Top 50 brokers - where OTC is likely headed

The goal is to centrally clear OTC. Not a matter of "if" but "when".

When that does happen leverage rules, fifo, hedging will likely be system wide. Remember how we said these rules will bite you sooner or later?

It's coming to a foreign broker near you... get ready.


Futures Magazine Article: Top 50 Brokers

Couldn't agree more with you pip seeker, Things aren't get to nice since they change the leverage rules for the brokerage in the US. I have put my eyes on some off shore brokers but still look for the better one.

Thanks for the information. Are these top 50 brokers list for USA brokers only? All of them are big banks and financial institutions. What about well known brokers such as GFTforex, Dukascopy, Gcitrading etc

It's not a list perse... why they called the article "top 50 brokers" is beyond me except for maybe the fight to be in the "in" group.

It's a glimpse of where OTC is headed and that is a Centrally cleared spot forex market. When that happens the broker is either in or out of the FX Club.

Read the article... the link to it is in the first post.

CFTC isn't looking to get rid of spot forex, but create a 'level playing field' for traders.

For those of us who have been trading forex for some time now, can tell you that forex back in 2006 was the wide west. Wasn't as popular as it is now (2009-2010). Retail brokers took full advantage of traders and out equity. From illegal platform manipulation to flat out stealing account equity.

If you were a victim of overseas brokers and US brokers shenanigans, you were out of luck as there weren't any definitive governing body to complain to. I can tell you countless stories of traders losing money to blatant thievery by their broker.

Enter the CFTC. The NFA taking lead on broker complaints was a start but brokers weren't fearful of the NFA. With CFTC taking an active interest in retail broker dealings, rest assured your US broker will behave. CFTC will command cooperation of brokers or they will be fined to the fullest extent of the law; including closing business. The NFA is great mediator for spot traders but its the CFTC that will bring fear to retail brokers.

Like me, traders who have been trading for a while will tell you, todays brokers have gotten their acts together. When was the last time you saw a thread proclaiming their broker defrauded them? Back in early FF days, you saw these thread more often that Winning Strategies in the Systems Forums.

At first I was against more regulation of spot forex but after seeing the immediate benefits of a CFTC run forex industry, I'm very happy the CFTC took over as I can tell you, things have changed for the better, broker wise. If the CFTC can continue to create positive forex trading market and give us a little more of what Future traders enjoy, such as segregated accounts and equity insurance, the forex market would be a whole lot better and safer.

They may not be trying to completely get rid of spot forex, but they are trying to severely restrict it and make it less appealing to small traders. This is all to protect the futures industry which has been showing diminishing volumes and liquidity in recent times and nothing else.

A 'level playing field' with 50-1 leverage on spot forex (futures is 100-1), no hedging, FIFO, where have you been??? Time to see the woods for the trees!!!

Yea, and spot forex would be much more attractive if they offer money safety, that's what concerns me the most.
And for leverage, i don't know why would anyone use leverage higher than 1:20, that's too risky.

Not really.. I think you're surfing with your eyes wide closed.

FX Brokers fined for MT4 plug-in that caused disadvantage to traders

Monday, November 1st, 2010 by DeltaQuest


The MT4 platform’s Forex plug-in called the ‘Virtual Dealer’, is causing a huge outrage amongst FX traders. FX Broker’s IKON and Gain Capital have both been fined by the National Futures Association (NFA) so far with the suspected use of the plug-in that has caused an intentional disadvantage to their trading clients.
Broker Gain Capital has been fined $459,000, while IKON has now been fined $320,000 for their involvements with the Virtual Dealer plug-in. It is expected that other brokers who have supported and provided the use of this Forex plug-in along with the MetaTrader 4, could well be handed similar fines.
The initial NFA complaints state allegedly how the brokers took part in price slippage operations, and margin and liquidation practices that were consequently beneficial to the brokers. The complaint for IKON also mentioned how the broker neglected the monitoring of Forex trades on its MT4 platform.
Gain Capital was rumored to be fined in the region of $3 million for its involvement, so their $459,000 issued by the NFA will be a relief. Both FX Brokers will although have to refund their trading clients who have been disadvantaged through the use of the plug-in, and both brokers are yet to respond to these NFA fines.

LINK TO STORY


How about the CFTC judge Levine who is supposedly been 100% against the client in all his rulings... and yet the CFTC is mum on this?


CFTC mum on judge controversy
No review

1. DANIEL P. COLLINS

Published 12/1/2010




The CFTC denied the request of retiring Administrative Law Judge George H. Painter to have his remaining cases reassigned to a judge detailed from another agency.
Judge Painter created quite a stir when, in announcing his retirement in September, he made the request that his cases not be given to fellow CFTC Administrative Law Judge Bruce Levine, alleging Levine was biased against complainants. The request was part of a notice sent to complainants and their attorneys in Painter’s remaining cases. Painter claimed that Levine had told him that he had promised former CFTC Chair Wendy Gramm "that he would never rule in a complainant’s favor." Painter’s notice goes on to say, "A review of his rulings will confirm that he has fulfilled his vow." He included a 2000 Wall Street Journal article supportive of his allegations.

In its order, the CFTC stated that Judge Painter lacked the authority to make "this unusual request" and that the cases would be reassigned to the other judge, presumably Judge Levine.
Neither Judge Levine nor the CFTC would comment on Painter’s claims.
A more recent Wall Street Journal articlepublished after Painter’s allegations became public referenced court records from a guardianship petition filed by Painter’s wife claiming Painter has recently struggled with mental illness and alcoholism. The story cites conflicting medical opinions of Painter’s mental health.
Painter noted that if he simply retired, his remaining cases would be reassigned to Judge Levine, adding, "This, I could not do in good conscience."
Attorney James McGurk says there has been a tendency by the CFTC Enforcement Division to bring case to U.S. District court instead of administratively.
Attorney Mark Ruddy says he knows of one current complainant who plans to ask Judge Levine to recuse himself from the case. Ruddy does not believe Levine would do so because "it could be seen as an admission of bias."
The complainant could appeal Levine’s decision to the Commission and eventually to Federal appeals court.
While charges of past bias appear to open up the likelihood of appeals one attorney familiar with futures litigation suggested the CFTC order could put an end to it as it would be difficult to open up past cases. The attorney added that the CFTC reparation case process is seldom used with more complainants choosing to use the National Futures Association arbitration process.

The CFTC denied the request of retiring Administrative Law Judge George H. Painter to have his remaining cases reassigned to a judge detailed from another agency.
Judge Painter created quite a stir when, in announcing his retirement in September, he made the request that his cases not be given to fellow CFTC Administrative Law Judge Bruce Levine, alleging Levine was biased against complainants. The request was part of a notice sent to complainants and their attorneys in Painter’s remaining cases. Painter claimed that Levine had told him that he had promised former CFTC Chair Wendy Gramm "that he would never rule in a complainant’s favor." Painter’s notice goes on to say, "A review of his rulings will confirm that he has fulfilled his vow." He included a 2000 Wall Street Journal article supportive of his allegations.
In its order, the CFTC stated that Judge Painter lacked the authority to make "this unusual request" and that the cases would be reassigned to the other judge, presumably Judge Levine.
Neither Judge Levine nor the CFTC would comment on Painter’s claims.
A more recent Wall Street Journal articlepublished after Painter’s allegations became public referenced court records from a guardianship petition filed by Painter’s wife claiming Painter has recently struggled with mental illness and alcoholism. The story cites conflicting medical opinions of Painter’s mental health.
Painter noted that if he simply retired, his remaining cases would be reassigned to Judge Levine, adding, "This, I could not do in good conscience."
Attorney James McGurk says there has been a tendency by the CFTC Enforcement Division to bring case to U.S. District court instead of administratively.
Attorney Mark Ruddy says he knows of one current complainant who plans to ask Judge Levine to recuse himself from the case. Ruddy does not believe Levine would do so because "it could be seen as an admission of bias."
The complainant could appeal Levine’s decision to the Commission and eventually to Federal appeals court.
While charges of past bias appear to open up the likelihood of appeals one attorney familiar with futures litigation suggested the CFTC order could put an end to it as it would be difficult to open up past cases. The attorney added that the CFTC reparation case process is seldom used with more complainants choosing to use the National Futures Association arbitration process.




LINK TO STORY

You're living in a dream world if you think you are any safer ATM due to NFA ~ CFTC oversight.