FXall Overtakes Reuters to be Crowned Most Liquid Interbank FX Portal in September
FXall, a leading FX execution venue has reported promising trading metrics for the month of September. The Thomson Reuters owed
Adil Siddiqui
|
Exchanges
(
Institutional FX )
|
2013-10-07T16:51:50+00:00
2013-10-07T16:51:50+00:00
FX volumes at ECN, FXall, have crossed Thomson Reuters and EBS for the month of September. The trading platform saw average daily trading volumes exceed the two main dealer to dealer portals to hit $111 billion. In terms of a pure comparison, FXall volumes though, do include both its pure ECN and relationship based trading, as well as non-spot FX securities such as swaps and forwards.
Trading in September has risen from the lows reported in August across the board. FXall saw volumes increase by 15% month on month from August figures where it dipped below the $100 billion a day mark to trade $97 billion in average daily trading volume.
Join the iFX EXPO Asia and discover your gateway to the Asian Markets
Suggested articles
CCI Traders Launches MT5 with ECNGo to article >>
Trading volumes at Thomson Reuters saw a slight increase from those reported in August. The portal recorded average daily trading volume of $110 billion from $107 billion in August 2013. Trading volumes in 2013 have been considerably lower at Thomson Reuters from a year earlier; in September 2012 the venue saw average daily trading reach $133 billion, 22% higher than the current months figures.
FXall has turned out to be a good buy for Thomson Reuters as both FXall and Thomson Reuters have been scoring higher than rival EBS. EBS’s average daily trading volume for September stood at $81.2 billion.
(Correction: article was updated to reflect different trading flow between FXall and other publicly reporting venues)
Could IC and Armada Markets also be getting their liquidity from FXall as their spreads are industry lowest not matched by any other Forex broker?
Whats the minimum deal size in FxAll? I suppose 1m like at ebs/reuters? That would probably exclude 95% of all retail orders.
This comparison is not correct. FXAll volume figures include all FX products such as Swaps, Forwards, etc…..while EBS, Reuters and Hotspot report Spot Only volumes, so saying that FXAll has surpassed the spot venues is not accurate. If the goal is to get a better understanding of market share, then that can only be achieved with a spot only volume number from FXall and ideally one that breaks out the ECN vs the relationship segments of the business.
Hard to believe Armada Markets clears through LMAX as overnight spreads of LMAX are much much worse compared to Armada. If FXall minimum size is 1M then it could be that IC and Armada send only A book to them and B-book the smaller tickets. As a client of both I don’t really care but I do am curious about the source of this superb liquidity and spreads. Am thinking about opening my own retail broker right now.
Armada started with lmax as sole LP, and they added Citi to that. Supposedly their TradeStream product. I think its even on their website somewhere. I’d be curious to know if Armada has a b-book.
can't one of the liquidity providers do the "b-booking"? this way when a broker claims "it comes directly from our liquidity provider", they technically are not lying?
i saw finfx weasel their way out of admitting that their spreads are unusually high vs other ECN retail competitors (global prime au, ic markets, fxopen ecn, armada, etc)
"The LP made me do it" seems to be the new scapegoat used by offshore and onshore brokers alike.
FXAll is owned by Thomson Reuters, so not quite right to call them competitors!