Dégradation Du Capital Net De Oanda - Forex Forum

Comme il y a beaucoup d'utilisateurs d'oanda ici, peut être cette information sera intéressante pour vous.

Le capital net de Oanda est passé en 1 an de 26 M$ à 11 M$.
Il y a encore de la marge, mais c'est quand même interessant de le noter je pense.

pour info les liens sur le site de la CFTC avec tous les FCM

Fin 2006
Fin 2005

This post has been edited by jlpi: Feb 16 2007, 15:53

Apparemment il y aurait cette réponse sur le site de Oanda de la part de son PDG (en gros tout va bien, c'est des changements comptables...).A chacun de faire son opinion.

This is a very important topic, so I thought I should respond before too many draw the wrong conclusions. What makes it difficult is that I don't really have much more to add that what was stated previously. But please allow me to reiterate anyways:

OANDA has been operating with profits for each and every month of 2006 as well as January of 2007. The capital on our balance sheet has been increasing correspondingly. OANDA has experienced strong growth in 2006 regardless of which metric you apply, including number of clients, client deposits, transaction volume, revenue and earnings. In fact, 2006 was a spectacular year for OANDA from an earnings point of view. The bottom line: operating funds are definitely not part of the equation.

OANDA's net capital as posted on the CFTC Web site has however gone down, as many here have observed. This is entirely due to various haircuts and charges that the CFTC and NFA rules require us to deduct from our capital. The various rules that apply are a bit convoluted, but the specific rule that is primarily responsible for the drop in OANDA's net capital is the required "concentration charge", which requires us to deduct 6% or 20% (depending on the currency pair) of the value of the position of some of our clients. While the concentration charge rule was introduced a while ago, the NFA only recently clarified how it was to be interpreted. This was brought up late 2006 when the NFA conducted their audit on site (as they do once a year). I can only speculate why some other firms have not had similar swings in their posted net capital numbers: either they are not applying the newer interpretation, or they do not have clients that enter into very large positions.