What happened with SIEB today?
No read yet
Uses news and trading volume to explain the day’s move and how it relates to the market.
Stop guessing. Get the call, a three-month target price, the best and worst cases, and a source for every claim.
Siebert Financial Corp helps investors trade securities and manage their investments, chiefly through its brokerage subsidiary MSCO. Customers pay trading commissions and advisory fees, and those who borrow against securities in their accounts pay interest. MSCO also earns from borrowing and lending shares and from trading securities for its own account. Securities borrowing and lending, together with interest and marketing and distribution fees, generate most revenue; customer trading commissions are a smaller source.
Financial services account for nearly all revenue. Alongside brokerage, Siebert offers investment management through SNXT and insurance through PW. Its smaller GM business represents music and sports talent and provides marketing and content-production services.
The business depends on trading activity, demand for borrowed shares and interest rates. MSCO clears trades itself and also uses National Financial Services Corp., making clearing systems and intermediaries important to its operations. Securities rules require it to maintain liquid capital, customer reserves and clearing collateral, limiting how much money it can commit to trading or transfer to the parent company.
The risk section is the longest, dullest part of the filing. This keeps only what can really hurt you: where it hits, how hard, when it plays out.
Every company claims an edge. Each one is checked against hard numbers like margins and returns: which hold, and which line gives way first.
Interactive Brokers competes with Siebert to handle individual investors’ and professional clients’ trades, including completing the transfers of cash and securities after a trade, or clearing. Watch its low-cost trading tools and execution technology as benchmarks for Siebert’s discount brokerage offering.
Charles Schwab competes with Siebert for brokerage accounts and investment assets, and both businesses depend partly on customer cash balances and interest rates. Watch Schwab’s net interest revenue: falling rates already reduced Siebert’s interest income on customer balances.
Futu overlaps with Siebert in online brokerage for investors and financial services for corporate clients; both also lend customers money to trade and lend securities. Futu’s securities-lending business is particularly relevant to Siebert, whose stock borrow and loan revenue rose from $19.249 million in 2024 to $29.034 million in 2025.
UP Fintech competes with Siebert for digital brokerage clients and companies needing employee equity-plan and issuer services, while both handle U.S. trade clearing themselves. Watch UP Fintech’s clearing costs: it says handling more trades internally improves efficiency and profit margins.
Oppenheimer Holdings, Inc. competes with Siebert for private-client brokerage and wealth-management business, with both emphasizing the quality of trade execution. Watch Oppenheimer’s clients choosing fee-based rather than per-trade accounts, a shift relevant to the mix of brokerage commissions and advisory fees Siebert earns.
Stifel Financial Corp. overlaps with Siebert in selling brokerage and financial advice to private clients and securities trading services to institutions. Its private-client business and institutional equity and fixed-income trading are the relevant comparisons, rather than its broader banking operations.
Raymond James competes with Siebert for retail clients paying for investment advice and brokerage, and both also provide trading and corporate financing services. Watch Raymond James’s service quality, technology platform and product selection—the areas it identifies as central to winning clients.
Morgan Stanley competes with Siebert for individuals’ brokerage and wealth-management business and for institutional securities clients. Its Wealth Management and Institutional Securities businesses offer the closest comparisons; Morgan Stanley identifies execution, client experience and relative pricing as competitive factors.
Webull competes with Siebert for self-directed U.S. securities traders through online platforms and trading tools. Webull’s U.S. brokerage mainly earns payments from market makers and exchange partners for sending them customer orders, rather than customer commissions, making its pricing and mobile trading tools useful gauges of the competition Siebert faces.
Robinhood competes with Siebert for U.S. self-directed brokerage customers and their securities orders, though its substantial cryptocurrency offering makes it a broader comparison. Watch how Robinhood routes securities orders to market makers seeking better prices, since Siebert also emphasizes execution quality.
Dominari Holdings Inc. overlaps with Siebert in serving wealth-management, securities-trading, investment-banking and insurance clients through its subsidiaries. Watch Dominari’s financial-services partnerships and acquisitions, which are part of its plan to expand across these same businesses.
Goldman Sachs and Siebert both earn money from clients’ securities trading and financing, exposing them to trading demand and securities-financing conditions. Watch Goldman’s equities financing revenue alongside Siebert’s stock borrow and loan business, which generated $29.034 million in 2025.
Virtu Financial competes with Siebert by standing ready to buy and sell securities—market making—and executing client trades, where liquidity, execution quality and technology matter. Virtu’s market-making revenue comes from small buy/sell price spreads across large trading volumes; its execution technology is a useful comparison for Siebert’s emphasis on better prices and large-order execution.
Stifel Financial Corp. earningsSF
Stifel Financial's report will show how its private-client business and institutional equity and fixed-income trading are doing, revealing the competitive pressure it brings to Siebert for clients and orders.
Read the private-client business alongside institutional equity and fixed-income trading. If both hold up, Stifel is still competing for client assets and orders, keeping pressure on Siebert's brokerage and trading businesses. If both weaken, pressure from this rival may ease, but that does not mean Siebert won the business.
Robinhood Markets, Inc. earningsHOOD
Robinhood's report will show activity among U.S. self-directed securities traders and how its order-routing business is faring, revealing the contest with Siebert for customers' orders.
Look at Robinhood's securities-trading activity alongside its order-routing business. If both strengthen, competition for self-directed investors' orders remains firm, and Siebert must keep its execution service and pricing attractive. If both weaken, that contest may cool, but it does not mean Siebert's trading volume will rise.
Fed Interest Rate Decision
For Siebert, the Fed’s decision on the cost of borrowing across the economy matters because lower rates can reduce interest income on customer balances, a major Financial Services revenue stream.
Expected4.0%Last release4.0%
If it comes in above expectations
If rates rise more than expected, interest income on customer balances may increase, though competition to keep deposit rates low could limit the benefit.
If it comes in below expectations
If rates fall more than expected, interest income on customer balances may decline, reducing this revenue stream for Financial Services.
Oppenheimer Holdings, Inc. earningsOPY
Oppenheimer's report will show whether clients are choosing fee-based advice or paying per trade, a useful comparison for Siebert's mix of brokerage commissions and advisory fees.
Compare changes in Oppenheimer's fee-based accounts with its transaction-based brokerage business. If fee-based accounts strengthen, clients may be favoring ongoing advice, which could pressure Siebert's commissions unless advisory fees make up the difference. If brokerage holds up better, per-trade demand still has support. The firms' client mixes differ, so this is a clue about customer preferences, not proof that Siebert's clients have shifted.
Virtu Financial, Inc. earningsVIRT
Virtu Financial's report will show how trading activity and revenue in its market-making business are faring, indicating how active the market is in which it competes with Siebert for securities trades.
Read Virtu's market-making revenue alongside trading activity. If both are strong, market makers are seeing more opportunity to handle orders, putting Siebert's market making and principal trading in a more active market—but with stronger competition too. If both weaken, trading opportunities may be fewer. Virtu's business and order mix differ, so its results are not a substitute for Siebert's own figures.
Futu Holdings Limited earningsFUTU
Futu's report will show how its securities-lending business is faring, providing a market read-through for a significant source of Siebert's stock-borrow-and-loan revenue.
Read Futu's securities-lending revenue alongside activity in its brokerage business. Stronger lending revenue with active brokerage would suggest securities lending remains a lively source of income; weaker lending revenue without a clear slowdown in brokerage activity could point to less favorable lending economics. Siebert reported $29.034 million in stock-borrow-and-loan revenue in 2025. The firms serve different customer markets, so Futu offers a directional clue, not proof Siebert will move the same way.
