Goldman Sachs tops third edition of Dealer Rankings

Dealer Rankings 2025: Citi slides, Europeans climb in annual analysis of US fund and insurer trades

Key points Summary Q&A

• Goldman Sachs claimed top position in Risk.net’s Dealer Rankings, moving up from fourth place last year.
• The rankings are based on reports filed by US mutual funds, ETFs and life insurers that provide a snapshot of their books, including the counterparty for each trade.
• Goldman was particularly strong with mutual funds, but the bank was a top 10 dealer in all but one of the 16 markets covered by the data – the exception being repo.
• For the first time, no bank finished in the top 10 for all of the markets.

These summaries are generated by an LLM, but edited by humans.

Goldman Sachs deposed Citi to take the top spot in this year’s edition of Risk.net’s Dealer Rankings – the third annual analysis of trades reported by US mutual funds, ETFs and life insurers, and the first time Goldman has finished on top of the pile.

Its jump from last year’s fourth spot was primarily due to strength with mutual fund clients, where the rankings cover nine over-the-counter instruments. Goldman finished first in four of those instruments, and second in two others. The bank was less dominant among insurers, where it appeared in all seven instruments, but bagged no first places and only one second.

Across the 16 instruments tracked for the rankings, Goldman was a top 10 finisher in 15. Four banks can boast that distinction, but none achieved a clean sweep of all 16 – last year, both JP Morgan and Morgan Stanley did so.

The analysis is based on 2024 trading, revealed in quarterly snapshots that list all open positions and the relevant counterparty. Points are awarded to each dealer for book size, number of tickets and number of clients – as well as the year-on-year change in each of those metrics – to create a series of league tables (see box, Mini-methodology). The result is not perfect, but offers rare, public insight into the behaviour and strategy of both buy- and sell-side firms in what remains an opaque and largely private market.

 

Morgan Stanley moved up two places to finish second, buoyed by two first-place finishes with mutual funds, and three with life insurers – results that catapulted it up the table from last year’s joint-fourth with Goldman.

JP Morgan retained last year’s third place, finishing a single point behind Morgan Stanley. Its stability in the overall rankings was achieved by a slate of 12 top three finishes in the 16 instruments, but concealed swings in some markets: for example, with life insurer clients, the bank fell five spots in swaptions and foreign exchange forwards, while jumping four places in inflation swaps. The bank also fell out of the top 10 for FX forwards with mutual funds.

Bank of America slipped to fourth from last year’s second place, after falling back in FX forwards with mutual funds – a market it led last year – and losing further ground in credit default swaps.

Citi, meanwhile, dropped to fifth from first. Its overall standing was hurt by relative weakness with mutual funds and ETFs, where it slipped back in many instruments and ended with the sixth-biggest haul of points; among insurers, it was third. The bank was top for inflation swaps with life insurers, and made a comeback in the fiercely competitive market for FX forwards with mutual funds, where it finished second.

Euro trio brio

The shake-up at the top gave room for the big European dealers to close the gap on their US rivals. Barclays rose one place to tie with Citi for fifth overall – its highest finish in the three years of the rankings – while BNP Paribas topped the life insurer table and finished within touching distance of the top five overall. Deutsche Bank retained last year’s eighth spot, but did so with a much-increased points total – most of its year-on-year gains came from trades with mutual funds.

Wells Fargo and HSBC rounded out the top 10. The West Coast dealer climbed one spot to eighth overall, driven by a first place in swaptions and two second-place finishes with life insurers. HSBC’s strength in FX trading with mutual funds helped it jump two places overall.

Outside the top 10, a handful of regional and non-US players gained ground. Nomura is worth a special mention. The Japanese dealer recorded the tenth-highest overall points total, but the fifth-place tie between Barclays and Citi means it does not appear on the top 10 list of banks. Regardless, the dealer is on an upward trajectory – in the past two years of the rankings, Nomura has now climbed three spots.

Societe Generale performed well in swaptions and equity index options with life insurers. State Street finished fifth in FX forwards with mutual funds and ETFs.

Trading activity in the markets tracked by the Dealer Rankings rebounded across most instruments in 2024, though the recovery was uneven. The total reported notional rose in 11 of the 16 markets, reversing widespread declines in 2023.

FX options books grew strongly, with combined mutual fund and insurer notionals increasing from $91 billion to $149 billion year-on-year. That marks a 63% jump, though the total remains well below the $346 billion peak seen in 2021. Other interest rate instruments saw more measured growth in aggregate notionals: swaptions grew 14%, inflation swaps 12%, and interest rate swaps 5%.

Detailed charts and analysis for each of the top 10 dealers, and the 16 instruments, will be published tomorrow.

Mini-methodology

When reading, it will help to bear the following points in mind. A full description of the methodology is available here.

• The rankings are based on quarterly, trade-level snapshots of derivatives positions filed by mutual funds and life insurers, complete with the sell-side counterparty for each trade.
• For each instrument, and each end-user type, the data has been sliced into dozens of cuts – for example, all trades, large trades, long-dated trades, popular underlyings.
• Dealers active in each of these cuts are ranked in six ways – by total notional (or book size), by number of tickets, by number of clients, and by year-on-year growth in each of this first trio.
• Points are awarded based on how many dealers each firm finishes ahead of – there are more points on offer in well-populated cuts of the data.
• Collectively, we refer to points for notional, tickets and clients as ‘gross points’. We refer to points for year-on-year changes as ‘increase points’.