Abstract:Due to inadequate control systems and ineffective detection of potential market abuse, the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), the UK's regulatory watchdog, fined BGC Brokers LP and two GFI Group subsidiaries, GFI Brokers Limited and GFI Securities Limited.

Due to inadequate control systems and ineffective detection of potential market abuse, the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), the UK's regulatory watchdog, fined BGC Brokers LP and two GFI Group subsidiaries, GFI Brokers Limited and GFI Securities Limited, a total of £4,775,200.
According to the FCA, the inter-dealer brokers did not put the Market Abuse Regulation's (MAR) requirements for trade surveillance into practise. The failure to enforce appropriate frameworks has resulted in a significant increase in the risk of suspicious trading activity going undetected.
Trading firms, in the nearly two-year period between 2016 and 2018, used flawed and ineffective surveillance procedures that were unable to adequately address market abuse. Moreover, BGC and GFI systems did not cover all asset classes under MAR.
Upon evaluating the profiles of these companies in question, WikiFX discovered that they have low Wikiscore which translates into their high underlying risk and low credibility.\



“Oversight of our markets is a regulated partnership between the FCA and market participants, and so gaps or holes in a firm's ability to monitor and detect abusive trading poses direct risks to market integrity. This case is another example of the FCA's determination to ensure firms prioritise market integrity and the maintenance of high standards of compliance,” Mark Steward, the Executive Director of Enforcement and Market Oversight at FCA, commented.
The Executive Director of Enforcement and Market Oversight at FCA, Mark Steward, explained that “oversight of our markets is a regulated partnership between the FCA and market participants, and so gaps or holes in a firm's ability to monitor and detect abusive trading poses direct risks to market integrity. This case is another example of the FCA's determination to ensure firms prioritise market integrity and the maintenance of high standards of compliance.”
MAR was established six years ago, strengthening the standards for reporting and detecting market abuse. It includes a duty to keep an eye on orders and transactions to spot possible fraud efforts.
The FCA performs self-supervision of misuse by collecting data from all players in the regulated market. A specific market surveillance team controls the suspicious transaction and order reporting (STOR) regime. As part of its mandate, it carries out ad hoc checks among market participants to assess whether they control potential market abuses.


Have you been financially ruined through chargebacks allowed by Garanti BBVA Securities? Do you have to wait for hours to get your queries resolved by the broker’s customer support official? Did the same scenario prevail when you contact the officials in-person? Failed to close your account as Garanti BBVA Securities officials remained unresponsive to your calls? Many have expressed similar concerns while sharing the Garanti BBVA Securities review online. In this article, we have shared some complaints against the broker. Take a look!

For any experienced forex and CFD trader, the mechanics of moving capital are as critical as the trading strategy itself. The efficiency, security, and transparency of a broker's funding procedures form the bedrock of a trustworthy, long-term trading relationship. A broker can offer the tightest spreads and the most advanced platform, but if depositing funds is cumbersome or withdrawing profits is a battle, all other advantages become moot. This review provides a data-driven examination of Stonefort Securities withdrawals and funding methods. We will dissect the available information on payment options, processing times, associated costs, and the real-world user experience. Our analysis is anchored primarily in data from the global broker regulatory inquiry platform, WikiFX, supplemented by a critical look at publicly available information to provide a comprehensive and unbiased perspective for traders evaluating this broker.

For any experienced trader, the integrity of a broker is not just measured by its spreads or platform stability, but by the efficiency and reliability of its financial plumbing. The ability to deposit and, more importantly, withdraw capital without friction is a cornerstone of trust. This review provides an in-depth, data-driven analysis of the MH Markets deposits and withdrawals overview, examining the entire fund management lifecycle—from funding methods and processing speeds to fees and potential obstacles. MH Markets, operating for 5-10 years under the name Mohicans Markets (Ltd), has established a global footprint. With a WikiFX score of 7.08/10, it positions itself as a multi-asset broker offering a range of account types and access to the popular MetaTrader platforms. However, for a discerning trader, the real test lies in the details of its payment systems and the security of their funds. This article dissects the MH Markets funding methods withdrawal experience, leveraging pr

Is your forex trading experience with GAIN Capital full of financial scams? Does the broker disallow you from withdrawing your funds, including profits? Have you been scammed under the guise of higher return promises by an official? Does the GAIN Capital forex broker not have an effective customer support service for your trading queries? Concerned by this, many traders have shared negative GAIN Capital reviews online. In this article, we have discussed some of them. Read on!