FXTM

It gave the European licence back

Every other broker in this directory holds its tier-1 licences and routes the rest of the world offshore. FXTM did something none of the others did: it stopped.

Forextime Ltd stopped serving EU retail clients in February 2021, ceased Cypriot operations on 31 December 2023, formally renounced its CIF authorisation, and CySEC withdrew licence 185/12 with effect from 20 May 2024 2. The group’s chief commercial officer said so plainly at the time: "We haven’t targeted clients in Europe for a number of years through any of our brands, and we don’t expect to focus on European audiences as we look forward. As a result we took the decision not to maintain a retail licence under CYSEC" 2.

It is worth being clear about what that is and is not. It is not an enforcement action and it is not on this page’s record of those, because nobody acted against the firm — it resigned. A company deciding Europe is not its market and giving up the licence rather than keeping a dormant one is arguably more honest than the alternative, which is on another page in this directory.

What it means for a reader is simple: whatever FXTM’s marketing shows, there is no European entity behind it any more, and there has not been for years.

The British company, by its own numbers

Exinity UK Limited still holds FCA authorisation 777911, and it is the reason this broker scores a ten on regulation. Its accounts describe a matched principal broker in the retail CFD markets whose revenue comes from commissions and service charges paid by Exinity Limited in Mauritius, "as all client trades of the Company are matched with Exinity Limited in its capacity as the Company’s liquidity provider" 1.

Then the numbers, which are the most interesting thing on this page. "In 2024 the Company opened 476 (2023: 347) new accounts, of which 79 (2023: 190) had received funds deposited by clients before the end of the year" 1. Seventy-nine funded accounts in a year, down from a hundred and ninety. Segregated client funds at 31 December 2024: £362,292, against £596,446 a year earlier 1.

For scale, Pepperstone’s British company held £26.2m of client money at its year end. FXTM’s holds about one seventieth of that. The company is profitable, well capitalised and doing exactly what it says; it is simply very small, and it is what the FCA badge on the marketing refers to.

This is not a criticism of the firm so much as an argument about the badge. A tier-1 licence tells you a regulator supervises a company. It does not tell you that the company is where your money would go, and on this record that gap is a factor of seventy.

Where the business actually is

Mauritius. Exinity Limited, company C119470 C1/GBL, holds an investment dealer licence from the Financial Services Commission there and takes every client the other entities do not 3. The same company holds South Africa’s FSCA licence as an over-the-counter derivative provider, which is why the entity map shows one legal name against two jurisdictions — that is correct rather than a duplicate.

Two entities were missing from this page entirely and one of them is tier-1: the British company above, and Exinity Capital East Africa Ltd, licensed by Kenya’s Capital Markets Authority as a non-dealing online foreign exchange broker 3. Kenya has been added to the regulator table for it, at tier B — a statutory regulator with a named licence category for this business and no compensation scheme, the same shape as South Africa and Dubai.

The group says its focus is Kenya, South Africa and Mauritius, and the licences match the statement. That is a coherent business. It is a different business from the one a reader in Europe or Britain thinks they are looking at.

What we searched for and did not find

No enforcement action against FXTM, Forextime or Exinity turned up in any register or outlet we checked — no fine, no restriction, no warning list entry, no litigation. The conduct component on this page therefore scores ten, and it means "a person looked on 16 September 2026 and found nothing", not "there is nothing".

One number we could not settle: a review desk publishes 46614 as the South African licence where the group’s own documents and this record say 50320. We have no reader for the FSCA register, so it stays as it is with the disagreement noted.