COUNTERPARTY FILE · last re-checked 2026-09
Marex (Marex Financial) — institutional liquidity provider
This record highlights transparency gaps regarding licensing and published information.
Licence, read literally
| Regulator | Licence number | Jurisdiction | Tier | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FCA | 442767 | UK | tier-1 | open source ↗ |
| FCA | not verified | UK | tier-1 | open source ↗ |
Tier classification follows the same scale as the retail register: tier-2 means real supervision and client-money segregation, without an investor compensation scheme — never misread it as tier-1 protection.
Residuals a counterparty carries
Unpublished FCA Number
Marex Financial's FCA number is not published, raising transparency concerns.
Source: firm disclosures page
Incomplete Licensing Information
Marex FX Limited's license number is not provided on the fetched page.
Source: firm disclosures page
The claims ledger
Claims specific enough to be falsified — and the ones that remain the venue's own measurement.
Testable claims
- Marex Financial is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA registration number 442767), incorporated under the laws of England and Wales (company no. 5613061) and a member of the London Stock Exchange (https://www.marex.com/cdd-disclaimer/)
- Marex Group plc is incorporated in England and Wales (company no. 5613060, LEI 549800DWX0SVICJAL507) and listed on the NASDAQ Global Select exchange under ticker 'MRX'; Marex FX Limited (company no. 11366742) is authorised and regulated by the FCA as an Authorised Payment Institution (https://www.marex.com/terms-of-use)
- FCA register corroborates Marex Financial reference number 442767 (register.fca.org.uk, surfaced in register records)
Claims we cannot verify from outside
Perimeter and coverage
| Asset classes | Venues | Connectivity | Clients accepted | Explicitly refused |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FX, Precious metals, Commodities, Energy | Institutional and commercial clients across commodities, energy and financial markets |
A firm that publishes its own negative space — who it refuses, where it is not licensed — is materially easier to diligence than one that doesn't. The refusal list is treated here as disclosure, not as a defect.