The electronic brokerage segment at Interactive Brokers LLC (NASDAQ:IBKR), which deals with clearance and settlement of trades for individual and institutional clients globally, has shown mixed performance last month.
During March 2019, total client DARTs came in at 867,000, up five percent month-over-month from 824,000 in February 2019. On a year-on-year basis, Interactive Brokers saw a weak volume in its DARTs with March’s figure dipping approximately four percent relative to 903,000 reported in March 2018.
In terms of equity balance in customers’ accounts during March 2019, the figure totaled $147.6 billion, an increase of 14 percent year-on-year from $129.2 billion. In addition, Interactive Brokers managed to best its February 2019 equivalent, having notched a gain of three percent from $143.7 billion in the prior month.
Interactive Brokers’ ending client margin loan balances came in at $25.5 billion in March 2019, down one percent from $25.7 billion in February 2019. Across a yearly interval, the figure also moved lower by 13 percent when weighed against $29.3 billion in March 2018.
TrioMarkets Partners with HokoCloud, Expands its Portfolio with Social TradingGo to article >>
IB fined $100,000 to settle supervision case
Business highlights, according to the company’s press release, also showed that a total of 623,000 customer accounts were active at IB during March 2019. The figure was higher by one percent month-on-month when compared to February 2019 (614,200 accounts), and 20.0 percent higher from 617,400 accounts a year ago.
On average, in March 2019 Interactive Brokers charged clients commission fees of $3.82 per order, including exchange, clearing and regulatory fees, with the key products metrics coming out at $2.45 for stocks, $5.14 for equity options and $6.49 for futures orders.
Earlier last month, Interactive Brokers agreed to pay $100,000 in fines to settle multiple charges with the New Jersey’s Division of Consumer Affairs and the Bureau of Securities.
The civil penalty is related to allegations that the CFTC-registered broker did not adequately supervise its account opening procedures and permitted the former chief of a now-defunct hedge fund to trade even after he was banned from trading by NFA.