FCA’s FX, CFD and spread-betting complaint count rose 53.5% in the first half

Complaints reported by firms in the FCA’s combined foreign-exchange, contracts-for-difference and spread-betting category increased to 2,043 in the first half of 2026, from 1,331 in the preceding six months. The rise of 712 complaints amounts to 53.5%, a calculation from the regulator’s latest product tables shows. The count was also 72.6% above the 1,184 reported for the first half of 2025.[1]

The increase is a signal for closer examination of trading services, rather than proof of a particular broker’s misconduct. The category combines FX, CFDs and spread betting and does not identify which of those products generated the extra complaints. It measures complaints reported by regulated firms, not complaints made directly to the FCA, unique dissatisfied customers or cases in which an Ombudsman has ruled against a business.[1][2]

A sharper increase in the latest six months

The four half-year observations show a rise in every displayed period, with the largest absolute and percentage increase in H1 2026. Comparing the latest period with the same half of the preceding year removes one simple seasonal mismatch: the increase is 859 complaints, calculated as 2,043 minus 1,184. Dividing by 1,184 gives 72.6% after rounding. It does not control for changes in customer numbers, firms reporting or trading activity.[1]

For the six-month comparison, the denominator is 1,331, not the latest count: 712 divided by 1,331 gives 53.5%. These are percentage increases in complaint volumes, not percentage-point changes in a complaint rate. The figures also should not be annualised into a full-year forecast. The regulator had not published H2 2026 outcomes in this release.[1][2]

The trading-product rise was larger proportionally than the change across the FCA’s aggregate publication. Firms reported about 1.85 million complaints across the covered financial products in H1 2026, up 6.3% from the previous half. Even so, the 2,043 complaints in the combined trading category represent only about 0.11% of that rounded aggregate. A rapid increase in a small category and a small share of the total can both be true.[1][2]

Which complaints the data capture

The FCA defines a complaint as an expression of dissatisfaction about a regulated firm’s financial product or service. Reporting covers relevant activities carried out in the UK by a firm or its appointed representatives and can include retail customers, professional clients and other eligible complainants. The combined trading count should therefore not be described as a count solely of retail CFD investors or solely of trading-loss disputes.[2]

The aggregate publication covers more than 3,000 regulated firms. Its population is broader than the named firm-level tables, which generally require at least 500 complaints in a six-month reporting period or 1,000 in a year for certain reporting firms. Complaints at firms below those publication thresholds remain in the aggregate totals. Some firms also report jointly with other businesses in the same group. A simple sum of selected published broker entries may therefore fail to reproduce the product total.[2][3]

The FCA also warns that historical figures can change when firms correct or resubmit returns. This comparison takes all four periods from the latest table, rather than combining an old downloaded number with a new release. That keeps the observation dates consistent, while recognising that the table is still based on firms’ submitted data and can contain reporting inaccuracies.[1][2]

An increase is not yet a deterioration rate

Complaint counts can rise because service or treatment worsens, because more customers use a product, because existing clients trade more, or because complaint awareness and reporting change. The product row does not distinguish those explanations. A comparison of customer experience would need a consistent exposure denominator, such as comparable active-account populations, together with the grounds, resolution times and outcome of the complaints. Trading volume alone would answer a different question from the number of customer relationships.[1][2]

Nor can the overall financial-services uphold rate be applied to this category. The FCA reports that 54.8% of closed complaints across its covered aggregate were upheld in H1 2026. That statistic has a different population and denominator from the 2,043 trading-category complaints received. Multiplying them would not estimate the number of justified FX, CFD or spread-betting complaints, and it would mix incoming cases with cases closed during the period.[1][2]

The Financial Ombudsman Service measures a different stage. Its figures concern complaints referred to the Ombudsman, while the FCA collection records complaints reported to firms. The regulator expressly cautions against direct comparison of the two datasets. They can provide complementary context, but one cannot divide an Ombudsman category count by this combined half-year total and call the answer a referral or escalation rate without matching periods, products and case populations.[2]

What the next release needs to clarify

The immediate finding is a substantial acceleration in reported complaint volume within a small, combined trading category. The useful follow-up is to identify the product and firm contribution, whether the increase persists, and whether outcomes such as upheld complaints or redress move with it. Those questions would distinguish broader customer growth from a concentrated operational or conduct problem. The present figures establish the increase; they do not yet establish its cause.[1][2]

Report an error or submit an update