Dukascopy

• Met

  Client-facing entities appear on the regulator’s register 12345

  We matched Dukascopy Bank SA on FINMA’s list of authorised banks, Dukascopy Europe IBS AS on ESMA’s register as a firm authorised by Latvijas Banka, and Dukascopy Japan on the Japan FSA’s list of registered operators.

• Met

  Authorisations are current and unrestricted 345

  All three authorisations are current, with no suspension or restriction shown.

• Met

  Permissions cover the services offered 3456

  FINMA authorises Dukascopy Bank SA as a bank, which operates the SWFX marketplace as a trading facility and deals as principal; ESMA’s register shows the Latvian company authorised to receive, transmit and execute orders; and the Japanese company is a registered financial instruments business operator.

• Met

  Regulatory claims on the website are accurate 1234

  The regulatory statements on Dukascopy’s Swiss and EU sites match the registers.

• Met

  Clients can tell which regulated entity serves them 127

  The Swiss and EU sites and terms name the company clients deal with, its regulator and address.

Criteria and their weighting are explained in the methodology.

• Met

  Legal entity details are published 1378

  The companies’ full names and addresses are published, and the EU company’s registration number and address match its filed annual report; ESMA’s register still shows an older Riga address.

• Partly met

  Ultimate ownership can be identified 39

  The bank’s annual report names Andrey Duka and Veronika Duka as its founding shareholders and co-chief executives, and FINMA lists the bank as not foreign controlled, but we found no statement of who holds the shares.

• Met

  Group structure is explained 9

  The annual report presents the Dukascopy group, with consolidated accounts covering the Swiss bank and its Latvian and Japanese companies.

• Met

  Directors or senior managers are identified 9

  The annual report names the co-chief executives, the chief financial officer and the board of directors.

• Partly met

  Financial statements are available 89

  The bank publishes annual reports audited by KPMG, but the latest on its financial reports page is for 2023. The Latvian company’s 2025 report, audited by BDO, is published.

Criteria and their weighting are explained in the methodology.

• Partly met

  Client money segregation is disclosed 71011

  Dukascopy Bank SA holds clients’ cash as bank deposits, protected by Swiss deposit insurance rather than segregated. We found no client money segregation terms in the EU company’s terms, and did not review the Japanese company’s documents, which are in Japanese.

• Partly met

  Retail clients have negative balance protection 1710

  The EU company limits retail clients’ liability to their margin and reimburses negative balances. Dukascopy Bank SA’s conditions require clients to clear negative balances, and its risk warning says 0.21% of retail accounts had to deposit funds to offset one.

• Met

  An investor compensation scheme applies 21011

  Deposits with Dukascopy Bank SA are covered by esisuisse, which lists the bank as a member, up to CHF 100,000, and the EU site states investor protection of up to EUR 20,000. We did not review the Japanese company’s arrangements.

• Partly met

  Banking and custody arrangements are disclosed 710

  Dukascopy Bank SA holds its clients’ cash itself as a licensed bank. The EU terms do not say where the Latvian company’s client money is held.

• Partly met

  Withdrawal terms are disclosed 1213

  The fee schedule lists withdrawal methods and fees, but we found no withdrawal processing times in the documents reviewed.

Criteria and their weighting are explained in the methodology.

Starts at 100 and loses points for each substantiated adverse finding by severity and age. Allegations, complaints and clone warnings never count. Total deducted: 0 points.

• Met

  Warning lists and enforcement records have been searched 14

  We searched FINMA-related, CySEC, FCA, CVM, KNF and Japan FSA records and the Indian and Malaysian alert lists, and ran web searches. We found no enforcement action or alert-list entry.

No published findings were on record at the review date.

Criteria and their weighting are explained in the methodology.

• Partly met

  A complaints procedure is published 710

  Both companies publish how to complain in writing; the bank answers within 30 days, but the EU terms give no response time. Both sets of terms also bar clients from speaking publicly about a complaint for 30 days, with a daily penalty of CHF or EUR 100 up to 3,000.

• Partly met

  Independent dispute resolution is available 71012

  Clients of Dukascopy Bank SA can go to the Swiss Banking Ombudsman. The EU terms send disputes to the Latvian courts and name no out-of-court dispute body.

• Not determined

  Independent complaint outcomes show no adverse pattern 14

  Dukascopy has no UK company, so there are no Financial Ombudsman Service decisions, and we did not find published decisions of other dispute bodies.

• Not met

  Complaint data is disclosed 1

  We found no complaint statistics published by Dukascopy or by a regulator or ombudsman for its companies.

Criteria and their weighting are explained in the methodology.

• Met

  Costs are disclosed before account opening 1315

  The bank’s fee schedule and the EU company’s costs and charges disclosure set out commissions, rollover, transfer, conversion and dormant account fees.

• Met

  An order execution policy is published 616

  The bank’s best execution policy says it executes orders as principal on its own trading facility and explains the execution factors, including hedging, and the EU policy names the SWFX marketplace as the underlying venue.

• Met

  The client agreement is available before sign-up 71012

  The bank’s trading and general conditions and the EU terms can be read without an account.

• Partly met

  Leverage and margin terms are disclosed 710

  The conditions explain margin calls and margin cuts but do not state leverage or margin cut levels, which we did not find in the documents reviewed.

• Met

  Risk warnings are clear and current 12

  The EU site states that 68.82% of retail accounts lose money with this provider, and the Swiss site gives its own figure (74.94%) with the shares of accounts that lost all their margin or had a negative balance.

Criteria and their weighting are explained in the methodology.

• Met

  Marketing claims are accurate and attributable 12311

  The regulatory and deposit protection statements we checked match the registers.

• Partly met

  An address and working contact channels are published 24810

  Addresses, phone numbers and emails are published, and the EU address matches the company’s annual report, but ESMA’s register, which the regulator supplies, still lists an older address.

• Met

  Material changes are communicated 710

  Both companies give at least 30 days’ notice of changes to their terms.

Criteria and their weighting are explained in the methodology.

We have not checked this firm’s office in person, so this dimension scores zero. We check offices through our on-site verification programme.

• Not met

  Real office at the stated address, not a ghost address

• Not met

  Office of the assessed entity

• Not met

  Staffed and operating

Criteria and their weighting are explained in the methodology.

We have not completed an on-site assessment of this firm, so this dimension does not count and its weight is shared among the others.

• Not determined

  Company identity

• Not determined

  Regulatory claims

• Not determined

  Office visit

• Not determined

  Account opening

• Not determined

  Platform usability

• Not determined

  Costs and disclosures

• Not determined

  Customer support

• Not determined

  Deposits and withdrawals

• Not determined

  Trading functions

• Not determined

  Complaints process

Criteria and their weighting are explained in the methodology.