World Cup Fever Is Here! Choose your broker like you choose your team
Join WikiFX and investors worldwide in celebrating the excitement of the 2026 FIFA World Cup!
简体中文
繁體中文
English
Pусский
日本語
ภาษาไทย
Tiếng Việt
Bahasa Indonesia
Español
हिन्दी
Filippiiniläinen
Français
Deutsch
Português
Türkçe
한국어
العربية
اردو
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.

Disclaimer:
The views in this article only represent the author's personal views, and do not constitute investment advice on this platform. This platform does not guarantee the accuracy, completeness and timeliness of the information in the article, and will not be liable for any loss caused by the use of or reliance on the information in the article.

Join WikiFX and investors worldwide in celebrating the excitement of the 2026 FIFA World Cup!

Have you experienced issues with Pepperstone deposit & withdrawal processing? From your experience, do you feel that the Australia-based forex broker causes losses to its clients? Did the brokerage entity freeze your account and give you a margin call? All these trading allegations have been rampant on broker review platforms such as WikiFX. This Pepperstone review article takes a close look at the user complaints, especially in 2026. Additionally, we have given an overview of the regulatory framework under which the brokerage entity operates.

Some broker comparisons end with a confident "go with this one." This is not one of them — and that honesty is exactly what makes it worth reading. Wundersys and tradgrip are two young, offshore-registered brokers that keep popping up in front of beginner traders, often through aggressive online marketing. Both promise the usual buffet: tight spreads, generous leverage, multiple account tiers. And both, according to WikiFX, sit near the very bottom of the safety scale. So instead of crowning a champion, this comparison is really about something more useful: learning to read the warning signs, understanding the small differences that still matter, and knowing why "the better of two risky options" is still a conversation about risk.

If you trade forex from India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, or Nepal, you already know the quiet truth that eats into every trader's results: it is not just the market that decides whether you profit — it is the cost of getting in and out of each trade. Shave a couple of dollars off your commission on every lot, multiply it across hundreds of trades a year, and you are looking at the difference between a strategy that works and one that bleeds out slowly. South Asian traders are some of the most cost-conscious in the world, and rightly so. So we pulled the data on the brokers most often recommended for the region, cross-checked every name on WikiFX, and ranked them by the one number that matters most here: what they actually charge you to trade. Before the list, one quick lesson that will make this whole ranking click.