a shame. With Tradition's huge financial muscle behind them, FXDD could bring far wider acceptance to the MT4 platform in the US and in the West, while capturing a bigger market share for themselves. Stupid mofos.
More...


Fair point, and I agree that no one should sign a customer agreement with a non-FCM (I thought the NFA put an end to doing business via unregistered subsidiaries a la Refco - I guess not!). My point was that ppl who believe there are 'good' firms with 'a lot' of capital are again going to be lured into a false sence of security.

I am not saying capital is not important, but it probably also implies a high level of liabilities - to evaluate the risk you need to look at business prectices, risk management experience, etc. Granted, this is probably beyond most retail clients, but that means again CFTC/NFA have to do a better job.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top