Interactive Brokers Loses $16 Million of Retail FX Funds in April

Data from the US securities regulator for April shows that had lost more than $16 million in retail forex deposits. After consecutive advances in its market share, the Connecticut-based company was again the worst performer over the last few months after recording an overall drop of nearly 50 percent on a yearly basis. IB’s retail FX deposits went down to $56 million from $72 million the previous month and after the figure hit its peak at $103 million mark in June 2019.
Overall, the latest data shows a total marginal change month-over-month , and even differences amongst each broker were not pronounced.

According to the agency, the FX funds held at registered brokerages operating in the United States, including FCMs that are registered as Retail Foreign Exchange Dealers (RFEDs) and those included as broker-dealers, came in at $553 million in April 2020, which is a marginal drop of one percent month-over-month compared with the $556 million reported in March 2020.
Three brokers notched increases in Retail Funds
Meanwhile,  funds grew by $7.7 million, up nearly four percent month-over-month. Further, retail deposits at OANDA also rose by nearly $1.8 million in April 2020, while IG US added $2.2 million, or 14 percent, in the same month.
Looking at the market share of different brokers, the distribution slightly changed in April relative to the month prior. , the largest FX broker in the United States, remained the leader in terms of market share, commanding a 39 percent share, unchanged from the prior month but lower from 46 percent in the 2019 ranking.
 also maintained its stance as the second largest in the US with 37 percent market share, up one percent over last month. Interactive Brokers and TD Ameritrade retained 10 and 11 percent share, respectively.
The chart listed below outlines the full list of all FCMs that held Retail Forex Obligations in the month ending on April 30, 2020 – for purposes of comparison, the figures have been included against their March 2020 counterparts to illustrate disparities.

Be First to Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *