AxiCorp partners with ILQ to offer its trading services to US clients

7 Comments on this post

Trackbacks

1. Andy said:
   I dont know, in my opinion, these ILQ people are questionable. A former principal, then client, was sentenced to 30 yrs prision in Florida for a multimillion $ ponzi scheme. And now this business with ATC (see NFA complaint). My money wont go anywhere near these guys.

   September 13th, 2012 at 8:56 pm
2. Michael Greenberg said:
   atc/nfa minor stuff

   September 13th, 2012 at 9:05 pm
3. Andy said:
   Not in my opinion, for both firms. Altho it appears no clients were harmed directly.

   ILQ was clearly deceiving NFA, by changing to unapproved counterparties right after the audit – and they knew they were not allowed to do that. Begs the question, what else will they do they know they are not allwed to?
   ATC or its principal was apparantly betting against its own clients (which seems to be a good bet in retail fx most of the time), while clearly stating the opposite on their website and also knowing it was illegal. Which begs the question, what else is blatantly wrong information on their website?

   Seriously – read the ILQ complaint again and tell me you are at ease with sending a substantial amount of dosh to these people. The word ‘ponzi’ occurs 3 times in this document. And the rest doesnt exactly instill confidence either. Illegal trading activity and misrepresentations to clients should not be considered minor stuff – even if it pales in dimension compared to pfg or mfglobal.

   September 13th, 2012 at 9:24 pm
4. DJ said:
   “atc/nfa minor stuff”

   Nothing big? ATC holds themselves out as a no dealing desk brokerage – which is true if they introduce to FXCM. When introducing to ILQ however, it certainly isn’t a no dealing desk environment. That’s the first issue.

   Now, the second major issue is most introducing brokers are compensated by volume of their clients’ trades regardless of the partner broker. In ATC via ILQ’s situation the NFA alleges ATC was also profiting off of client losses. It’s one thing for a broker who runs a desk to do so and their clients are aware they’re running a desk, this also means they’re “taking on risk” and could very well go the other way. But it’s another thing for an introducing broker who claims to be a no dealing desk brokerage to introduce to a deal desk broker and secretly earn money for each trade their clients are unprofitable on on top of earning a volume-based amount. ILQ may have been clearing off trades to an unapproved counterparty but at least they weren’t blatantly lieing to their clients.

   September 14th, 2012 at 2:27 pm
5. Paul said:
   I am not familiar with the ATC situation but if was like the ILQ issue then I would agree with Michael and say it is minor. The ultimate result/verdict for the ILQ complaint was nothing close to what the NFA was insinuating. Though the ILQ complaint stood out to me as one of the worst I have seen the ultimate result was far different than the tone of the NFA statement. This is not the first time that the NFA slandered a company in a complaint, and I am surprised that ILQ didn’t go after them for defamation of character (but who would they complain to – the NFA?). Unfortunately this is the typical M.O. for the NFA – to list a series of “egregious” offenses (lack of supervision, failure to uphold standards, etc.) then work on the true issue and get their moneys worth in a arbitrarily set fine. I am not saying that ILQ or ATC is truel innocent but they are not guilty of what is charged either.

   The NFA is the Judge, Jury, and Executioner, so if you want to work in the USA then it is the price you pay…

   September 14th, 2012 at 3:02 pm
6. Michael Greenberg said:
   sorry to break this to you: everybody in the market, including many “STP/ECN” and even “Prime Brokers” are doing that. it may be unethical and ‘unfair’ but it’s not illegal
   when saying minor the intention was to say that these cases differ from those of gain/fxcm/fxdd where asymmetric slippage was involved – which was completely against the clients

   September 14th, 2012 at 7:23 pm
7. Jon said:
   ^^ Well said Michael.

   can someone point me to the ATC debacle regarding trading against clients?

   September 18th, 2012 at 7:04 am