Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2107.14055

Profit and loss manipulations by online trading brokers

Golnaz Shahtahmassebi·Lascelles Wright
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Online trading has attracted millions of people around the world. In March 2021, it was reported there were 18 million accounts from just one broker. Historically, manipulation in financial markets is considered to be fraudulently influencing share, currency pairs or any other indices prices. This article introduces the idea that online trading platform technical issues can be considered as brokers manipulation to control traders profit and loss. More importantly it shows these technical issues are the contributing factors of the 82% risk of retail traders losing money. We identify trading platform technical issues of one of the world's leading online trading providers and calculate retail traders losses caused by these issues. To do this, we independently record each trade details using the REST API response provided by the broker. We show traders log activity files is the only way to assess any suspected profit or loss manipulation by the broker. Therefore, it is essential for any retail trader to have access to their log files. We compare our findings with broker's Trustpilot customer reviews. We illustrate how traders' profit and loss can be negatively affected by broker's platform technical issues such as not being able to close profitable trades, closing trades with delays, disappearance of trades, disappearance of profit from clients statements, profit and loss discrepancies, stop loss not being triggered, stop loss or limit order triggered too early. Although regulatory bodies try to ensure that consumers get a fair deal, these attempts are hugely insufficient in protecting retail traders. Therefore, regulatory bodies such as the FCA should take these technical issues seriously and not rely on brokers' internal investigations, because under any other circumstances, these platform manipulations would be considered as crimes and connivingly misappropriating funds.

Explore related subjects

q-fin.TRstat.OT

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Golnaz Shahtahmassebi, Lascelles Wright. 2021-07-29. Profit and loss manipulations by online trading brokers. https://arxiv.org/abs/2107.14055

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Deep Learning of Robust Market Making under Regime-Switching Order Flow

Classical market-making strategies based on stochastic control, such as the Avellaneda-Stoikov and the Gu\'{e}ant-Lehalle-Fernandez-Tapia (GLFT) extension, provide closed-form quoting rules, but rest on assumptions that break down at realistic microstructure timescales. One of them is that order flow is stationary, while empirical evidence points to the existence of regimes, possibly associated with algorithmic execution of metaorders. In this case, existing methods provide negative PnL. In this paper, we develop a deep reinforcement-learning market maker (RLMM) - a Rainbow-style distributional DQN (C51) which is calibrated and tested in a zero-intelligence limit order book. We find that, in the stationary setting, RLMM outperforms GLFT across the entire observed risk-return frontier. The RLMM is more robust to flow asymmetry than GLFT, but, like any stationarily trained strategy, it still suffers large drawdowns from inventory saturation under persistent directional imbalance. Augmenting the state of RLMM with two auxiliary signals - a Bayesian online change-point filter over the directional flow bias and a queue-adjusted quote-exposure imbalance -restores profitability. A final scenario-bandit step that reweights low-return regime scenarios further improves performance under random-persistence and correlated-direction stress.

q-fin.TR↗
arXiv2026

dexamine: A Python package for Uniswap event data on Ethereum

Decentralized exchanges record trading and liquidity provision on public blockchains, but empirical analysis requires interpreting these records and linking them to execution metadata. dexamine is a Python package that parses Uniswap v2 and v3 events on Ethereum. It converts transaction receipt logs into observations of trades and liquidity changes, with token quantities, pool state, transaction order, and gas information. The package separates data retrieval, contract metadata, protocol interpretation, and output construction. The repository provides recorded Ethereum responses and an offline reproducible example, and version 1 has been used to construct data for an empirical study of price discovery in decentralized markets.

q-fin.TR↗
arXiv2026

The Double-Edged Sword of Short-Selling Bans

We develop a theoretical model that endogenizes the regulator's decision to impose short-selling bans to prevent large stock price declines. Empirically, we test the model's predictions using the cross-sectional variation in short-selling restrictions implemented across European countries in 2020. Consistent with our model, we find that bans had a detrimental effect on liquidity and failed to support the average price levels, but were effective in limiting large price drawdowns. Finally, we show that the effectiveness of the bans depends on the share of informed stockholders, a central variable in our framework, thus informing the design of more effective regulatory responses.

q-fin.TR↗