FCA publishes good and poor practice for CFD firms

On 15 October 2026, the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) published a new webpage setting out good practices and areas where contracts for difference (CFD) firms could do more to meet their Consumer Duty price and fair value obligations.

Background

In November 2025, the FCA published its findings from a multi-firm review of CFD providers, including outlining how they were meeting the Consumer Duty price and value outcome, and where they could improve. In May 2026, the FCA asked 81 CFD firms if they had made any changes as a result. 

Summary

The FCA findings were as follows, in particular:

• Fair value assessments and peer group comparison: Following FCA feedback, most firms have broadened their fair value assessments to capture all costs and charges applied to client accounts, rather than focusing solely on execution costs, dealing charges and service features. This provides a more complete assessment of the overall value delivered to consumers. Firms have also improved their peer group analysis, replacing comparisons with offshore or global providers with more relevant benchmarking against UK-regulated firms.

• Appropriateness testing and vulnerability monitoring: Several firms have strengthened onboarding and appropriateness-testing processes. Changes include introducing income thresholds that trigger enhanced scrutiny or restrict access, reviewing target markets, and improving vulnerability monitoring arrangements. These measures are intended to ensure products remain appropriate for consumers and to identify risks at an earlier stage.

• Client disclosures and information: Most firms have improved, or intend to improve, their disclosure of charges through client communications, applications and websites. Good practice includes dedicated webpages, pop-ups and other prominent explanations of fees and how they are calculated, supported by clear signposting throughout the client journey. Firms are encouraged to provide this information alongside terms and conditions, Key Information Documents and future Consumer Composite Investments disclosures. While some firms have enhanced charge disclosures on deal tickets, only a minority provide annualised equivalents for overnight financing costs, and mark-ups within these charges remain largely opaque.

• Levels of charges and interest on cash balances: Most firms have not altered charge levels, instead concentrating on disclosure improvements. Only 12% reported changes or planned changes, including paying interest on cash balances, reducing overnight financing charges, reviewing rates following peer comparisons, and revising charging methodologies to better reflect margin arrangements.

• Firms have been slow to make changes: Although many firms have responded to FCA feedback, the FCA is disappointed by the pace of change, noting that nearly three years have passed since the Consumer Duty came into force.

• Fair value assessments should consider consumer outcomes: The FCA warns against treating fair value assessments as a compliance exercise. Firms should focus on consumer outcomes and potential harm, particularly where they remain outliers on charges such as overnight funding fees.

• Communications should support consumer understanding: Cost information often remains insufficiently prominent. Firms should provide clearer disclosures earlier in the customer journey and ensure communications around matched or hedged positions fairly explain both the costs and benefits.

• Overnight funding fees are inconsistent: The FCA found significant variation in overnight funding charges between firms and asset classes. Some rates appear high relative to prevailing interest rates and peer benchmarks. Firms should assess whether such charges deliver fair value, review the treatment of matched or hedged positions, and ensure product promotions and pricing structures are consistent with their obligations under the Consumer Duty.

Next steps

The FCA make clear that they strongly recommend firms review the good practice and areas of concern set out here and further consider if they should change anything to meet their price and fair value obligations.