Note: This English translation is for reference purposes only. In the event of any discrepancy between theJapanese original and this English translation, the Japanese original shall prevail. The Financial Futures
Association of Japan assumes no responsibility for this translation or for direct, indirect or any other form ofdamage arising from the translation.

Results of the Actual Conditions Survey of Over-The-Counter Retail Foreign
Exchange Margin Trading
October 31, 2023
Research Department, The Financial Futures Association of Japan
Introduction
The Financial Futures Association of Japan (hereinafter referred to as the “Association”), in
cooperation with the Tokyo Foreign Exchange Market Committee, conducts in every April a surveyof business model and other actual conditions of over-the-counter (OTC) retail foreign exchange (FX)
margin trading (hereinafter referred to as “OTC retail FX margin trading,” or foreign exchange margin
trading, referred to as “FX margin trading”) conducted by members that handle OTC retail FX margin
trading.
The Association also collects from Association members various data that are necessary for examining
the management condition of each member company of the Association (hereinafter referred to as the“Monitoring Data” 1 in this report) on a regular basis.
The results of the survey of actual conditions mentioned above are aggregated and analyzed while
taking the Monitoring Data into account, and are summarized as follows:Part 1: Survey of Actual Conditions of OTC Retail FX Margin Trading in April 2023
1. Survey Method
We conducted the survey by distributing questionnaires to all the members that handled OTC retail
FX margin trading as of April 30, 2023 (excluding members that only provide intermediary services),and asking them to answer the questions on the questionnaires.
2. Number of Members Subject to the Survey
The number of members subject to the survey 2 (unless otherwise specifically provided, hereinafterreferred to as the “Members”) was 49 3.
Exhibit 1: Change in Number of Members Subject to the Survey(Unit: Company (Member))

Survey Month and Year
April 2014
April 2015

Number of Members Subject to the Survey
61
56

Year-on-Year Change
2-5

1 Trading volume of OTC retail FX margin trading with customers uses a figure aggregated based on the monitoring

survey that is reported by each member to the financial regulatory authority, who cooperatively sends its copy to the
Association. Therefore, please note that the figures do not completely match those publicly announced by the
Association on the Monthly Statistical Bulletin on OTC Retail FX Margin Trading.
2 As all Members that handle OTC retail FX margin trading (hereinafter referred to as “Members handling OTC retail FX
margin trading”) are the Members subject to the survey, the meaning of the “Members handling OTC retail FX margin
trading” is the same as that of the “Members subject to the survey.” However, please understand that both expressions
are used in this report, depending on the context or for making the report easier to understand.
3 For the April 2019 survey, two of the Members handling OTC retail FX margin trading had no record of actual trades.
They are excluded from the Members subject to the survey. (The same also applies in Part 2.)

April 2016
April 2017
April 2018
April 2019
April 2020
April 2021
April 2022
April 2023

51
53
53
51
52
51
49
49

-5
2
0
-2
1
-1
-2
0

3. Collected Results<Item 1>
(1) Business Model
The Association focused on the flow of executing a transaction of OTC retail FX margin trading, andcategorized the flows into 24 groups indicated in the “Table of Business Model Category” below (thetotal number of model numbers indicated in the table below (“model No.” in the Exhibit) as a businessmodel depending on the characteristics of the flow:
Table of Business Model Category
Model No. of
Each Business
Model(model No.)White Label[Note 1]

No. of Firms Used for
Cover Transactions to
Formulate Prices[Note 2]

Marry (During
Trading Hours)[Note 3]1

Discretionary

2

Yes

3

DiscretionaryNo57Discretionary
Yes

8
9

DiscretionaryNo

12Discretionary
Yes

14
15

Discretionary
No

17

After
BeforeApplicable

Discretionary
Yes

20
22

After
BeforeSingle

16

21

After
Before

13

19

After
BeforeSeveral

11

18

After
BeforeNotapplicable

10

After
BeforeSingle46Timing of Execution with
Customers and CoverTransaction[Note 4]After
BeforeSeveralDiscretionary
No

23
24

After
Before2

Note 1: White label means a transaction form where a Member executes a transaction with a customer under its own name using a
pricing/execution system managed by another foreign exchange broker (including FX operator). This includes a case wherea Member uses a system provided by its parent company, etc.
Note 2: This means the number of firms that provide a cover rate used for formulating the price, not the number of firms who
actually conduct cover transactions. In a normal condition, if a trading price with customers is formulated based on the rate
provided by a specific single firm that is used for cover transaction, it is described as “Single,” while if the rate is selectedor synthesized from those provided by several firms that are used for cover transactions every time the price for customers
is formulated, it is described as “Several.”
Note 3: During the daytime, if there is a system that controls the price fluctuation risk arising from transactions with customers byusing marry, it is described as “Yes,” while if there is no such system, it is described as “No.” Additionally, if covertransactions are made for all the transactions executed with customers during the daytime, in principle, it is described as“No,” whereas if cover transactions are not made for some of the transactions executed with customers during the daytime,
and the price fluctuation risk is offset by open positions created by transactions with other customers that match against theoriginal transactions, it is described as “Yes.”
Note 4: In a normal condition, if a cover transaction is made after executing a transaction with a customer, it is described as “After,”while if a transaction with a customer is executed only after a cover transaction is completed, it is described as “Before.” If
a cover transaction can be made either before or after executing a transaction with a customer, it is described as“Discretionary.” Also, if a Member holds its own position by making a cover transaction before receiving a customer orderand can match its own position against the customer’s order, it is described as “Discretionary.” If a transaction with acustomer can be completed at the same time when a cover transaction is made under a system such as STP, it is described
as “Before.” In the case of white label, “Discretionary,” “After,” or “Before” is determined depending on the timing of
cover transaction made by the outsourcing contractor. It is not necessary to consider response at the time of emergency.

(2) Distribution of Business Models
Exhibit 2 shows the number of Members subject to the survey (49 companies in total) that adopt acertain business model (model No.) shown in the Table of Business Model Category in Part 1, Section
3, <Item 1>-(1). The total number of responses was 59, which exceeded the total number of theMembers subject to the survey, as some Members adopted several business models (model No.).
When we look at the breakdown of each business model (model No.), 15 Members (accounting forabout 25.4% of the total responses) adopted at least one of model Nos. 16 to 18 (the business models
that are a white label form, use one firm for cover transactions, and do not conduct marry transactions),
whereas 27 Members (accounting for about 45.8% of the total responses) adopted at least one of modelNos. 7 to 9 (the business models that are not a white label form, use several firms for cover transactions,and can conduct marry transactions). Individually, model No. 8 (the business model that is not a whitelabel form, uses several firms for cover transactions, can conduct marry transactions, and conducts acover transaction after carrying out contract with a customer) was adopted by 18 Members (accounting
for approximately 30.5% of the total responses).
Exhibit 3 shows the number of Members subject to the survey (49 in total) that adopted either “Single(one)” or “Several (two, or three or more)” business models (model No.).
3

Exhibit 2: Total Number of Members that Adopt Each Model Number in Part 1, 3-(1)(Unit: Company (Member))

Exhibit 3: Breakdown of Members by Number of Business Models Adopted(Unit: Company (Member))

The number of Members that

The number of Members that adopt

The number of Members that adopt

adopt a single model

several (two) models

several (three or more) models

41

6

2

(3) Ranking of Members Based on Trading Volume of OTC Retail FX Margin Tradingwith Customers and Business Models Adopted
We rank the Members subject to the survey based on the trading volume of OTC retail FX margin
trading, and categorize them into three classes 4. Exhibit 4 shows the total number of Members by eachof the three classes that adopted a certain business model (model No. show in 3-(1)) as in Exhibit 2.
When we look at the breakdown, we found that Model No. 8 was most widely adopted for the FirstClass, Model No. 6 and No. 8 were for the Second Class, and Model No.18 was for the Third Class.

4

We rank the Members subject to the survey by the trading volume of OTC retail FX margin trading in FY ended April
2023, and categorized the top one-third as the First Class (Rank 1st to 17th), the next one-third as the Second Class(Rank 18th to 33rd), and the remaining one-third as the Third Class (Rank 34th to 49th).

4

Exhibit 4: Total Number of Members in Each of Three Classes Based on OTC Retail
FX Margin Trading Volume (with Customers) Ranking that Adopted a Certain
Model (Model No.) Shown in Part 1, 3-(1)(Unit: Company (Member))

The First Group Members
The Second Group
Members
The Third Group Members<Item 2> Use of Prime Broker (PB) 5 System and Volume of Use(1) Change in the Use of PBs by the Members Subject to the Survey
Exhibit 5 shows the number of Members using the Prime Broker (PB) system, the number of contracts
made through the PB system, the number of PBs, and the trading volume of OTC retail FX margin
trading with customers under the PB system.
Exhibit 6 shows the number of Members by the use of the Prime Broker (PB) system in terms of
Newly started, Ceased (terminated), Increased, and Decreased:
Exhibit 5: Use of PB system and the Usage Amount
Survey Month and Year
[Note 1]

5

No. of Members

No. of Members

No. of PBs

PB usageamountusing the PB
Systemmade through the PB system(total)(Net) [Note 2](million yen)
[Note 3]

Prime Broker (PB) means a broker who intermediates a transaction between the Member and a bank that is used for acover transaction, and takes up the position of the Members based on the give-up instruction or by a tri-party agreement
for the settlement between the Member and the financial institution used for the cover transaction.

5

April 2014

16

30

7

52,764,799

April 201517

April 2016

15

31

8

99,643,704

31

10

70,312,312

April 2017

15

30

7

April 2018

16

31

7

45,205,313
56,596,271

April 2019

16

31

6

50,243,748

April 2020
April 2021

17
18

38
42

9
10

65,406,358

April 2022

16

38

9

108,821,216

April 2023

16

38

7

65,126,498

75,102,439

Note 1: Survey on the number of PBs (net) and the PB usage amount began in April 2014 (The same shall apply in Exhibits 6 and
7).
Note 2: It is the number of PBs that the Members have contracted after deducting the overlapped numbers.
Note 3: Corrections have been made to figures reported in the 2017 survey for the figures of April 2018.

Exhibit 6: Use of PB system (Newly started, Ceased (terminated), Increased, andDecreased)(Unit: Company (Member))No. of Membersthat ceasedusing PBs
2

No. of Members that
decreased the number
of PBs used [Note2]
1

No. of Members that
increased the number
of PBs used
3No. of Membersthat newly started
using PBs
1

April 2015 [Note]

0

3

2

2

April 2016 [Note]

2

0

3

1

April 2017

0

3

2

0

April 2018

0

0

0

1

April 2019

0

1

1

0

April 2020

0

0

5

1

April 2021

0

0

2

1

April 2022[Note]

1

2

0

0

April 2023

0

1

1

0

Survey Month andYear
April 2014

Note:

In addition to the figures indicated above, one Member that used the PB system ceased the business as of April 2015, and
one Member was absorbed by another Member as of April 2016 and April 2022, respectively.

Note 2: Corrections have been made to figures reported in the 2021 survey for the figures of April 2022.

(2) Attributes of PBs 6
As shown in Exhibit 7, the number of PBs used by the Members handling OTC retail FX margin
trading was a total of seven in 2023. The attribute of seven PBs is “i. Financial institutions subject toreporting to the Tokyo Foreign Exchange Market Committee.”

6 Please refer to the footnote in Part 2, 3-(1) for each attribute of PBs.

6

Exhibit 7: Use of PBs by Attribute(Unit: Company (PB))
i. Financial
institutions subject
to reporting to theTokyo Foreign
Exchange Market
Committee

ii. Financial
institution subject
to reporting to the
Bank of Japan(excluding thosecategorized as i)iii. Financial institution
subject to reporting toa central bank, etc.
(overseas) (excluding
those categorized as i
or ii)

Domestic PBs
other than i to iii

April 2014

6

-

1

-

-

April 2015

4

-

2

-

2

April 2016

6

-

2

-

2

April 2017

5

-

1

-

1

April 2018

5

-

1

-

1

April 2019

5

-

1

-

-

April 2020

8

-

1

-

-

April 2021
April 2022

8
8

-

1
-

-

1
1

April 2023

7

-

-

-

-

Survey Monthand Year

Overseas PBs
other than i to iii<Item 3> Offering of Automatic Trading Tools(1) Offering of Automatic Trading Tools to Customers
Exhibit 8 shows the number of Members that offered automatic trading tools to customers every April
from 2014 onwards, and in the case where the automatic tool was offered, the number of Membersthat offered a tool that was internally developed, externally developed, or both.
Exhibit 8: Number of Members Offering Automatic Trading Tools and the Attributesof Developers of the Tools(Unit: Company (Member))

Survey Month and Year

No. of Members thatoffered automatic
trading tools

Whether the automatic trading tools offered were internallydeveloped, externally developed, or both

April 2014

21

Internallydeveloped
3

Externally developed(developed by others)
16

April 2015

23

4

16

3

April 2016

25

7

15

3

April 2017

25

8

14

3

April 2018

20

6

11

3

April 2019

21

4

13

4

April 2020

23

5

13

5

April 2021
April 2022

20
19

4
3

12
12

4
4

April 2023

20

5

12

3

Both
2

(2) Impact of Automatic Trading Tools
Exhibit 9 shows the trading volume of OTC retail FX margin trading with customers executed by all
the Members subject to the survey, by the Members that offered automatic trading tools, and by the7Members that did not offer automatic trading tools, as of every April from 2014 onwards.
Exhibit 10 shows the trading volume of OTC retail FX margin trading with customers executed by theMembers that offered automatic trading tools (total of 10 Members) in all the surveys conducted every
April from 2014 onwards, and by the Members that did not offer automatic trading tools (total of 18
Members) in all the surveys conducted every April from 2014 onwards.
Exhibit 9: Trading Volume of OTC Retail FX Margin Trading with Customers(By all the Members subject to the survey, and Members that offered/did not offer automatic trading
tools in each survey conducted every April from 2014 onwards)(Unit: million yen, %)Trading Volume of OTC Retail FX Margin Trading with
Customers

Survey Monthand Year

Members subject
to the Survey

Members that did
Members that
not offeroffered automatic
automatic trading
trading tools
tools

Change(Ascomparedwithpreviousyear)

Change(Ascomparedwithpreviousyear)
Membersthat
Members
offeredsubject toautomatic
the Survey
trading
tools

Change(Ascomparedwithpreviousyear)
Membersthat did
not offer
automatic
trading
tools

Change(Ascomparedwith April
2014)

Membersthat
Members
offeredsubject toautomatic
the Survey
trading
tools

Membersthat did
not offer
automatic
trading
tools

April 2014

238,252,636

35,660,526

202,592,110

53.9%

47.6%

100.0%

100.0%

April 2015

453,041,189

36,697,371

416,343,818 190.2%

102.9%

205.5%

190.2%

102.9%

205.5%

April 2016

407,399,182

98,816,141

308,583,041

89.9%

269.3%

74.1%

171.0%

277.1%

152.3%

April 2017319,281,362

79,001,116

240,280,246

78.4%

79.9%

77.9%

134.0%

221.5%

118.6%

April 2018309,440,740

87,218,594

222,222,146

96.9%

110.4%

92.5%

129.9%

244.6%

109.7%

April 2019

240,804,618

57,956,661

182,847,957

77.8%

66.4%

82.3%

101.1%

162.5%

90.3%

April 2020

527,763,826

116,650,925

411,112,901 219.2%

201.3%

224.8%

221.5%

327.1%

202.9%

April 2021

543,629,832

104,821,804

438,808,028 103.0%

89.9%

106.7%

228.2%

293.9%

216.6%

April 2022

991,844,591

193,770,710

798,073,881 182.4%

184.9%

181.9%

416.3%

543.4%

393.9%

April 2023

770,703,514

149,336,244

621,367,270

77.1%

77.9%

323.5%

418.8%

306.7%

77.7%

55.2%

Change(Ascomparedwith April
2014)

Change(Ascomparedwith April
2014)

100.0%

Exhibit 10: Trading Volume of OTC Retail FX Margin Trading with Customers(By Members that offered or did not offer automatic trading tools in all the surveys conducted
every April from 2014 onwards)(Unit: million yen, %)Survey Monthand Year

Trading Volume of OTC Retail FX Margin Tradingwith Customers
Members that Members that
(Reference)
Change inhave offered
have not offered Members that(A)
automatic
automatic trading have conducted(Astrading tools in tools in all the
OTC retail FX
compared
all the years
years from April margin trading for withfrom April
2014 to 2023
all the years from previous
2014 to 2023
(total of 18
year)
April 2014 to(total of 10
Members)... (B) 2023 other thanMembers)...
(A) and (B) (total
(A)
of 14
Members)… (C)April 2014

9,405,005

171,061,678

52,629,453 -April 2015

15,749,962

327,443,056

102,934,525

8

167.5%

Change in(B)(Ascomparedwithprevious
year)(Reference Change in)(A)
Change in (As(C)
compared(As
with April
compared 2014)
withpreviousyear)-

191.4%

195.6%

Change in(B)(Ascomparedwith April
2014)(Reference)
Change in(C)(Ascomparedwith April
2014)

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

167.5%

191.4%

195.6%

April 2016

17,437,041

301,533,920

86,692,770

110.7%

92.1%

84.2%

185.4%

176.3%

164.7%

April 201715,489,964

235,011,370

67,516,346

88.8%

77.9%

77.9%

164.7%

137.4%

128.3%

April 201819,145,280

214,999,293

74,361,768

123.6%

91.5%

110.1%

203.6%

125.7%

141.3%

April 201918,229,113

159,289,082

62,611,518

95.2%

74.1%

84.2%

193.8%

93.1%

119.0%

April 2020

35,577,519

363,438,192

127,035,334

195.2%

228.2%

202.9%

378.3%

212.5%

241.4%

April 2021

31,764,806

369,479,732

135,699,336

89.3%

101.7%

106.8%

337.7%

216.0%

257.8%

April 2022

44,769,708

683,721,265

246,759,430

140.9%

185.0%

181.8%

476.0%

399.7%

468.9%

April 2023

25,887,798

564,893,711

169,766,978

57.8%

82.6%

68.8%

275.3%

330.2%

322.6%<Item 4> Offering of API 7 to Customers(1) Offering of API to Customers
Exhibit 11 shows the number of Members that offered API every April from 2014 onwards.
Exhibit 11: Number of Members that Offered API(Unit: Company (Member))

Survey Month andYear
April 2014

No. of Members thatoffered API
7

No. of Members that
stopped offering API
0

No. of Members that started
offering API
2

April 2015

15

0

8

April 2016

12

3

1

April 2017

12

2

2

April 2018

11

3

2

April 2019

10

2

1

April 2020

9

1

0

April 2021

9

1

1

April 2022

7

3

1

April 2023

6

1

0

(2) Impact of Application Programming Interface
Exhibit 12 shows the trading volume of OTC retail FX margin trading with customers executed by all
the Members subject to the survey, Members that offered Application Programming Interface (API),and Members that did not offer API in each survey conducted every April from 2014 onwards.
Exhibit 13 shows the trading volume of OTC retail FX margin trading with customers executed by theMembers that have offered API in all the surveys conducted every April from 2014 onwards (total ofthree Members) and by the Members that have not offered automatic trading tools in all the surveys
conducted every April from 2014 onwards (total of 27 Members).
Exhibit 12: Trading Volume of OTC Retail FX Margin Trading with Customers(By all the Members subject to the survey, and Members that offered/did not offer API in eachsurvey conducted every April from 2014 onwards)

7

In this document, API (Application Programming Interface) means specifications of the interface that is used to exchange
data with external software (mainly a system for system trading).

9

(Unit: million yen, %)Change(Ascomparedwithpreviousyear)

Trading Volume of OTC Retail FX Margin
Trading with Customers

Change(Ascomparedwithpreviousyear)

MembersthatofferedMembers
API insubject toeach
the Survey
surveymonth

Change(Ascomparedwithpreviousyear)

Change(Ascomparedwith April
2014)

Change(Ascomparedwith April
2014)

Change(Ascomparedwith April
2014)

Membersthat did not
Members
offer API in subject to theeach survey
Surveymonth

MembersthatofferedAPI ineach
surveymonth

Membersthat did notoffer API ineach survey
month

Survey Monthand Year

Members
subject to theSurveyMembers thatoffered API

Members that
did not offer
API

April 2014

238,252,636

24,711,589

213,541,047

53.9%

48.8%

54.5%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

April 2015

453,041,189

81,606,353

371,434,836

190.2%

330.2%

173.9%

190.2%

330.2%

173.9%

April 2016

407,399,182

91,996,657

315,402,525

89.9%

112.7%

84.9%

171.0%

372.3%

147.7%

April 2017319,281,362

33,756,891

285,524,471

78.4%

36.7%

90.5%

134.0%

136.6%

133.7%

April 2018309,440,740

36,217,966

273,222,774

96.9%

107.3%

95.7%

129.9%

146.6%

127.9%

April 2019

240,804,618

33,931,673

206,872,945

77.8%

93.7%

75.7%

101.1%

137.3%

96.9%

April 2020

527,763,826

76,670,474

451,093,352

219.2%

226.0%

218.1%

221.5%

310.3%

211.2%

April 2021

543,629,832

57,927,310

485,702,522

103.0%

75.6%

107.7%

228.2%

234.4%

227.5%

April 2022

991,844,591

25,790,214

966,054,377

182.4%

44.5%

198.9%

416.3%

104.4%

452.4%

April 2023

770,703,514

16,202,992

754,500,522

77.7%

62.8%

78.1%

323.5%

65.6%

353.3%

Exhibit 13: Trading Volume of OTC Retail FX Margin Trading with Customers(By Members that offered/ did not offer API in all the surveys conducted every April from 2014
onwards)(Unit: million yen, %)Trading Volume of OTC Retail FX Margin Trading with
Customers(Reference)
Members that haveconducted OTC
retail FX margin
trading for all theyears from April
2014 to 2023 otherthan (A) and (B)(total of 12
Members)… (C)Change in Change in (Referenc Change in Change in (Referenc(A)(B) (As
e)
(A)
(B)
e)
(As
compared Change in (As(As
Change incompared with(C) (As
compared compared (C)withprevious compared with April with April (Asprevious year)withcompared
2014)
2014)
year)
previous
with April
year)
2014)

Members thathave offered
API for all theyears from
April 2014 to2023 (total ofthreeMembers)...
(A)

Members that have
not offered API for
all the years from
April 2014 to 2023
(total of 27
Members)... (B)April 2014

1,577,709

175,643,496

55,874,931 -April 2015

3,334,905

329,101,269

113,691,369

211.4%

187.4%

April 2016

3,472,661

302,841,068

99,350,002

104.1%

92.0%

April 2017

4,309,902

235,703,439

78,004,339

124.1%

April 2018

4,370,015

229,655,280

74,481,046

April 20195,004,117

168,694,316

66,431,280

April 2020

5,710,112

381,668,752

April 2021

5,870,575

April 2022

9,945,914

April 2023

5,684,460

Survey Monthand Year

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

203.5%

211.4%

187.4%

203.5%

87.4%

220.1%

172.4%

177.8%

77.8%

78.5%

273.2%

134.2%

139.6%

101.4%

97.4%

95.5%

277.0%

130.8%

133.3%

114.5%

73.5%

89.2%

317.2%

96.0%

118.9%

138,672,181

114.1%

226.2%

208.7%

361.9%

217.3%

248.2%

379,762,453

151,310,846

102.8%

99.5%

109.1%

372.1%

216.2%

270.8%

701,152,502

264,151,987

169.4%

184.6%

174.6%

630.4%

399.2%

472.8%

566,748,058

188,115,969

57.2%

80.8%

71.2%

360.3%

322.7%

336.7%

10--

<Item 5> Currency Options
Exhibit 14 shows the number of Members handling OTC retail FX margin trading that also handledcurrency option trading (limited to the currency options regulated by the Financial Instruments andExchange Act) every April from 2014 onwards.
Exhibit 14: Number of Members Handling OTC Retail FX Margin Trading that Also
Handled OTC Currency Option Trading(Unit: Company (Member))

Survey Month and Year
April 2014
April 2015
April 2016
April 2017
April 2018
April 2019
April 2020
April 2021
April 2022
April 2023
Note:

Number of Members that handled OTC Currency Options
No. of Members that also handled retail BO trading [Note]
10
7
10
8
10
7
10
8
9
7
12
8
13
8
13
8
13
8
12
8

Retail BO means currency binary options for retail customers that are defined in the “Business Conduct Rules on Retail
OTC Binary Option Trading” published by the Association.

11

Part 2: Aggregation and Analysis of Cover Transaction Data for OTC Retail FX Margin
Trading
1. Cover Transactions Subject to Aggregation and Attributes of Members
Table 1 shows the number of Members that handled OTC retail FX margin trading by type of business.
Table 1: Number of Members Handling OTC Retail FX Margin Trading by Type ofBusiness(Unit: Company (Member))
Attribute of Member(Business Type)

Registered Financial
Institution

Securities
Company

Financial Futures Company,
etc.

Total

5
5
5
6
6
6
7
6
6
6

31
30
27
28
29
27
27
27
26
26

25
21
19
19
18
18
18
18
17
17

61
56
51
53
53
51
52
51
49
49

Survey Month and Year

April 2014
April 2015
April 2016
April 2017
April 2018
April 2019
April 2020
April 2021
April 2022
April 2023

Note:

[Note, Note 2][Note, Note 2]

Securities Company means a Member of the Association that is also a member of the Japan Securities Dealers Association(excluding specified business members and special members), and Financial Futures Company etc. means a Member of the
Association other than a Registered Financial Institution or Securities Company. However, if a Member of the Association
newly joins the Japan Securities Dealers Association after becoming a Member of the Association, or if the weight of its
business other than financial futures trading exceeds that of financial futures trading, or for other specific reasons, theattribute of the Member shall be changed and the number of respective Members shall be recounted.

Note 2: The figures for April 2016, 2017, 2021, and 2022 were corrected in the previous year’s survey respectively.

2. Impact of FX Margin Trading in Japan on Foreign Exchange Market(1) Flow of Transactions
The flow of funds in OTC retail FX margin trading consists of the flow between a customer and a
Member that handles OTC retail FX margin trading (internal circulation) and the flow between a
Member that handles OTC retail FX margin trading and a firm used for cover transactions (external
circulation). Marry transactions that are offset within a Member that handles OTC retail FX margin
trading without carrying out a cover transaction with an outside firm are categorized as internal
circulation.
Furthermore, when we look at the retail FX margin trading in Japan through Tokyo Financial
Exchange’s Click365 that is regarded as a transaction in a domestic exchange, as it has a framework
under which an investor and a market maker are matched for the transaction, we can say that it has
12similar characteristics to those of the external flow of the OTC retail FX margin trading.
As the trading volume that is regarded as external circulation in retail FX margin trading (external
circulation volume) increases, it may impact the FX market through firms used for cover transactions(as well as market makers).
Table 2 below shows the external circulation volume of retail FX margin trading.
Table 2: External Circulation Volume of FX Margin Trading(Unit: 100 million yen, %)OTC retail FX margin trading(2)/(1)(%)

Internal
Circulation
Volume =(1)−(2)(3) Click365
Trading
Volume[Notes 2, 3](4) Total
External
Circulation
Volume of FX
Margin Trading= (2)+(3)Survey Monthand Year(1) Trading
Volume with
Customers(2) External
Circulation Volume(Total amount of covertransactions) [Note 1]

April 2014

2,382,526

986,06941.4%

1,396,457

23,3581,009,427

April 2015

4,530,411

1,818,843

40.1%

2,711,568

32,955

1,851,798

April 2016

4,073,991

1,681,387

41.3%

2,392,604

31,728

1,713,115

April 2017

3,192,813

1,265,381

39.6%

1,927,432

22,544

1,287,925

April 2018

3,094,407

1,271,873

41.1%

1,822,534

23,384

1,295,257

April 2019

2,408,046

1,042,452

43.3%

1,365,593

14,534

1,056,986

April 2020

5,277,638

1,763,017

33.4%

3,514,620

19,691

1,782,708

April 2021

5,436,298

2,451,217

45.1%

2,985,080

17,2072,468,424

April 2022

9,918,445

3,726,576

37.6%

6,191,869

40,6893,767,265

April 2023

7,707,035

2,592,249

33.6%

5,114,785

20,9482,613,197

Note 1: Based on the Monitoring Data. Hedge transactions and other transactions are included for members for which hedgetransactions and other proprietary trading are difficult to distinguish from cover transactions.
Note 2: This figure represents the monthly trading volume disclosed by the Tokyo Financial Exchange multiplied by the month-end
settlement price.
Note 3: In total, there were six MM (market makers) as of June 30, 2023 (Commerzbank, Deutsche Securities, Barclays Bank,
Goldman Sachs Japan, Nomura Securities, and MUFG Bank).

(2) Comparison with the Tokyo Foreign Exchange Market
As shown in Table 3, the total external circulation volume of FX trading accounted for 79.3% of the
spot trading volume in the Tokyo foreign exchange market.
Table 3: Comparison between Spot Transactions in the Tokyo Foreign Exchange
Market and External Circulation Volume(Unit: 100 million yen, %)Survey Monthand Year

Survey Results Announced by the Tokyo
Foreign Exchange Market Committee [Note 1](1) Spot Trading(2) Of which,VolumeTransactions with
Non-Financial
Institution Customers(domestic) [Note 2]13(3) Total External
Circulation Volume of
FX Trading(The same as those in(4) in Table 2)(3)/(1)(%)(3)/(2)(%)

April 2014

2,347,993

764,693

1,009,42743.0%

132.0%

April 2015

3,263,748

1,272,232

1,851,798

56.7%

145.6%

April 2016

2,638,980

588,956

1,713,11564.9%

290.9%

April 2017

2,429,826

596,991

1,287,925

53.0%

215.7%

April 2018

2,809,094

1,083,271

1,295,257

46.1%

119.6%

April 2019

2,705,120

1,107,138

1,056,986

39.1%

95.5%

April 2020

3,012,421

948,547

1,782,708

59.2%

187.9%

April 2021

3,176,389

982,1512,468,424

77.7%

251.3%

April 2022

4,291,185

962,077

3,767,26587.8%

391.6%

April 2023

3,296,198

828,616

2,613,197

79.3%

315.4%

Note 1: Figures in (1) and (2) of the table above are calculated by multiplying the spot trading volume described in “[Reference
Table] <Table 1>” in the “Survey on Foreign Exchange Transaction Volume in Tokyo Foreign Exchange Market” publishedby the Tokyo Foreign Exchange Market Committee by the yen/dollar spot rate as of 17:00 at the end of April published by
the Bank of Japan (80.74 yen in 2012, 97.83 yen in 2013, 102.51 in 2014, 118.91 yen in 2015, 108.40 yen in 2016, 111.29
yen in 2017, 109.40 yen in 2018, 111.675 yen in 2019, 106.06 yen in 2020, 108.885 yen in 2021, 130.595 yen in 2022, and135.725 yen in 2023).
Note 2: We adopt the same definition of non-financial institution customers as those on the “Survey on Foreign Exchange
Transaction Volume in Tokyo Foreign Exchange Market” published by the Tokyo Foreign Exchange Market Committee. In
the survey, it is explained that transactions with FX margin trading operators should be recorded as transactions with nonfinancial institution customers. However, it should be noted that such transactions can be classified into a category otherthan those with non-financial institution customers if the FX margin trading operator is not a specialized FX margin trading
operator.

3. Cover Transactions for OTC Retail FX Margin Trading(1) Firms Used for Cover Transactions by Attribute 8 and Use of Cover Transactions
The number of firms for cover transactions used by the Members handling OTC retail FX margin
trading by attribute shown in Table 4 and the total number of Members handling OTC retail FX margin
trading that use firms for cover transactions (by attribute) shown in Table 4-2 indicate the attribute offirms used for cover transactions with which Members handling OTC retail FX margin trading makea cover transaction.
The number of Members handling OTC retail FX margin trading is approximately 3.9 per firm used
for cover transactions. When we look at the attributes of firms used for cover transactions, the numberof Members handling OTC retail FX margin trading is approximately 8.8 on average per financial
institution subject to reporting to the Tokyo Foreign Exchange Market Committee, which is higher
than the general average.
8

When we determine the attribute, financial institutions that participate in (report to) the “Survey on Foreign Exchange
Transaction Volume in Tokyo Foreign Exchange Market” are categorized into “Financial institutions subject to reportingto the Tokyo Foreign Exchange Market Committee”; financial institutions that cooperate with the “Central Bank Survey
on Foreign Exchange and Derivatives (FX and Derivatives Survey)” conducted once in three years by the Bank of Japan(excluding those categorized into the financial institutions subject to reporting to the Tokyo Foreign Exchange Market
Committee) are categorized as “Financial institutions subject to reporting to the Bank of Japan”; and financial institutions,etc. that cooperate with the “FX and Derivatives Survey” conducted by a central bank other than in Japan are categorized
into “Other financial institutions, etc. subject to reporting to a central bank (overseas).”14

Table 4: Number of Firms for Cover Transactions by Attribute Used by Members Handling
OTC Retail FX Margin Trading(Unit: Company (Operator))
Attributes ofFirms Used
for CoverTransactions(3) Other(1)(2)
financial
Financial
Financial
institutions,institutions
institutions
1.
etc. subject
subject tosubject toTotal
to reporting
reporting toreporting tofromto a central
the Tokyo
the Bank of(1) tobank
Foreign(3)
Japan(overseas)
Exchange(excluding(excluding
Market(1))(1) and (2))
Committee
SurveyMonth andYear

2. Total offirms thatare not
categorized
into any of (4)the above
Domestic
but are used Operatorsfor covertransactions(total of (4)and (5))(5)Overseas
U.S. U.K.
Operators
Total

Singapore

Australia

Others

Grand
Total

[Note]

April 2014

25

18

1

6

32

12

20

2

9

4

3

2

57

April 2015

22

16

1

5

35

11

24

3

9

4

5

3

57

April 2016

22

16

1

5

36

13

23

3

8

4

4

4

58

April 2017

26

19

1

6

41

13

28

5

10

5

4

4

67

April 2018

25

19

1

5

43

13

30

5

11

4

4

6

68

April 2019
April 2020

26
27

19
19

1
1

6
7

45
49

14
14

31
35

5
5

11
12

5
8

4
3

6
7

71
76

April 2021

26

19

1

6

50

15

35

6

13

7

3

6

76

April 2022

26

19

1

6

45

15

30

4

12

6

3

5

71

April 2023

26

19

1

6

46

15

31

3

12

7

3

6

72

Note: Malaysia, New Zealand, Ireland, Belize, Cyprus, UAE, Germany, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Greece, and Vanuatu.

Table 4-2: Total Number of Members Handling OTC Retail FX Margin Trading that Use Firms
for Cover Transactions (by Attribute) [Note 1](Unit: Company (Member))
Attributes ofFirms Used for
Cover
Transactions

SurveyMonth andYear

(1)
Financial
institutions
1.
subject to
Totalreporting tofrom
the Tokyo(1) toForeign(3)
Exchange
MarketCommittee(2)(3) Other
Financial financial
institutions institutions,subject to etc. subject
reporting to reportingto theto a central
Bank ofbankJapan(overseas)(excluding (excluding(1))(1) and (2))

2. Total offirms thatare not
categorized
into any of(4)
the above
Domestic
but areOperators
used forcover
transactions(total of (4)and (5))(5)Overseas
U.S. U.K. Singapore Australia
Operators
Total

Others[Note 2]

Grand
Total

April 2014

141

123

2

16

68

31

37

3

14

15

3

2

209

April 2015

128

113

1

14

68

24

44

4

16

16

5

3

196

April 2016

136

116

1

19

68

25

43

8

11

15

4

5

204

15

April 2017

152

132

1

19

79

29

50

10

13

16

4

7

231

April 2018

156

137

1

18

86

32

54

6

19

16

5

8

242

April 2019

163

143

1

19

86

31

55

6

20

17

5

7

249

April 2020

174

152

1

21

104

38

66

6

21

27

4

8

278

April 2021

182

164

1

17

94

36

58

7

22

20

3

6

276

April 2022

187

167

2

18

91

37

54

5

22

19

3

5

278

April 2023

191

169

3

19

94

38

56

4

23

20

3

6

285

Note 1: This is a total aggregated figure after categorizing firms for cover transactions used by Members handling OTC retail FX
margin trading by attribute.
Note 2: Malaysia, New Zealand, Ireland, Belize, Cyprus, UAE, Germany, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Greece, and Vanuatu.

(2) Trading Volume of Cover Transactions by Attribute of Firms Used for CoverTransactions
As in Table 4 and Table 4-2, Table 5 and Table 5-2 show the trading volume of cover transactions
executed between Members that handle OTC retail FX margin trading and firms used for covertransactions after categorizing firms used for cover transactions by attribute. When we look at the data
by attribute, financial institutions subject to reporting to the Tokyo Foreign Exchange Market
Committee accounted for 26.3% of all cover transactions.
Table 6 shows the aggregated result by categorizing data in (1), (2), and (4) of the attributes of firms
used for cover transactions as shown in Table 5 as domestic cover transactions, and data in (3) and (5)as overseas cover transactions.
Table 5: Trading Volume of Cover Transactions by Attribute of Firms Used for CoverTransactions(Unit: 100 million yen)
Attributes ofFirms Used for
Cover
Transactions

1. Financial
Institutions(financial
institutions
included in
category (1)to (3))(1) Financial
institutions
subject toreporting to
the Tokyo
Foreign
Exchange
MarketCommittee(2) Financial
institutions
subject toreporting to the
Bank of Japan(excluding (1))(3) Financial
institutions,etc. subject toreporting to acentral bank(overseas)(excluding (1)and (2))

2. OtherFirms Used
(4)
for CoverDomestic
Transactions
Operators(Other than1.)(5) Overseas
Operators
Total

U.S.

U.K.

Singapore

Australia

Others[Note]

Grand Total

SurveyMonth and
Year

2014
April

562,145546,098

0

16,047423,923

347,362

76,5609,942

32,667

29,775

3,089

1,084

986,069

2015
April

1,066,640

1,043,167

023,472752,202636,729

115,473

38,95336,862

18,156

20,976525

1,818,843

2016
April

841,822789,458

052,364

839,564

750,352

89,212

36,766

18,381

19,973

10,196

3,893

1,681,387

2017
April

558,313521,352

036,960707,068

617,018

90,04938,08834,248

7,697

6,503

3,511

1,265,381

2018
April

606,608

580,509

0

26,099665,264

553,916

111,347

46,43333,411

15,433

14,321

1,747

1,271,873

16

2019
April

537,300

512,944024,356505,151

392,217112,934

47,73436,684

16,229

9,907

2,377

1,042,452

2020
April

725,258

686,091

039,167

1,037,758

884,114

153,644

54,49860,211

21,85913,3903,684

1,763,017

2021
April

830,855

778,846052,008

1,620,362 1,452,932

167,430

68,042

62,91421,98011,7712,720

2,451,217

2022
April

1,254,521

1,173,781

080,7392,472,055 2,110,193

361,862

110,707 189,886

49,933

2,194

9,140

3,726,576

2023
April

727,936

682,919045,016

1,864,313 1,574,515

289,797

68,691

62,195

15,93043,5372,592,249

99,441

Note: Malaysia, New Zealand, Ireland, Belize, Cyprus, UAE, Germany, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Greece, and Vanuatu.

Table 5-2: Trading Volume of Cover Transactions by Attribute of Firms Used for
Cover Transactions (As a Percentage of Grand Total in Each Month by Attribute)(Unit: %)Attributes ofFirms Used
for CoverTransactions

1. Financial
Institutions(financial
institutions
included in
category (1) to(3))(1) Financial
institutions
subject toreporting to theTokyo Foreign
Exchange
MarketCommittee(2) Financial
institutions
subject toreporting to
the Bank ofJapan(excluding(1))(3) Financial
institutions,etc. subject
to reporting
to a central
bank(overseas)(excluding(1) and (2))

57.0%

55.4%

0.0%

1.6%

43.0%

35.2%

58.6%

57.4%

0.0%

1.3%

41.4%

50.1%

47.0%

0.0%

3.1%

April
2017

44.1%

41.2%

0.0%

April
2018

47.7%

45.6%

April
2019

51.5%

April
2020
April
2021

2. Other Firms
Used for Cover (4) Domestic
Transactions
Operators(Other than 1.)(5)
Overseas
Operators
Total

Singapore

Australia

Others

U.S.

U.K.

7.8%

1.0%

3.3%

3.0%

0.3%

0.1%

100.0%

35.0%

6.3%

2.1%

2.0%

1.0%

1.2%

0.0%

100.0%

49.9%

44.6%

5.3%

2.2%

1.1%

1.2%

0.6%

0.2%

100.0%

2.9%

55.9%

48.8%

7.1%

3.0%

2.7%

0.6%

0.5%

0.3%

100.0%

0.0%

2.1%

52.3%

43.6%

8.8%

3.7%

2.6%

1.2%

1.1%

0.1%

100.0%

49.2%

0.0%

2.3%

48.5%

37.6%

10.8%

4.6%

3.5%

1.6%

1.0%

0.2%

100.0%

41.1%

38.9%

0.0%

2.2%

58.9%

50.1%

8.7%

3.1%

3.4%

1.2%

0.8%

0.2%

100.0%

33.9%

31.8%

0.0%

2.1%

66.1%

59.3%

6.8%

2.8%

2.6%

0.9%

0.5%

0.1%

100.0%

April
2022

33.7%

31.5%

0.0%

2.2%

66.3%

56.6%

9.7%

3.0%

5.1%

1.3%

0.1%

0.2%

100.0%

April
2023

28.1%

26.3%

0.0%

1.7%

71.9%

60.7%

11.2%

2.6%

3.8%

2.4%

0.6%

1.7%

100.0%[Note]

Grand Total

SurveyMonth and
Year

April
2014
April
2015
April
2016

Note:

Malaysia, New Zealand, Ireland, Belize, Cyprus, UAE, Germany, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Greece, and Vanuatu.

Table 6: Change of Trading Volume of Cover Transactions (Domestic and Overseas)(Unit: 100 million yen, %)Survey Month andYear
April 2014

Trading Volume of
Cover Transactions(Total)986,069

Domestic Cover Transactions[Note]

Trading Volume893,46117

Overseas Cover Transactions

Percentage
of Total

Trading Volume

Percentage
of Total

90.6%

92,607

9.4%

April 2015

1,818,843

1,679,896

92.4%

138,946

7.6%

April 2016

1,681,387

1,539,810

91.6%

141,576

8.4%

April 2017

1,265,381

1,138,371

90.0%

127,009

10.0%

April 2018

1,271,873

1,134,425

89.2%

137,447

10.8%

April 2019

1,042,452

905,16186.8%

137,290

13.2%

April 2020

1,763,017

1,570,205

89.1%

192,811

10.9%

April 2021

2,451,217

2,231,778

91.0%

219,438

9.0%

April 2022

3,726,576

3,283,975

88.1%

443,098

11.9%

April 2023

2,592,249

2,257,435

87.1%

335,193

12.9%

Note:

Corrections have been made to figures reported in the 2021 survey for the figures of April 2022.

(3) Trading Volume of Cover Transactions Based on the Trading Volume of OTC Retail
FX Margin Trading
In order to show the trading volume of cover transactions in connection with the trading volume of
OTC retail FX margin trading (with customers), we firstly rank Members that handle OTC retail FX
margin trading by their trading volume of OTC retail FX margin trading (with customers) in eachsurvey year and month, and then categorize them into six classes (e.g. from first to third). Tables 7 to
10 show data of OTC retail FX margin trading categorized by the above six classes.
Table 7: Trading Volume of OTC Retail FX Margin Trading (with Customers) (byranking class based on the trading volume with customers)(Unit: 100 million yen)
Survey Monthand Year

1st to 3rdplace

4th to 10thplace

11th to 20thplace

21st to 30thplace

31st to 40thplace

41st placeand more

April 2014

Total

1,294,840

675,578

306,871

70,00527,0848,145

2,382,526

April 2015

2,476,761

1,367,613

497,839

134,886

46,896

6,415

4,530,411

April 2016

2,064,879

1,426,025

457,247

89,27134,0172,550

4,073,991

April 2017

1,592,561

1,119,193

381,791

72,77722,921

3,566

3,192,813

April 2018

1,532,188

1,088,132

372,326

78,89920,261

2,599

3,094,407

April 2019

1,105,735

878,668

340,876

64,972

13,862

3,930

2,408,046

April 2020

2,672,564

1,834,592

642,342

101,134

21,175

5,828

5,277,638

April 2021

2,349,286

2,222,596

661,131

170,133

25,793

7,355

5,436,298

April 2022

4,599,956

3,841,037

1,104,636

306,169

57,566

9,078

9,918,445

April 2023

4,100,350

2,655,607

713,351

192,139

38,853

6,732

7,707,035

Table 8: Trading Volume of Cover Transactions by Members Handling OTC Retail FX
Margin Trading by Ranking Class Based on the Trading Volume of OTC Retail FX
Margin Trading with Customers(Unit: 100 million yen)
Survey Monthand Year

1st to 3rdplace

4th to 10thplace

11th to 20th
place

18

21st to 30thplace

31st to 40thplace

41st placeand more

Total

April 2014

264,476354,287

275,918

58,87824,4198,089

986,069

April 2015

405,016

902,433

337,143

128,655

39,271

6,323

1,818,843

April 2016

331,651

929,141

301,644

90,70325,9472,299

1,681,387

April 2017

149,716

726,007

301,578

65,654

18,584

3,840

1,265,381

April 2018

195,368

685,475

292,146

79,95816,4662,457

1,271,873

April 2019

149,598

538,506

279,607

57,343

13,433

3,962

1,042,452

April 2020

193,427

1,008,661

438,192

97,383

19,694

5,657

1,763,017

April 2021

644,672

1,256,854

373,449

148,978

19,9287,333

2,451,217

April 2022

506,396

2,321,613

585,908

253,957

46,037

12,661

3,726,576

April 2023

334,758

1,568,570

468,708

182,190

29,6158,406

2,592,249

Table 9. Ratio of Trading Volume of Cover Transactions by Ranking Class Based on
the Trading Volume of OTC Retail FX Margin Trading Volume of CoverTransactions(Unit: %)Survey Month andYear
April 2014

1st to 3rd
place
26.8%

4th to 10th
place
35.9%

11th to 20th
place
28.0%

21st to 30th
place
6.0%

31st to 40th
place
2.5%

41st place and
more
0.8%

April 2015

22.3%

49.6%

18.5%

7.1%

2.2%

0.3%

April 2016

19.7%

55.3%

17.9%

5.4%

1.5%

0.1%

April 2017

11.8%

57.4%

23.8%

5.2%

1.5%

0.3%

April 2018

15.4%

53.9%

23.0%

6.3%

1.3%

0.2%

April 2019

14.4%

51.7%

26.8%

5.5%

1.3%

0.4%

April 2020

11.0%

57.2%

24.9%

5.5%

1.1%

0.3%

April 2021

26.3%

51.3%

15.2%

6.1%

0.8%

0.3%

April 2022

13.6%

62.3%

15.7%

6.8%

1.2%

0.3%

April 2023

12.9%

60.5%

18.1%

7.0%

1.1%

0.3%

Table 10: Ratio of Trading Volume of Cover Transactions (Table 8) to the Trading
Volume of OTC Retail FX Margin Trading (Table 7)(by ranking class based on the trading volume of OTC retail FX margin trading withcustomers)(Unit: % [Note])
Survey Month andYear
April 2014

1st to 3rdplace

4th to 10thplace

11th to 20thplace

21st to 30thplace

31st to 40thplace

41st place and
more

20.4%

52.4%

89.9%

84.1%

90.2%

99.3%

April 2015

16.4%

66.0%

67.7%

95.4%

83.7%

98.6%

April 2016

16.1%

65.2%

66.0%

101.6%

76.3%

90.1%

April 2017

9.4%

64.9%

79.0%

90.2%

81.1%

107.7%

April 2018

12.8%

63.0%

78.5%

101.3%

81.3%

94.6%

19

April 2019

13.5%

61.3%

82.0%

88.3%

96.9%

100.8%

April 2020

7.2%

55.0%

68.2%

96.3%

93.0%

97.1%

April 2021

27.4%

56.5%

56.5%

87.6%

77.3%

99.7%

April 2022

11.0%

60.4%

53.0%

82.9%

80.0%

139.5%

April 2023

8.2%

59.1%

65.7%

94.8%

76.2%

124.9%

Note:

It is possible that the trading volume of cover transactions may exceed the trading volume of OTC retail FX margin trading(i.e. over 100%) due to the transfer of open positions following the change of the firm used for cover transactions ortransaction errors.

Conclusion (General Comments and Considerations)

The following is a conclusion (general comments and considerations) of the survey:
When we look at the business model for OTC retail FX margin trading that is executed by Members
handling OTC retail FX margin trading, we find that many Members handling OTC retail FX margin
trading do not adopt a white label form, but instead they use several firms for cover transactions andconduct marry transactions. This transaction form is particularly adopted by Members with a large
amount of OTC retail FX margin trading with customers. On the other hand, there are also many
Members handling OTC retail FX margin trading that adopt a white label form, use a single firm forcover transactions, and do not conduct marry transactions. This form is particularly adopted by
Members with a small amount of OTC retail FX margin trading. This trend is similar to the results ofthe past surveys, and the results of this survey followed suit.
Automatic trading tools are provided this year by 20 Members handling OTC retail FX margin trading,up from last year (19 Members in 2022), and a higher number of them offer internally developed tools
than in 2022. Out of the total trading volume of OTC retail FX margin trading with customers executedby all the Members handling OTC retail FX margin trading, the trading volume executed by theMembers that have provided automatic trading tools accounted for approximately 19.4% (about 19.5%
in 2022). The share was less than 20% for the third consecutive year. The trading volume of OTC retail
FX margin trading with customers executed by operators that have continuously provided automatic
trading tools since 2014 accounted for roughly 3.4% (about 4.6% in 2022) of the total trading volume
of OTC retail FX margin trading with customers executed by operators that have conducted suchtrading for all the survey months since 2014. However, compared with 2014, the trading volume of
OTC retail FX margin trading with customers in each year executed by the Members who consistently
provided automatic trading tools was slightly higher than those of the other Members in recent years
but it was a little lower this time.
When we look at API, we see that the number of Members handling OTC retail FX margin tradingand providing API has been on a decreasing trend since 2015 (for reference, 15 companies in 2015
and six companies in 2023), and the trading volume of OTC retail FX margin trading with customers
executed by the Members that have provided API was approximately 2.1% (about 2.6% in 2022) of
the total trading volume of all the Members handling OTC retail FX margin trading with customers.
20

The trading volume of OTC retail FX margin trading with customers executed by operators that havecontinuously provided API since 2014 accounted for roughly 0.7% of the total trading volume of OTC
retail FX margin trading with customers executed by operators that have conducted such trading for
all the survey months since 2014. Compared with 2014, the trading volume of OTC retail FX margin
trading with customers in each year executed by the Members who consistently provided API has beenslightly higher than those of the other Members in recent years.
Judging from the fact that compared with the results of spot trading at the foreign exchange market ofaround 330 trillion yen released by the Tokyo Foreign Exchange Market Committee survey, theamount of transactions by non-financial institution customers (domestic) into which transactions by
Members handling OTC retail FX margin trading are categorized is approximately 83 trillion yen,with the external circulation of OTC retail FX margin trading reaching approximately 259 trillion yen,
it appears that OTC retail FX margin trading has a certain impact on the foreign exchange market, asshown in last year’s report.
As for the usage cover transactions by attribute, the total number of Members handling OTC retail FX
margin trading that use firms for cover transactions increased compared to the previous survey as awhole, while as for the total number of Members by attribute, the number of financial institutions thatparticipate in (report to) the "Survey on Foreign Exchange Transactions Volume in Tokyo Foreign
Exchange Market" increased for the eighth consecutive year. With regard to the trading volume ofcover transactions by attribute of cover counterparty traders, as shown in Table 5-2, (4), the ratio of
amount of cover transactions by domestic operators to the total amount in each year has continued toincrease, and the ratio exceeded 60% this time.
It was also confirmed that the ratios of financial institutions that participate in (report to) the Survey
on Foreign Exchange Transaction Volume in Tokyo Foreign Exchange Market account for
approximately 60% of the total number of Members handling OTC retail FX margin trading, andapproximately 30% of trading volume of cover transactions despite the decrease for the fourthconsecutive year. This indicates that the business relationship is continuously being built between
Members that handle OTC retail FX margin trading and financial institutions that participate in (reportto) the Survey on Foreign Exchange Transaction Volume in Tokyo Foreign Exchange Market throughcover transactions for OTC retail FX margin trading.
(Written by Kurakata of the Research Department of the FFAJ)• The Financial Futures Association of Japan does not guarantee that data and information provided in this document
are accurate, correct, and/or up to date, although it has made every effort to ensure such accuracy, correctness, andtimeliness.
• All of the information contained in this document (text, charts, tables, etc.) is subject to copyright and is protected by
the applicable copyright laws and international treaties. The Financial Futures Association of Japan does not assume
any liability for and has no obligation to compensate for any loss or damage caused by or arising from data andinformation contained herein, including any errors, omissions, or reliance on this information.
Copyright © The Financial Futures Association of Japan All Rights Reserved.

21

22