A few months back, we sat down with Match‑Trade Technologies’ CEO, Michał Karczewski, to discuss a topic that really resonated with many readers: how prop firms can hedge funded accounts with FX‑EDGE as their LP.
That first conversation sparked a lot of follow‑up questions particularly around how the model has performed and what comes next for the company’s liquidity offering.
With plenty of live data now behind them, we caught up with Michał ahead of the upcoming iFX EXPO Dubai 2026 to talk about how the solution has evolved, how the gold boom has reshaped the liquidity ecosystem, and where he sees prop trading heading next.
2026 has opened with a wave of geopolitical tensions, from Maduro to Iran and Greenland, and gold has been one of the key beneficiaries. How have these latest moves in gold affected your business as a liquidity provider, and do you see any broader impact on the industry?
Gold has become a very demanding instrument lately, both for brokers and LPs. On the broker side, we’re seeing more and more firms trying to hedge a large share, if not all, of their gold exposure. Clients who had been inactive for quite a while are coming back to us with very specific questions about gold hedging solutions.
From the liquidity provider perspective, we’re seeing much the same thing. Gold – and silver, to an extent – is now somewhat problematic to deal with as well. The concentration of long positions is so high that many liquidity providers are reassessing and tightening their risk appetite. Because of those policy changes, the surge of interest in gold, and the growing tendency to A‑book XAUUSD, there are now far fewer places where you can hedge gold on the terms that, until recently, were pretty much standard. My guess is that this will be one of the main talking points at the iFX EXPO in Dubai.
We’re also noticing more crypto exchanges introducing gold trading. Do you think the outflow of traders towards exchanges will be significant?
I do see the trend, absolutely. Exchanges have to react to the sharp drop in crypto volumes, and right now, as I mentioned, gold is the most popular instrument on the market. So it’s logical that they’re trying to compensate for lower crypto activity by adding gold to the mix.
Will this trigger a major migration of clients to exchanges? It’s difficult to judge at this stage. There will certainly be some shift, but I don’t believe it will be a serious threat to brokers. Looking at both our traditional and prop liquidity clients, we see gold taking an ever-larger share of overall volume, so they don’t seem to be struggling with declining turnover.
Our data shows that nearly half of all first trades are in gold, and gold’s share in total volume is around 60–65%. But clients ultimately follow volatility – once gold stops trending, they’ll look for the next set of highly volatile instruments that can deliver quick returns, and things should normalize. The only unknown is how long this current gold cycle will continue.
Last time we spoke, you mentioned your new prop liquidity offering, and off the record you said you’d be able to talk more about how the market received it closer to the iFX EXPO in Dubai. Can you share an update now?
We’re now in a much better position to assess how it’s been received, and the response has been very positive. The initial feedback from prop firms using our dedicated liquidity shows they’re pleased with the setup and are actively hedging their funded phases through us.
We’re also steadily onboarding new clients, including larger and more established firms that were quite sceptical at first, but are now coming on board as they see the model working in practice.
Why were the larger clients sceptical about the idea?
It’s quite simple. Bigger prop firms usually have more complex internal structures and plenty of market experience. What we proposed was a completely new way of hedging funded‑phase risk, so their first instinct was to observe from a distance and see whether it actually worked in real trading conditions.
Large brands also have much more to lose in terms of reputation. They can’t risk negative PR because of technical issues with a new liquidity setup, so their default approach is to wait rather than rush in. Now, after a few months of live trading, it’s clear the model works as we expected and doesn’t create operational problems for the props. As a result, those larger firms are coming back to the conversation and are much more open to connecting to our liquidity.
Since the product has proven itself, I assume you’re planning to build on it. Is there anything in the pipeline you can already talk about?
The initial phase was primarily aimed at prop firms using Match‑Trader. We’ve now finished testing for flows from other platforms and are in the process of onboarding our first MetaTrader 5 clients. At this point, our prop liquidity can effectively be integrated with any platform and any bridge.
On the refinement side, we’re continuously improving how we price specific funded‑phase conditions. That lets us estimate more accurately how each rule influences the risk profile and at what cost we’re able to hedge it.
On the new fx‑edge.com website, you’re promoting a free bridge for clients using your liquidity. Where’s the catch?
Believe it or not, there really isn’t one. We simply figured that since we’ve already developed a bridge, why not use it to make our liquidity offer more attractive. For years, we didn’t focus on selling the bridge commercially and mainly used it in‑house, because the market already has several strong bridge providers catering to highly demanding clients.
What we also saw, though, is a large group of brokers who only need a bridge for straightforward A/B‑Book execution, without all the fancy add-ons. We’ve built a set of extra features into our bridge that work exclusively with our liquidity and aren’t available elsewhere. That combination helps us stand out as a liquidity provider while giving clients some additional value.
Alongside developments in prop liquidity, there’s also a lot of buzz around prediction markets right now. What’s your view on them, and could they realistically evolve into the “next prop trading”?
You’re right, that’s something we’ve been hearing quite a bit about lately. Personally, I think prediction markets – or “probability trading,” as I like to call it – will have a much tougher path than prop trading. First of all, prop trading is typically treated as an educational service by regulators, app stores, social platforms, or PSPs. This makes marketing and operations much easier and cheaper. With prediction markets, that angle isn’t really available.
On top of that, prediction markets are typically classified as betting, and many financial regulators are unlikely to approve them. Some firms may try to go down the gambling‑licence route, but that’s not my area of expertise. For now, we’re seeing a boom in the US, while in Europe these products are not permitted. If they do start to appear more widely, my guess is that offshore jurisdictions will move first.
From a technology perspective, there’s a lot of potential in this area, so as a company we’re keeping a close eye on it. In fact, our team started working on event‑based trading functionality for Match‑Trader some time ago, and we’ll be showing the first version at the upcoming iFX EXPO Dubai.
