★ WIDE MOAT STOCKS & COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGES ★

Checking

Interactive Brokers Group, Inc.

IBKR · NASDAQ

Market cap (USD)$163.8B
SectorFinancials
IndustryInvestment - Banking & Investment Services
CountryUS
Data as of
Moat score
68/ 100

Weighted average of segment moat scores, combining moat strength, durability, confidence, market structure, pricing power, and market share.

Request update

Spot something outdated? Send a quick note and source so we can refresh this profile.

Overview

Interactive Brokers Group, Inc. operates a single brokerage segment, providing multi-asset execution, clearing, custody, prime brokerage, securities lending, and margin lending globally. The moat is primarily operational: proprietary, highly automated systems support low execution costs, scalable risk controls, and high transaction throughput. Hub-like advantages come from access to 170+ electronic exchanges and market centers in 40 countries and 29 currencies, plus API and FIX connectivity. Generic regulatory barriers were not treated as a company-specific compliance moat, and use of standardized FIX connectivity did not establish workflow lock-in. Key pressures are intense price competition, large incumbent technology budgets, regulatory scrutiny, cyber and operational risk, and rate-cycle sensitivity.

Primary segment

Brokerage

Market structure

Competitive

Market share

HHI:

Coverage

1 segments · 8 tags

Updated 2026-07-12

Segments

Brokerage

Multi-asset electronic brokerage, clearing, custody, prime brokerage, securities lending, margin lending, and prediction-market access

Revenue

100%

Structure

Competitive

Pricing

weak

Share

Peers

SCHWHOODMSGS+4

Moat Claims

Brokerage

Multi-asset electronic brokerage, clearing, custody, prime brokerage, securities lending, margin lending, and prediction-market access

IBKR reports a single reportable segment, brokerage. The Q1 FY2026 10-Q reported $1.669B of net revenues and $1.288B of income before income taxes. June 2026 monthly metrics reported 5.185M client accounts, $930.3B of ending client equity, and 5.269M DARTs.

Competitive

Operational Excellence

Supply

Strength

Strength 4 of 5

Durability

Durability 2 of 3

Confidence

Confidence 4 of 5

Evidence

Evidence 3 of 5

Decades of internally developed, highly automated trading, risk, and back-office systems support low execution costs and scalable global operations.

Operational Excellence moat: definition, examples, and stocks

Erosion risks

  • Technology commoditization and rivals closing the automation gap (including AI-enabled tooling)
  • Major outage, cyber incident, or operational failure harming trust and triggering client churn
  • Third-party dependency failures (exchanges, banks, crypto partners) disrupting service

Leading indicators

  • Cost-to-serve (expense per account / per DART) trend
  • Platform uptime and incident frequency
  • DARTs, client accounts, client equity, and margin loan balances

Counterarguments

  • Large incumbents (e.g., Schwab, Fidelity, major banks) also operate at scale and can invest heavily in technology
  • Some clients are price and UX sensitive and can switch brokers with relatively low friction via account transfer rails

Interoperability Hub

Network

Strength

Strength 4 of 5

Durability

Durability 2 of 3

Confidence

Confidence 4 of 5

Evidence

Evidence 2 of 5

A unified, multi-currency platform connecting clients to 170+ exchanges and market centers with desktop, mobile, API, and FIX access acts as a hub for global multi-asset trading workflows.

Interoperability Hub moat: definition, examples, and stocks

Erosion risks

  • Competitors expand global access and narrow breadth differentiation
  • Regulatory and geopolitical restrictions reduce cross-border product and market access
  • Standardized connectivity (FIX and OMS) reduces switching friction for institutional multi-broker setups

Leading indicators

  • Number of markets and currencies supported
  • Growth in non-U.S. client accounts and client equity
  • Client account count and client equity from monthly brokerage metrics

Counterarguments

  • Institutional clients often multi-home across brokers and prime brokers, limiting lock-in to any single connectivity hub
  • For many retail users, breadth of global access is not the primary driver vs UX, content, or brand

Evidence

sec_filing

Our proprietary technology is the key to our success.

Directly supports an operations and technology-driven cost and efficiency advantage.

sec_filing

we employ proprietary technology to automate

Automation reduces unit servicing costs and supports consistent execution and risk controls at scale.

news

5.269 million Daily Average Revenue Trades (DARTs)

Current monthly metrics show large-scale transaction throughput on the automated platform.

sec_filing

more than 170 electronic exchanges and market centers in 40 countries and 29 currencies

Supports breadth of venue and currency connectivity and the value of a single integrated platform.

sec_filing

API... or industry standard Financial Information Exchange ("FIX") connectivity

Supports hub-like integration into institutional systems via standard connectivity.

Risks & Indicators

Erosion risks

  • Technology commoditization and rivals closing the automation gap (including AI-enabled tooling)
  • Major outage, cyber incident, or operational failure harming trust and triggering client churn
  • Third-party dependency failures (exchanges, banks, crypto partners) disrupting service
  • Competitors expand global access and narrow breadth differentiation
  • Regulatory and geopolitical restrictions reduce cross-border product and market access
  • Standardized connectivity (FIX and OMS) reduces switching friction for institutional multi-broker setups

Leading indicators

  • Cost-to-serve (expense per account / per DART) trend
  • Platform uptime and incident frequency
  • DARTs, client accounts, client equity, and margin loan balances
  • Commission and financing-rate competitiveness vs peers
  • Number of markets and currencies supported
  • Growth in non-U.S. client accounts and client equity

Keep the research going

Created 2026-01-06
Updated 2026-07-12

More Rankings & Systems

Curation & Accuracy

This directory blends AI‑assisted discovery with human curation. Entries are reviewed, edited, and organized with the goal of expanding coverage and sharpening quality over time. Your feedback helps steer improvements (because no single human can capture everything all at once).

Details change. Pricing, features, and availability may be incomplete or out of date. Treat listings as a starting point and verify on the provider’s site before making decisions. If you spot an error or a gap, send a quick note and I’ll adjust.