While all the hoopla over FXCM going down on 1/22/10 continues, I like digging deeper to see if there is a bigger story behind the smoke and mirrors. Well, that story is all but too clear now. Not only did FXCM's Servers go down, but at precisely the same (exact) time, guess else's Servers went down? That's right, no other than dbFX! I completely stumbled over this correlation and did not go out looking for it, folks. I no longer have any FXCM (so I thought) nonsense running on my HDD, but I do have what I thought was a clean installation of the dbFX retail platform installed as a demo on my HDD for what I call off-site testing - that's testing of new concepts NOT using my real trading station, so that they won't know what I'm testing. Anyway, I logged into dbFX at around 1:00 pm est. Lo and behold, the login failed for the first time. I thought to myself; this is a bit odd, this never happens. So, I close the trading station and attempt to login again. Well, right before my eyes, the dbFX Trading Station throws a dialog box to screen the says: Cannot Connect to: http://dbFX.FXCMCORPORATE.com. Well, my eyes almost popped out of my head because I was told in no uncertain terms that dbFX ONLY used the Software (front-end) of from FXCM. I was told directly by Deutsche Bank FX, that whenever I logged into a dbFX account, that I was logging directly onto a dbFX Server located on dbFX soil and on the dbFX Network and that my login had nothing, whatsoever, to do with FXCM, their Server or their Network. Pretty, clear, huh. Well, being a former enterprise technology guy, I went to work. I could have easily run WHOIS, but I like digging for router hubs and gateways myself. So, getting to CMD on windows, I ran a ping against http:'//dbFX.FXCMCORPORATE.com and got the IP: 208.87.149.250. I then (today) logged back into the dbFX trading platform (the one having nothing to do with FXCM other than using its front-end, ya, that one) and ran netstat from the command line (CMD) in windows. Netstat showed that my server was connected to another machine with the name: dbdemo.fxcorporate.com. So, from CMD I ping dbdemo.fxcorporate.com and get back the IP: 204.8.241.13. Notice the difference between 208.87.149.250 and 204.8.241.13. So, I go back to CMD and run tracert on BOTH IP addresses. Well, guess what folks? Both IP's start out on the same path with precisely the same number of hops, until the path splits near hop number 9. Hop 9 had the machine name: fxcorporate-gw.ip4.tinet.net (77.67.69.26) and everybody knows that the designation "gw" most likely means: Gateway and the start of the Hexadecimal sequence being a 77, confirms it in my mind. So, here I am, all this time, living under the WORDS of one of the worlds largest FX players, thinking the entire time that since it was a Bank (of all things) that it had to be doing business above board - all the while being lied to, as my login sequence was being terminated directly on another FXCM Server and being run through an FXCM Network. So, when dbFX tells you that your account sits on their Server, forget about it, it ain't true. When dbFX tells you that you are trading with their data feeds and their pricing model, forget about it, it ain't true. Not when FXCM is holding all the cards: Software, Hardware and Network - nope - forget about it. Until I step foot inside the dbFX Datacenter or its IT Department and physically verify the location of the Gateway Authentication Server and the physical existence of the Account Server and the Data Warehouse containing the actual Database Tables that make up my account (Demo or Production) - then as far as I am concerned the name of dbFX is not dbFX at all; it is DBFXCM and nothing more. There is no physical differentiation between dbFX and FXCM at the Software, Hardware or Network levels. None. So, why would I continue to believe that the Pricing and Data Feeds are have such distinctions in them? No intelligent person would assume as much and neither do I (anymore). Here's the bigger problem: Why? Why would such a mega successful BANK like Deutsche Bank, crawl in bed with the infestation known as FXCM? Sure, db had enough reserve capital for the development of its own trading platform. I'll soon need an Institutional Trading Platform that can get me to market in large scale. Roughly between 50M to 100M notional value (daily). Why would I trust that kind of transaction to anyone that would LIE to me so blatantly? This makes Barclays look mighty good right about now. They have an Institutional platform that on the surface looks pretty solid. I've never used it, but I'm on the phone first thing in the morning to find out about it. I cannot believe that I was seriously considering Deutsche Bank. I also cannot believe that they made such strategic error in running their business. The error message was a dead giveaway, but the research confirmed it for me when I discovered 77.67.69.26. Let that be a lesson to both db and FXCM. Or, should I say, let that be singular lesson for DBFXCM. Thank goodness for network tools and the ability to know how to use them! The End. (of any relationship I was contemplating down the road with Deutsche Bank)
Good thing I pulled my funds from FXCM this week. I mean if your a serious broker then you shouldn't go down at all. Maybe once in a year, but it's a monthly or sometimes weekly occurrence.
I'm guessing any broker who went down at the same time, is a white label customer of FXCM. So really no excuse for being down. Wouldn't you have a backup switch/system that kicks in automatically. They have had similar situations where something goes wrong, and they just wait a day to get it up. They say they will do new procedures to make sure this doesn't happen again. The thing is you can find that phrase in another press release a couple months back of a similar downtime.
Well that's just not true. I've been with them since December with a live account and demo accounts about seven months before that. This it the first time I've seen such a thing happen. I do agree with your statements about backup network switches however. No financial institution should go down that long.
Let's not exagerate. By exagerating, you are losing all credibility. I have an account with them for several years now and was quite pissed off with the lenght of downtime on Friday but saying their platform is down once a week is quite a stretch.
Yes, as in outage of my capital out of their firm several years ago. Do you mean that kind of "outage." Yes, an outage of my capital from FXCM. Lessons learned the hard way are typically lessons learned the best. Thank goodness, I'm years over these guys. What a sham-bamm-thank-you-mam outfit. They (like so many others) grew and obtained their size, at a time when FX Retail was new and Traders were clueless about how and why the Interbank system worked. However, many Traders have wised up and moved on - away from shops like FXCM. No serious Trader that I know of (personally) trades with outfits like FXCM on a Retail account. Not if actually treating your trading like a business matters, or sustaining long-term profitability matters. Don't get me wrong. I love FXCM. I love looking at them in my rear view mirror - precisely where they belong for the serious minded Trader.