BGC Group, Inc. - Annual Report: 2010 (Form 10-K)

Table of Contents

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

FOR ANNUAL AND TRANSITION REPORTS PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

(Mark One)

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010

OR

For the transition period from                     to                    

Commission File Number 0-28191

BGC Partners, Inc.

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)

(212) 610-2200

(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:

None

(Title of Class)

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.    Yes  ¨    No  x

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.    Yes  ¨    No  x

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant: (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.    Yes  x    No  ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).    Yes  ¨    No  ¨

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.    ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See definition of “accelerated filer and large accelerated filer” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

Large Accelerated Filer  ¨            Accelerated Filer  x            Non-accelerated Filer  ¨            Smaller Reporting Company  ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).    Yes  ¨    No  x

The aggregate market value of voting common equity held by non-affiliates of the registrant, based upon the closing price of the Class A common stock on June 30, 2010 as reported on NASDAQ, was approximately $353,029,767.

Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the registrant’s classes of common stock, as of the latest practicable date.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE.

Table of Contents

BGC Partners, Inc.

2010 FORM 10-K ANNUAL REPORT

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Table of Contents

SPECIAL NOTE ON FORWARD-LOOKING INFORMATION

This Annual Report on Form 10-K (“Form 10-K”) contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”). Such statements are based upon current expectations that involve risks and uncertainties. Any statements contained herein that are not statements of historical fact may be deemed to be forward-looking statements. For example, words such as “may,” “will,” “should,” “estimates,” “predicts,” “potential,” “continue,” “strategy,” “believes,” “anticipates,” “plans,” “expects,” “intends” and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements.

Our actual results and the outcome and timing of certain events may differ significantly from the expectations discussed in the forward-looking statements. Factors that might cause or contribute to such a discrepancy include, but are not limited to:

3

Table of Contents

The foregoing risks and uncertainties, as well as those risks discussed under the headings “Item 1A—Risk Factors”, “Item 7—Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and “Item 7A—Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Risk” and elsewhere in this Form 10-K, may cause actual results to differ materially from the forward-looking statements. The information included herein is given as of the filing date of this Form 10-K with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”), and future events or circumstances could differ significantly from these forward-looking statements. The Company does not undertake to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

WHERE YOU CAN FIND MORE INFORMATION

Our Internet website address is www.bgcpartners.com. Through our Internet website, we make available, free of charge, the following reports as soon as reasonably practicable after electronically filing them with, or furnishing them to, the SEC: our annual reports on Form 10-K; our proxy statements for our annual and special stockholder meetings; our quarterly reports on Form 10-Q; our current reports on Form 8-K; Forms 3, 4 and 5 and Schedules 13D and 13G filed on behalf of Cantor, our directors and our executive officers; and amendments to those reports. In addition, our Internet website address is the primary location for press releases regarding our business, including our quarterly and year-end financial results.

4

Table of Contents

PART I

Throughout this document BGC Partners, Inc. is referred to as “BGC” and, together with its subsidiaries, as the “Company”, “we”, “us” or “our.

Our Business

We are a leading global financial intermediary to the financial markets specializing in the brokering of a broad range of financial products globally, including fixed income securities, interest rate swaps, foreign exchange, equities, equity derivatives, credit derivatives, commodities, futures, structured products and other instruments. We also provide a full range of services, including trade execution, broker-dealer services, clearing, processing, information, and other back office services, to a broad range of financial and non-financial institutions. Through our eSpeed and BGCantor Market Data brands, we also offer financial technology solutions, market data, and analytics related to select financial instruments and markets. Our customers include many of the world’s largest banks, broker-dealers, investment banks, trading firms, hedge funds, governments and investment firms. Our integrated platform is designed to provide flexibility to customers with regard to price discovery, execution and processing of transactions, and enables them to use voice, hybrid, or, where available, fully electronic brokerage services in connection with transactions executed either OTC or through an exchange.

We have offices located in 24 cities, including New York and London, as well as Aspen, Beijing, Chicago, Copenhagen, Dubai, Garden City, Hong Kong, Istanbul, Johannesburg, Mexico City, Moscow, Nyon, Paris, Rio de Janeiro, São Paulo, Sarasota, Seoul, Singapore, Sydney, Tokyo, Toronto and West Palm Beach. As of December 31, 2010, we had 1,705 brokers and salespeople across approximately 200 desks and products (more than triple the number we had in October 2004). In 2010, we processed approximately 21.3 million transactions, totaling almost $171 trillion notional on our hybrid and fully electronic platforms.

Our History

Our voice brokerage business originates from one of the oldest and most established inter-dealer franchises in the financial intermediary industry. Cantor started our brokerage operations in 1972 and in 1996 launched the eSpeed system, revolutionizing the way government bonds are traded in the inter-dealer market by providing a fully electronic trading marketplace. eSpeed, Inc.(“eSpeed”) completed an initial public offering in 1999 and began trading on NASDAQ, yet remained one of Cantor’s controlled subsidiaries. Following eSpeed’s initial public offering, Cantor continued to operate its inter-dealer voice brokerage business separately from eSpeed.

Prior to the events of September 11, 2001, our brokerage business was widely recognized as one of the leading full-service wholesale inter-dealer brokers in the world with a rich history of developing innovative technological and financial solutions. After September 11, 2001 and the loss of the majority of our U.S.-based employees, our brokerage business operated primarily in Europe.

In August 2004, Cantor announced the reorganization and separation of its inter-dealer voice brokerage business into a subsidiary called “BGC,” in honor of B. Gerald Cantor, a pioneer in screen brokerage services and fixed income market data products. Over the past several years, we have re-established our U.S. presence and have continued to expand our global presence through the acquisition and integration of established brokerage companies and the hiring of experienced brokers. Through these actions, we have been able to expand our presence in key markets and position our business for sustained growth. These acquisitions include:

5

Table of Contents

The Merger

On April 1, 2008, BGC Partners, LLC (“BGC Partners OldCo”) merged with and into eSpeed, to form BGC Partners, Inc. The merger combined eSpeed’s electronic marketplaces and related electronic trading technology expertise in the government bond and other markets with our inter-dealer brokerage businesses. Our management believes this combination has positioned us as one of the few inter-dealer brokers with hybrid capabilities and technology, thus enabling us to offer superior execution to our clients and drive higher trading volumes. Prior to the merger, BGC Partners, Inc. and eSpeed had a strong relationship through a joint services agreement under which revenues for certain services were shared. One of the primary motivations for our merger was our strategy of better focusing eSpeed’s technology on supporting BGC Partners’ brokerage services.

Industry Overview

Wholesale market participants and institutions, such as major banks, investment banks and broker-dealer firms, continue to look to marketplace firms that are able to meet the bulk of their outside trading needs in a broad range of products across geographies. These wholesale market participants continue to display a willingness to use the services of inter-dealer brokers who are able to provide timely and valuable pricing information, strong execution capabilities and the liquidity necessary for such market participants to execute their desired transactions.

Derivatives are increasingly being used to manage risk or to take advantage of the anticipated direction of a market by allowing holders to guard against gains or declines in the price of underlying assets without having to buy or sell the underlying assets. Derivatives are often used to mitigate the risks associated with interest rate

6

Table of Contents

movements, equity ownership, changes in the value of foreign currency, credit defaults by large corporate and sovereign debtors and changes in the prices of commodity products. Demand from financial institutions, financial services intermediaries and large corporations have increased volumes in the wholesale derivatives market, thereby increasing the business opportunity for inter-dealer brokers such as us.

The OTC markets have grown faster than exchange-traded markets over the past decade. According to the Bank for International Settlements (the “BIS”), the underlying OTC and exchange-traded derivative markets traditionally served by inter-dealer brokers have experienced compound annual growth rates, which we refer to as “CAGR,” of approximately 19% and 17%, respectively, based on notional amounts outstanding from December 31, 2000 through June 30, 2010.

The following figures come from the BIS: As of June 30, 2010, the notional amounts outstanding for all OTC derivatives was $583 trillion, up 512% from $95 trillion in December 2000. The notional amounts outstanding for all exchange traded derivatives was $76 trillion on June 30, 2010, up 430% from $14 trillion on December 31, 2000. The notional amounts outstanding for all domestic and international debt securities was approximately $89 trillion on June 30, 2010, up over 150% from approximately $36 trillion on December 31, 2000.

In “liquid” financial markets, the presence of a large number of market participants and facilitators of liquidity and the availability of pricing reference data and standardized terms allow market participants to trade financial instruments quickly and with minimal price disturbance. In these markets, there is substantial competition, efficient execution and high trading volume. While most of the liquid markets are found on listed exchanges, several liquid products continue to be traded OTC, including U.S. Treasuries and spot foreign exchange. Often, the primary liquidity provider for such OTC markets is an inter-dealer broker.

To the extent the trading of a financial instrument requires customization; the relevant market tends to be more illiquid. Illiquid markets generally have fewer market participants, less price transparency, higher spreads and lower trading volumes. Complex financial instruments that are traded OTC tend to be illiquid and are traded primarily by more sophisticated buyers and sellers. Inter-dealer brokers facilitate trading in less liquid markets by providing price discovery, preserving anonymity in matched principal trades, matching buyers and sellers on a name give-up basis in agency transactions and providing market intelligence to their customers. “Name give-up” transactions refer to those transactions where the inter-dealer broker acts as an agent and the identity of the two counterparties is disclosed once the trade is completed as opposed to “matched principal” trades where anonymity is preserved even after the transaction is completed. In a “matched principal transaction” BGC Partners agrees to simultaneously buy securities or derivatives from one client and to sell them to another client. In both agency and matched principal transactions, customers decide to execute a trade and inter-dealer brokers effectively source the counterparties for those trades. Inter-dealer brokers are particularly helpful in facilitating large or non-standardized transactions due to their in-depth market knowledge and access to potential counterparties.

An illiquid market for a financial instrument may evolve over a period of time into a more liquid one, creating new market opportunities for all participants; however, the evolution of a relatively illiquid market for a financial instrument to a more liquid market is not necessarily inevitable. If a market for a particular financial instrument develops and matures, more buyers and sellers may enter the market, resulting in more transactions (greater liquidity) and increased pricing information. As the market for an illiquid financial instrument evolves into a more liquid market, the characteristics of trading, the preferred mode of execution and the size of commissions that market participants pay and, more specifically, inter-dealer brokers charge, may change. In some instances, pure voice execution may be replaced by “hybrid” execution services. Hybrid models satisfy customer preferences to trade on a voice, hybrid, or, where available, fully electronic basis.

For more liquid markets, such as certain U.S. Treasury and cash foreign exchange products, electronic marketplaces have emerged as the primary means of conducting transactions and creating markets. In an electronic marketplace, substantially all of the participants’ actions are facilitated through an electronic medium,

7

Table of Contents

such as a private electronic network or over the Internet, which reduces the need for actual face-to-face or voice-to-voice participant interaction to those functions where people provide the greatest value. For many market participants, the establishment of electronic marketplaces has created access to new opportunities, while increasing trading profits, investment returns and market volumes, all while making possible the creation of new financial products and strategies that have further contributed to increased market volumes. These increased trading volumes have in turn driven increased demand for newer, ever-more sophisticated financial technology products.

Most large exchanges worldwide, including certain exchanges in the U.S., France, Canada, Germany, Japan, Sweden, Switzerland and the U.K., are now partially or completely electronic. Additionally, even in markets for less commoditized products where customers place orders through a voice-broker who implements a transact ion electronically, the customers of inter-dealer brokers may benefit from liquidity, pricing, robust interactive trading, post-trade processing and other technology services. Further, we believe that market participants will seek to outsource customized solutions for the electronic distribution of their products to avoid the difficulty and cost of developing and maintaining their own electronic solutions, and to improve the quality and reliability of these solutions.

While some products may evolve from illiquid markets to liquid markets, new products are continually being developed. Historically, as markets evolve and participants look to separate or isolate risks, certain products will tend to exhibit correlations and pricing relationships leading to the development of new derivative products.

The chart below presents the growth of certain OTC and exchange-traded markets from December 31, 2000 to June 30, 2010.

Notes and Sources for the above chart: The BIS for global debt and all derivatives except for CDS. For CDS, the source is the International Swaps and Derivatives Association (ISDA). For US Federal Government and Corporate debt, the source is The Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association (SIFMA). Note: For global and domestic debt, International issues comprise all foreign currency issues by residents and non-residents of a given country as well as domestic currency issues launched by non-residents. Additionally, domestic

8

Table of Contents

securities specifically targeted to international investors are also considered as international issues in the BIS statistics. Domestic debt securities are defined as those that have been issued by residents in domestic currency and targeted at resident investors.

Over the last decade, most of the above market categories have experienced double-digit growth. Although many of these markets had lower or negative growth following the collapse of Lehman Brothers and the ensuing global financial crises, we believe that much of this growth has been, and in many cases over the long term will continue to be, driven by the following trends:

9

Table of Contents

Finally, over the course of 2009 and 2010, regulators and legislators in the U.S. and E.U. worked to create new laws and regulations for the global OTC derivatives markets, including, most recently, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. The new rules and proposals for rules have mainly called for additional transparency, position limits and collateral or capital requirements, as well as for central clearing of most standardized derivatives. We believe that uncertainty around the final form such new rules might take may have negatively impacted trading volumes in certain markets in which we broker. We believe that it is too early to comment on specific aspects of the U.S. legislation as rules are still being created, and much too early to comment on laws not yet passed in Europe.

Our Market Opportunity

We believe the financial markets in which we operate present us with the following opportunities to provide value to our customers as a financial intermediary, inter-dealer broker, marketplace developer, technology provider and market data supplier:

Increasing Use of Hedging and Risk Management. Inter-dealer brokers work with market participants who trade financial products, generally on behalf of their clients, to hedge risks associated with interest rate movements, equity ownership, fluctuations in the value of foreign currency, credit defaults by large corporate and sovereign debtors and volatility in the commodity markets. These hedging activities account for a growing proportion of the daily trading volume in derivative products. We believe that broadening familiarity with derivative products and the growing need for hedging and risk management will continue to drive higher trading volumes in financial products we broker including interest rate derivatives, credit derivatives, foreign exchange and listed futures products.

Introduction of New Products. As market participants and their customers strive to mitigate risk, new types of securities and derivatives are introduced which are not immediately ready for more liquid and standardized electronic markets. As these require broker-assisted execution, we believe that these new products provide opportunities for inter-dealer brokers to expand their trading volumes and create product niches. We believe that these products generally have higher commissions than more liquid instruments.

Growth in Algorithmic and Computerized Trading. In recent years, and in certain listed and OTC markets, computerized trading has seen tremendous growth spurred by increasing liquidity and lower operating costs. As our customers increase their use of computerized trading, and as fully electronic trading becomes widespread in more asset classes, volumes should rise on our electronic platforms.

Market Demand for Global Execution and Presence. We believe that the continuing globalization of trading and the liberalization of capital markets are propelling growth in trading volumes in products across the globe. In addition, we believe that economic growth in emerging markets such as Brazil, Russia, India, and China is fueling demand for inter-dealer brokered currency and fixed income and commodity hedging for customers across the globe. These factors and others are driving the demand for brokerage services in new markets. We also believe our presence in multiple financial centers across the globe positions us to capitalize on such demand. We also believe our recent expansion into Russia, Brazil, the United Arab Emirates, and China further enhances our global market positions.

Market Demand for Superior Execution. Inter-dealer brokers act as important price discovery agents and valuable liquidity providers in both liquid and illiquid markets. The presence of a broker provides customers with market intelligence and aids in the execution process. The flow of information inter-dealer brokers provide to

10

Table of Contents

market participants is critical, enhancing liquidity and resulting in improved prices. Furthermore, the combination of hybrid execution with straight-through processing has significantly improved confirmation and settlement processes and has resulted in cost savings for customers. Hence, we expect to see continued demand in the wholesale markets for inter-dealer brokers due to their ability to provide price discovery, liquidity and superior execution.

Desire for Anonymity. Leading financial market participants frequently seek to trade anonymously to reduce market impacts. We expect to see an increasing demand for inter-dealer brokers to provide trade anonymity.

Increasing Demand for Market Data. Demand for reliable, real-time market data is growing as new financial products are introduced and trading volumes increase.

Our Competitive Strengths

We believe that the following principal competitive strengths will help us enhance our position as a leading global inter-dealer broker:

We are a Leading Inter-Dealer Broker with Specific Strengths in Key Markets. We have displayed leadership in a multitude of markets globally, including the markets for certain interest rate derivatives, foreign exchange and credit products. The Company has been recognized within the industry, including by Risk magazine, for our strong presence in such interest rate products as interest rate swaptions, exotic interest rate products, interest rate caps/floors, interest rate swaps and repurchase agreements, as well as U.S. Treasuries. Over the past three years, Asia Risk magazine has named us as a leading broker in numerous product categories, including interest rate swaps, currency derivatives, equity derivatives and credit derivatives, as well as for overall “Technology Development”. Last year Australia Risk named BGC the #1 broker in Currencies. The Risk and Asia Risk rankings are based on each magazine’s annual survey of broker-dealers in their respective readership markets. In addition, BGC Partners was named by Waters magazine as Best Interdealer Broker in its 2009 European Financial IT Awards for the performance of BGC’s fully electronic trading across multiple asset classes. We believe the leadership position that we have in our markets and our access to a broad customer base help us to locate the best price and to deliver the best execution for our customers, in both liquid and illiquid markets.

We Have Strong Core Relationships. We believe that our long-standing relationships with some of the world’s largest financial institutions enhance our role as a liquidity provider. These relationships provide access to significant pools of liquidity, which is a key component of attracting new customers and enhancing our role as a provider of liquidity, price discovery and efficient execution. These strong relationships also allow us to participate in growth opportunities as these institutions begin to use newer products for risk management and trading. In addition, we believe these relationships allow us to sell our current and new products to our customers.

We Have a Full Scale, Hybrid Brokerage Platform. For many of our products, our hybrid platform allows our customers to trade on a voice, hybrid, or fully electronic basis, regardless of whether the trade is OTC or exchange-based, and to benefit from the experience and market intelligence of our worldwide brokerage network.

We Have Proprietary Technology. Over the past decade, we have heavily invested in creating and maintaining our infrastructure, technology, and innovations in multiple markets. We believe our technology gives us an advantage over our competitors, which more often depend on third party vendors to support their functionality. Also, as a result of the eSpeed merger, our technology capabilities are more closely aligned with our brokerage efforts and have been focused on new and emerging screen based market solutions to support our brokers. Finally, our technology, unlike that of many of our competitors, is generally designed and developed in-house, and is thus tailored to specifically suit the needs of our brokers and clients.

11

Table of Contents

We Provide Quality Software, Market Data and Analytics Products. Our leading position and liquidity in brokerage markets allow us to provide our customers with high quality, market data and analytics products. In addition, our proprietary software leverages our global infrastructure, software and systems, portfolio of intellectual property and electronic trading expertise to provide customers with electronic marketplaces, exchanges and real-time auctions to enhance securities issuance and to customize trading interfaces. Our ability to offer these products not only helps support our leadership position in several key markets but also provides us with a stable source of non-brokerage revenues.

We Have Demonstrated the Ability to Identify, Recruit and Retain Key Talent. In October 2004, when Cantor began the restructuring of its inter-dealer brokerage business, we employed approximately 500 brokers and salespeople. As of December 31, 2010, we had 1,705 brokers and sales people across approximately 200 desks and products, which is more than triple the amount we had in October of 2004. In a competitive environment, we have demonstrated our ability to successfully develop, attract and retain leading brokers, including through acquisitions of new businesses, in order to expand and enhance our brokerage staff. We believe that our ability to attract talent across the globe will enable us to grow our business and provide our customers with trading execution that is superior to that provided by many of our competitors.

Our Partnership Structure Creates Long-Term Incentives. Our partnership structure is one of the unique strengths of our business. We believe that it provides long-term incentives and is an effective tool in recruiting, motivating and retaining our key employees. We believe that the ability to participate in the ongoing success of the enterprise acts as a strong motivator for brokers to perform and aligns their interests with stockholders.

We Have a Proven Acquisition Track Record. In August 2010, we acquired the key assets of Mint Partners and Mint Equities. In June 2009, we completed the acquisition of Liquidez. The merger of eSpeed and BGC Partners was completed on April 1, 2008. In August 2007, we acquired the emerging markets equities derivatives business of Marex Financial. In December 2006, we acquired AS Menkul, an established broker in Turkey, and, in November 2006, we acquired Aurel Leven, an independent inter-dealer broker in France, active in the equities, equity derivatives and fixed income markets. Finally, in 2005, we acquired Euro Brokers and ETC Pollak, and have integrated these established brokerage companies into our business. These acquisitions allowed us to expand our broker headcount, product offerings, technology capabilities and geographic footprint. We believe that this ability to successfully identify, acquire and integrate high quality brokerage companies will provide us with the opportunity to strengthen and enhance our franchise and to continue the rebuilding of our U.S. business and expand in local markets around the world.

We Have Experienced Senior Management. We are led by a core senior management team, each of whom has many years of experience in the wholesale financial markets. Howard W. Lutnick, who serves as our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, guided the BGC Division, eSpeed, and Cantor through the aftermath of the events of September 11, 2001, and was instrumental in the initial public offering of eSpeed in 1999. Shaun Lynn, our President, and Sean Windeatt, our Chief Operating Officer, have presided over the addition of more than 1,200 new brokers and salespeople and the expansion and growth of our business in the United States, Europe and Asia over the past six years. Our executives are supported by a highly experienced and qualified team of managers. We believe that our experienced management team gives us a competitive advantage in executing our business strategy.

Our Strategy

We seek to enhance our position as a leading global inter-dealer broker by increasing our market share in existing markets and expanding into new markets. We intend to achieve this goal by employing the following strategies:

Leading Positions in Targeted Traditional, Liquid Markets. We intend to strengthen our position as a leading provider of inter-dealer brokerage services, technology infrastructure and market data products in the

12

Table of Contents

markets in which we focus. We believe that in these selected markets, we have the scale to continue to be a top participant, and we believe underlying macro fundamentals allow additional room for growth.

Build and Develop Less Liquid Markets. We continue to build and expand in markets for selected emerging asset classes. We believe that our role as a top participant in certain underlying securities will be helpful in building liquidity in the higher growth, higher margin businesses associated with these underlying securities. We intend to leverage our position in traditional markets to build these new businesses.

Expand in Attractive Markets Where Local Presence and Expertise Are Required. We plan to continue to expand into new geographies and build local presence in those markets. We believe that having local presence and expertise in targeted markets will provide us with a competitive advantage over our competitors.

Leverage Existing Developed Infrastructure to Drive Margins. We have made substantial investments in brokers and technology in our targeted markets. We believe that the infrastructure in place is scalable, which provides us an opportunity for margin improvement as brokers increase production, we increase brokerage headcount, and as marketplaces become increasingly electronic. Due to the relatively fixed cost nature of the back office functions and real estate-related expenses, each additional transaction we broker or sale we make should add incremental profit to our business.

Expand our Broker Workforce Through Acquisitions and Recruitment. Since October 2004, we have expanded our front office workforce by over 1,200 people. As of December 31, 2010, we had 1,705 brokers and salespeople. We have a proven track record of growing our global network of brokers through business acquisitions and recruiting efforts and believe we are well-positioned to continue to do so. We intend to continue to selectively acquire companies and hire experienced brokers and salespeople with the goal of further developing our market position in various products, accelerating our growth and enhancing our profitability.

Leverage our Proprietary Technology to Pursue New Products, Software Solutions, and Offerings. We believe that our ability to develop and build our own technology allows us to be at the forefront of new products and offerings. We also plan to capitalize on our global infrastructure, intellectual property and electronic trading expertise to provide a complete outsourced solution to customers to enable them to access electronic markets.

Further Develop and Expand our Market Data Services and Analytics Products. We intend to further develop our market data services and analytics products by integrating proprietary information generated by our inter-dealer brokerage business into new market data products designed to meet the needs of a greater number of customers. Sophisticated quantitative approaches to risk management as well as customer time sensitivity have created new needs, uses and demands for trading-related data and analytics. We intend to create new value-added services for customers to complement these products, including databases, analytical tools and other services to assist end-users.

Overview of our Products and Services

Inter-Dealer Brokerage

We are focused on serving three principal brokerage markets:

We believe that the strong long-term growth prospects for these markets, combined with our continued addition of brokers in other markets where we are currently strengthening our position and building scale, provide us with significant opportunities to increase revenues. We also plan to expand into additional product categories and seek to grow our market share in illiquid markets. Due to the complexity of newer and illiquid

13

Table of Contents

markets, customers are generally willing to pay a brokerage commission for liquidity and for the ability of experienced brokerage professionals to provide market intelligence and create structuring solutions.

We provide electronic marketplaces in several financial markets through our eSpeed- and BGC Trader- branded trading platform. These electronic marketplaces include government bond markets, spot foreign exchange, foreign exchange options, corporate bonds, and credit default swaps. We believe that eSpeed/BGC Trader is a comprehensive trading platform providing volume, access, speed of execution and ease of use. Our trading platform establishes a direct link between our brokers and customers and occupies valuable real estate on traders’ desktop, which is difficult to replicate. We believe that we can leverage our platform to offer fully electronic trading as additional products transition from voice to electronic execution.

We have leveraged our hybrid platform to provide real-time product and pricing information through our BGC Trader application. We also provide straight-through processing to our customers for an increasing number of products. Our end-to-end solution includes real-time and auction-based transaction processing, credit and risk management tools and back-end processing and billing systems. Customers can access our trading application through our privately managed global high speed data network, over the internet, or third party communication networks.

14

Table of Contents

The following table identifies some of the key securities and financial products which we broker:

15

Table of Contents

16

Table of Contents

All trades executed on the eSpeed platform settle for clearing purposes against CF&Co., a BGC affiliate. CF&Co. is a member of FINRA (formerly NASD) and the Fixed Income Clearing Corporation, a subsidiary of the Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation. CF&Co., BGC, and other affiliates participate in U.S. Treasuries as well as other markets by posting quotations for their account and by acting as principal on trades with platform users. Such activity is intended, among other things, to assist CF&Co., BGC, and their affiliates in managing their proprietary positions (including, but not limited to, those established as a result of combination trades and errors), facilitating transactions, framing markets, adding liquidity, increasing commissions and attracting order flow.

Market Data

We complement our trading services by providing our market data and analytics to our customers through our BGCantor Market Data suite of products. BGCantor Market Data is the source of real-time pricing and other data derived through BGC Partners and eSpeed for global securities and derivatives. Current products include real-time data in live markets for U.S. Treasuries, European Government Bonds, Foreign Exchange Spot and Options, Interest Rate Swaps, Credit, and ELX Futures, These market data services are available across a broad array of distribution channels, including Bloomberg, Reuters, CQG, Interactive Data, Xignite, SunGard and Cantor Direct.

17

Table of Contents

Software Solutions

Through our Software Solutions business, we provide customized screen-based market solutions to both related and unrelated parties. Using Software Solutions, our clients are able to develop a marketplace, trade with their customers, issue debt, trade odd lots, access program trading interfaces and access our network and our intellectual property. We can add advanced functionality to enable our customers to distribute branded products to their customers through online offerings and auctions, including private and reverse auctions, via our trading platform and global network. Through our Kleos Managed Services business, we provide system co-location service to a number of financial firms which use our infrastructure to run their high velocity and algorithmic trading strategies through access to our markets.

We have signed Software Solutions agreements with a number of U.S. and international enterprises, including the following:

We also use our technology to offer services such as automated spreading through our eSpeed network front-end trading software.

Our Software Solutions business provides the software and technology infrastructure for the transactional and technology related elements of Freedom International Brokerage Company’s (“Freedom”) marketplace as well as certain other services in exchange for specified percentages of transaction revenues from the marketplace. It also provides software development, software maintenance, customer support, infrastructure, and internal technology services to support ELX’s electronic trading platform.

Aqua Business

In October 2007, we spun off our former eSpeed Equities Direct business to form Aqua, a business owned 51% by Cantor and 49% by us. Aqua’s purpose is to provide access to new block trading liquidity in the equities markets. The SEC has granted approval for Aqua to operate an Alternative Trading System in compliance with Regulation ATS.

Customers

We primarily serve the wholesale inter-dealer market, including many of the world’s largest banks that regularly trade in capital markets, brokerage houses, investment firms, hedge funds, and investment banks. Customers using our eSpeed branded products also include professional trading firms, futures commission merchants and other professional market participants and financial institutions. Our BGCantor Market Data products and services are available through many platforms and are available to a wide variety of capital market participants including banks, investment banks, brokerage firms, asset managers, hedge funds, investment analysts and financial advisors. We also license our intellectual property portfolio and Software Solutions to various financial markets participants.

For the year ended December 31, 2010, our top 10 customers, collectively, accounted for approximately 41.8% of our total revenue on a consolidated basis and our largest customer accounted for approximately 5.7% of our total revenue on a consolidated basis.

18

Table of Contents

Sales and Marketing

Our brokers and salespeople are the primary marketing and sales resources to our customers. Thus, our sales and marketing program is aimed at enhancing the ability of our brokers to cross-sell effectively in addition to informing our customers about our product and service offerings. We also employ product teams and business development professionals. We leverage our customer relationships through a variety of direct marketing and sales initiatives and build and enhance our brand image through marketing and communications campaigns targeted at a diverse audience, including traders, potential partners and the investor and press communities. We may also market to our existing and prospective customers through a variety of co-marketing/co-branding initiatives with our partners.

Our brokerage product team is composed of product managers, who are each responsible for a specific part of our brokerage business. The product managers seek to ensure that our brokers, across all regions, have access to technical expertise, support and multiple execution methods in order to grow and market their business. This approach of combining marketing with our product strategy has enabled us to turn innovative ideas into deliverable hybrid solutions, such as “BGC Trader,” our multi-asset hybrid offering to our customers for voice and electronic execution.

Our team of business development professionals is responsible for growing our global footprint through raising awareness of our products and services. The business development team markets our products and services to new and existing customers. As part of this process, they analyze existing levels of business with these entities in order to identify potential areas of growth and also to cross-sell our multiple offerings.

Our eSpeed and BGCantor Market Data branded products and services are promoted to our existing and prospective customers through a combination of sales, marketing and co-marketing campaigns.

Technology

Pre-Trade Technology. Our brokers use a suite of pricing and analytical tools which have been developed both in-house and in cooperation with specialist software suppliers. The pre-trade software suite combines proprietary market data, pricing and calculation libraries, together with those outsourced from what we believe to be the best-of-breed providers in the sector. The tools in turn publish to a normalized, global market data distribution platform allowing prices and rates to be distributed to our proprietary network, data vendor pages, secure websites and trading applications as indicative pricing.

Inter-Dealer Trading Technology. We utilize a sophisticated proprietary electronic trading platform to distribute prices to our customers. Price data are transmitted over our proprietary global private network and also by third-party providers of connectivity to the financial community. Prices are in turn displayed by our proprietary trading desktop application, BGC Trader. BGC Trader is our multi-asset BGC Partners-branded hybrid offering to our customers for voice and electronic execution. This product combines the benefits of our existing hybrid system with a new concept of creative, customer-focused and front-end design. The first asset groups to be incorporated under the BGC Trader banner were foreign exchange options, European corporate bonds, European CDS and iTraxx. We continue to expand the number of products it supports, including other tradable and view-only products in our portfolio. The majority of our global products are supported by this platform in a view only, hybrid/managed, or fully electronic mode. Trades executed by our customers in any mode are eligible for immediate electronic confirmation to straight-through processing hubs. Our proprietary graphical user interface is deployed on thousands of user desktops at hundreds of major banks and institutions.

Fully Electronic Trading Technology. Our eSpeed-branded fully electronic trading system is accessible to our customers through (1) our proprietary front-end trading software, (2) our proprietary application programming interface, which we refer to as “API,” a dedicated software library enabling customers to incorporate our platform directly into their own applications, (3) the Internet, via a browser interface or Java

19

Table of Contents

application and (4) software developed in collaboration with Independent Software Vendors and (5) Financial Information eXchange (“FIX”). Our system runs on large-scale hardware located in data centers in the U.S. and the U.K. and is distributed either over our multiple-path global network or via the Internet through links to multiple global Internet service providers.

Our eSpeed-branded electronic marketplaces operate on a technology platform and network that emphasizes scalability, performance, adaptability and reliability. Our technology platform consists of our proprietary, internally developed real-time global network distribution system; our proprietary transaction processing software, which includes interactive matching auction engines, fully integrated credit and risk management systems, pricing engines, analytics and associated middle and back-office operations systems; and customized inventory distribution and auction protocols designed to be used by our customers and partners in their distribution and trading systems and customer interfaces, including Windows, Java, Unix, Linux, our API and Independent Software Vendor access.

Together, these components enable our customers to effect transactions virtually instantaneously, with straight-through processing. Our trading system accepts orders and postings and distributes responses, generally in under 100 milliseconds.

Post-Trade Technology. Our platform automates previously paper and telephone-based transaction processing, confirmation and other functions, substantially improving and reducing the cost of many of our customers’ back offices and enabling straight-through processing. In addition to our own system, confirmation and trade processing is also available through third-party hubs including Swapswire, T-Zero, Reuters RTNS, Logicscope and direct straight-through processing in (FIX) for various banks.

We have electronic connections to most mainstream clearinghouses, including The Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation (DTCC), CLS Group, Euroclear, Clearstream, Monte Titoli, LCH.Clearnet, Eurex Clearing, CME Clearing and the Options Clearing Corporation (OCC). As more products become centrally cleared, and as our customers request that we use a particular venue, we expect to expand the number of clearinghouses to which we connect in the near future.

Systems Architecture. Our systems are implemented as a multi-tier hub and spoke architecture comprised of several components, which provide matching, credit management, market data distribution, position reporting, customer display and customer integration. The private network currently operates from four concurrent data centers (two of which are in London, one of which is in Rochelle Park, New Jersey and one of which is in Trumbull, Connecticut) and 12 hub cities throughout the world acting as distribution points for all private network customers. eSpeed network hubs beyond the core data centers are in Amsterdam, Brussels, Chicago, Frankfurt, Hong Kong, Madrid, Milan, Paris, Singapore, Tokyo, Toronto, and Zurich. The redundant structure of our system provides multiple backup paths and re-routing of data transmission if one spoke of a hub fails.

In addition to our own network system, we also receive and distribute secure trading information from customers using the services of multiple, major Internet service providers throughout the world. These connections enable us to offer our products and services via the Internet to our global customers.

Software Development

We devote substantial efforts to the development and improvement of our hybrid and electronic marketplaces and licensed software products and services. We work with our customers to identify their specific requirements and make modifications to our software, network distribution systems and technologies that are responsive to those needs. Our efforts focus on internal development, strategic partnering, acquisitions and licensing. As of December 31, 2010, we employed approximately 470 technology professionals.

20

Table of Contents

Our Intellectual Property

We have adopted a comprehensive intellectual property program to protect our proprietary technology. We currently have licenses covering various Cantor patents in the United States, including patents relating to (1) a system and method for auction-based trading of specialized items such as fixed income instruments, (2) a fixed income portfolio index processor and (3) a system for shared remote access of multiple application programs by one or more computers. Foreign counterpart applications for some of these U.S. patents have been filed.

We also have agreements to license technology covered by several pending U.S. patent applications relating to various other aspects of our electronic trading systems, including both functional and design aspects. We have filed a number of patent applications to further protect our proprietary technology and innovations, and have received patents for some of those applications.

In July 2004, we entered into an agreement with NYBOT, expiring in 2017, which provided among other things for payments from NYBOT in respect of NYBOT’s electronic futures trading through 2017. As a result of the agreement with NYBOT, we are the sole owner of the Cantor Financial Futures Exchange and the Commodity Futures Clearing Corporation of New York. Additionally, we have agreed with NYBOT that NYBOT will provide processing services for futures contracts or options on futures contracts listed on the Cantor Financial Futures Exchange or other exchange designated by us.

Our patent portfolio is growing and consists of numerous patents and patent applications relating to our core business and relating to other businesses. We continue to look for opportunities to license and/or otherwise monetize these and other patents in our portfolio.

We cannot determine at this time the significance of any of the foregoing patents, or patent applications, if issued, to our business. We can give no assurance that any of the foregoing patents will be found by a court to be valid and enforceable, or that any of these patents would not be infringed by a third party competing or seeking to compete with our business. Our business strategy may or may not include licensing such patents for royalties, joint ventures with other marketplaces or exchanges or exclusively using the patents in our marketplaces and other product and service offerings.

Credit Risk

Credit risk arises from potential non-performance by counterparties and customers. BGC Partners has established policies and procedures to manage its exposure to credit risk. BGC Partners maintains a thorough credit approval process to limit exposure to counterparty risk and employs stringent monitoring to control the counterparty risk from its matched principal and agency businesses. BGC Partners’ account opening and counterparty approval process includes verification of key customer identification, anti-money laundering verification checks and a credit review of financial and operating data. The credit review process includes establishing an internal credit rating and any other information deemed necessary to make an informed credit decision, including correspondence, due diligence calls and a visit to the entity’s premises, as necessary.

Credit approval is granted subject to certain trading limits and may be subject to additional conditions, such as the receipt of collateral or other credit support. On-going credit monitoring procedures include reviewing periodic financial statements and publicly available information on the client and collecting data from credit rating agencies, where available, to assess the on-going financial condition of the client. For transactions conducted through the eSpeed and BGC Trader electronic trading platform, BGC Partners has developed and utilizes an electronic credit monitoring system which measures and controls credit usage, including the ability to prohibit execution of trades that would exceed risk limits and permit only risk reducing trades.

Principal Transaction Risk

Through its subsidiaries, BGC Partners executes matched principal transactions in which it acts as a “middleman” by serving as counterparty to both a buyer and a seller in matching back-to-back trades. These transactions are then settled through a recognized settlement system or third-party clearing organization.

21

Table of Contents

Settlement typically occurs within one to three business days after the trade date. Cash settlement of the transaction occurs upon receipt or delivery of the underlying instrument that was traded. BGC Partners generally avoids settlement of principal transactions on a free-of-payment basis or by physical delivery of the underlying instrument. However, free-of-payment transactions may occur on a very limited basis.

The number of matched principal trades BGC Partners executes has continued to grow as compared to prior years. Receivables from brokers, dealers and clearing organizations and payables to brokers, dealers and clearing organizations on the Company’s consolidated statements of financial condition primarily represent the simultaneous purchase and sale of the securities associated with those matched principal transactions that have not settled as of their stated settlement dates. BGC Partners’ experience has been that substantially all of these transactions ultimately settle at the contracted amounts.

Market Risk

Market risk refers to the risk that a change in the level of one or more market prices, rates, indices or other factors will result in losses for a specified position. BGC Partners may allow certain of its desks to enter into unmatched principal transactions in the ordinary course of business and hold long and short inventory positions. These transactions are primarily for the purpose of facilitating clients’ execution needs, adding liquidity to a market or attracting additional order flow. As a result, BGC Partners may have market risk exposure on these transactions. BGC Partners’ exposure varies based on the size of its overall positions, the risk characteristics of the instruments held and the amount of time the positions are held before they are disposed of. BGC Partners has limited ability to track its exposure to market risk and unmatched positions on an intra-day basis; however, it attempts to mitigate its market risk on these positions by strict risk limits, extremely limited holding periods and hedging its exposure. These positions are intended to be held short term to facilitate customer transactions. However, due to a number of factors, including the nature of the position and access to the market on which it trades, BGC Partners may not be able to unwind the position and it may be forced to hold the position for a longer period than anticipated. All positions held longer than intra-day are marked to market.

Our risk management procedures and strict limits are designed to monitor and limit the risk of unintended loss and have been effective in the past. However, there is no assurance that these procedures and limits will be effective at limiting unanticipated losses in the future. Adverse movements in the securities positions or a downturn or disruption in the markets for these positions could result in a substantial loss. In addition, principal gains and losses resulting from these positions could on occasion have a disproportionate effect, positive or negative, on BGC Partners’ consolidated financial condition and results of operations for any particular reporting period.

Operational Risk

Our businesses are highly dependent on our ability to process a large number of transactions across numerous and diverse markets in many currencies on a daily basis. If any of our data processing systems do not operate properly or are disabled or if there are other shortcomings or failures in our internal processes, people or systems, we could suffer impairment to our liquidity, financial loss, a disruption of our businesses, liability to clients, regulatory intervention or reputational damage. These systems may fail to operate properly or become disabled as a result of events that are wholly or partially beyond our control, including a disruption of electrical or communications services or our inability to occupy one or more of our buildings. The inability of our systems to accommodate an increasing volume of transactions could also constrain our ability to expand our businesses.

In addition, despite our contingency plans, our ability to conduct business may be adversely impacted by a disruption in the infrastructure that supports our businesses and the communities in which they are located. This may include a disruption involving electrical, communications, transportation or other services used by us or third parties with whom we conduct business.

22

Table of Contents

Foreign Currency Risk

BGC Partners is exposed to risks associated with changes in foreign exchange rates. Changes in foreign currency rates create volatility in the U.S. dollar equivalent of the Company’s revenues and expenses in particular with regard to British Pounds and Euros. In addition, changes in the remeasurement of BGC Partners’ foreign currency denominated net assets are recorded as part of its results of operations and fluctuate with changes in foreign currency rates. BGC monitors the net exposure in foreign currencies on a daily basis and hedges its exposure as deemed appropriate with highly rated major financial institutions.

Interest Rate Risk

BGC Partners had $189.3 million in fixed-rate debt outstanding as of December 31, 2010. These debt obligations are not currently subject to fluctuations in interest rates, although in the event of refinancing or issuance of new debt, such debt could be subject to changes in interest rates.

Other

In addition, our processes address disaster recovery concerns. We operate most of our technology from dual-primary data centers at our two different London locations. Either site alone is capable of running all of our essential systems. In addition, we have technology running from data centers in New Jersey and Connecticut. Replicated instances of this technology are maintained in our London data centers. All data centers are built and equipped to best-practice standards of physical security with appropriate environmental monitoring and safeguards. Failover for the majority of our systems are automated.

Competition

We encounter competition in all aspects of our businesses and compete primarily with other inter-dealer brokers, including for brokers, salespeople, and suitable acquisition candidates.

Our existing and potential competitors in fully electronic trading are numerous and include other inter-dealer brokerage firms, multi-dealer trading companies, technology companies and market data and information vendors, securities and futures exchanges, electronic communications networks, crossing systems, software companies, consortia, business-to-business marketplace infrastructure companies and niche market energy and other commodity Internet-based trading systems.

Inter-Dealer Brokers

We primarily compete with four major, diversified inter-dealer brokers. These inter-dealer brokers are ICAP plc, Tullett Prebon plc, GFI Group Inc. and Compagnie Financière Tradition (which is majority owned by Viel & Cie), all of which are currently publicly traded companies. Other inter-dealer broker competitors include a number of smaller, private firms that tend to specialize in specific product areas or geographies.

Demand for services of brokers is directly affected by national and international economic and political conditions, broad trends in business and finance, the level and volatility of interest rates, changes in and uncertainty regarding tax laws and substantial fluctuations in the volume and price levels of securities transactions. Other significant factors affecting competition in the brokerage industry are the quality and ability of professional personnel, the depth and pricing efficiency of the market displayed by a broker, the strength of the technology used to service and execute on those markets and the relative prices of services and products offered by the brokers and by competing markets and trading processes.

Market Data Vendors

The majority of our large inter-dealer broker competitors also sell proprietary market data, which competes with our market data offerings. In addition to direct sales, we resell market data through large market data and information providers. These companies have established significant presences on the vast majority of trading

23

Table of Contents

desks in our industry. Some of these market data and information providers , such as Bloomberg and Thomson Reuters, have expanded their product mix to include electronic trading and execution of both OTC and listed products in addition to their traditional market data offerings.

Exchanges

Although our business will often use exchanges to execute transactions brokered in both listed and OTC markets, we believe that exchanges have sought and will seek to migrate products traditionally traded in OTC markets by inter-dealer brokers to exchanges. However, we believe that when a product goes from OTC to exchange-traded, the underlying or related OTC market often continues to experience growth in line with the growth of the exchange-traded contract. In addition, as ELX grows its business, we expect it to directly compete with other exchanges in the trading of certain contracts. In addition, IntercontinentalExchange, Inc. (“ICE”) operates both regulated exchanges and OTC execution services, and in the latter it competes directly with inter-dealer brokers in energy, commodities, and credit products. ICE entered these OTC markets primarily by acquiring independent OTC brokers, and we believe that its likely ICE or other exchange operators may seek to compete with us in the future by acquiring other such brokers, by creating futures products designed to mimic OTC products, or through other means.

Software Vendors and Others

Certain exchanges and market data companies, such as London Stock Exchange Group PLC and The NASDAQ OMX Group, Inc., license their technology for use by other market participants, including inter-dealer brokers and other exchanges. Such technology is potentially competitive insofar as we may attempt to license our technology in a similar manner as we have to ELX, or as we may to any company or organization that wishes to create or improve a trading system or exchange.

Banks and Broker-dealers

According to TABB Group, for a large percentage of all OTC trades, banks and dealers trade directly between each other without the use of an IDB or other intermediary. In addition, many listed and OTC transactions are conducted entirely in-house using only the bank or broker-dealer’s internal liquidity pools. Therefore, for many potential transactions, IDBs essentially compete with their own customers.

In addition, in certain products and markets, such as in listed equity-related products globally, and a variety of OTC and listed products in emerging markets like, IDBs sell, broker, and trade products on behalf of both wholesale and institutional customers. Consequently, BGC and its publicly-traded IDB peers can at times both service and compete with its bank and broker-dealer customers. This is generally not the case in the U.S. and U.K. in Rates, Credit, and Foreign Exchange.

Finally, banks and broker dealers have in the past created and/or funded consortia to compete with exchanges and Inter-dealer brokers. For example, ICAP’s inter-dealer businesses for fully electronic trading of U.S. Treasuries and spot foreign exchange both began as dealer-owned consortia before being acquired by ICAP. An example of a current and similar consortium is Tradeweb. Currently, several large banks hold stakes in Tradeweb, an internet-based market intermediary. Thomson Reuters Corporation is Tradeweb’s single largest shareholder. Although Tradeweb operates primarily as a dealer to customer platform, one of its offerings include a voice and electronic inter-dealer platform for mortgage-backed and U.S. Agency securities. Tradeweb’s management has said that it would like to expand into other inter-dealer markets, and as such may compete with BGC in other areas over time.

Overall, we believe that we may also face future competition from market data and technology companies and some securities brokerage firms, some of which are currently our customers, as well as from any future strategic alliances, joint ventures or other partnerships created by one or more of our potential or existing competitors.

24

Table of Contents

Partnership Overview

We believe that our partnership structure is one of the unique strengths of our business. Many of our key brokers have their own capital invested in our business, aligning their interests with our stockholders. Limited partnership interests in BGC Holdings consist of: (i) “founding/working partner units” held by limited partners who are employees; (ii) “limited partnership units” which consist of a variety of units that are generally held by employees such as REUs, RPUs, PSUs and PSIs; and (iii) “Cantor units” which are the exchangeable limited partnership interests held by Cantor entities.

We believe that our partnership structure is an effective tool in recruiting, motivating and retaining key employees. Many brokers are attracted by the opportunity to become partners because the partnership agreement entitles partners to quarterly distributions of income from the partnership. While BGC Holdings limited partnership interests entitle our partners to participate in distributions of income from the operations of our business, upon leaving BGC Holdings (or upon any other redemption or purchase of such limited partnership interests as described below), any such partners are only entitled to receive over time, and provided he or she does not violate certain partner obligations, an amount for his or her BGC Holdings limited partnership interests that reflects such partner’s capital account, excluding any goodwill or going concern value of BGC Partners’ business unless Cantor, in the case of the founding partners, and we, as the general partner of BGC Holdings, otherwise determine. Our partners can receive the right to exchange their BGC Holdings limited partnership interests for shares of BGC Partners common stock (if, in the case of founding partners, Cantor so determines (as Cantor has determined to do with respect to a portion of the founding partner interests immediately after the merger) and in the case of working partners and limited partnership unit holders, the BGC Holdings general partner, with Cantor’s consent, determines otherwise) and thereby realize any higher value associated with BGC Partners common stock. See “Certain Relationships and Related Transactions—Amended and Restated BGC Holdings Limited Partnership Agreement—Exchanges.” We believe that, having invested their own capital in us, partners feel a sense of responsibility for the health and performance of our business and have a strong incentive to maximize our revenues.

Relationship Between BGC Partners and Cantor

See “Certain Relationships and Related Transactions.”

Regulation

U.S. Regulation

The financial services industry in the United States is subject to extensive regulation under both federal and state laws. As registered broker-dealers and a Futures Commissions Merchant, certain of our subsidiaries are subject to laws and regulations which cover all aspects of financial services, including sales methods, trade practices, use and safekeeping of customers’ funds and securities, minimum capital requirements, recordkeeping, business practices, securities lending and financing of securities purchases and the conduct of associated persons. We and our subsidiaries also are subject to the various anti-fraud provisions of the Securities Act, the Exchange Act, the Commodity Exchange Act, certain state securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder. We also may be subject to vicarious and controlling person liability for the activities of our subsidiaries and our officers, employees and affiliated persons.

The SEC is the federal agency primarily responsible for the administration of federal securities laws, including adopting rules and regulations applicable to broker-dealers (other than government securities broker-dealers) and enforcing both its rules regarding broker-dealers and the Treasury’s rules regarding government securities broker-dealers. Broker-dealers are also subject to regulation by state securities administrators in those states in which they conduct business or have registered to do business. In addition, Treasury rules relating to trading government securities apply to such activities when engaged in by broker-dealers. The CFTC is the federal agency primarily responsible for the administration of federal commodities future laws, including the adoption of rules applicable to Futures Commissions Merchants and Designated Contract Markets such as ELX.

25

Table of Contents

Much of the regulation of broker-dealers’ operations in the United States has been delegated to self-regulatory organizations. These self-regulatory organizations adopt rules (which are subject to approval by the SEC) that govern the operations of broker-dealers and government securities broker-dealers and conduct periodic inspections and examinations of their operations. In the case of BGC Partners’ U.S. broker-dealer subsidiaries, the principal self-regulatory organization is FINRA. FINRA is a self-regulatory organization that commenced operations in the third quarter of 2007. It was formed from the consolidation of the NASD’s member regulation operations and the regulatory arm of the NYSE Group to act as the self-regulatory organization for all broker-dealers doing business within the United States. Accordingly, BGC Partners’ U.S. subsidiaries will be subject to both scheduled and unscheduled examinations by the SEC and FINRA. In our futures-related activities, our subsidiaries are also subject to the rules of the CFTC, futures exchanges of which they are members and the NFA, a futures self-regulatory organization.

The changing regulatory environment, new laws that may be passed by Congress, and rules that may be promulgated by the SEC, the Treasury, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, the CFTC, the NFA, FINRA and other self-regulatory organizations, or changes in the interpretation or enforcement of existing laws and rules, if adopted, may directly affect our mode of operation and profitability, of our competitors and our customers and of the securities markets in a way that could adversely affect our business.

The SEC, self-regulatory organizations and state securities administrators conduct informal and formal investigations of possible improprieties or illegal action by broker-dealers and their “associated persons,” which could be followed by the institution of administrative, civil and/or criminal proceedings against broker-dealers and/or “associated persons.” Among the sanctions that may result if administrative, civil or criminal proceedings were ever instituted against us or our “associated persons,” are injunctions, censure, fines, the issuance of cease-and-desist orders or suspension or expulsion from the industry and, in rare instances, even imprisonment. The principal purpose of regulating and disciplining broker-dealers is to protect customers and the securities markets, rather than to protect broker-dealers, creditors and equity holders. From time to time, our “associated persons” have been and are subject to routine investigations, none of which, to date, have had a material adverse effect on our business.

In light of recent events in the U.S. and global financial markets and economy, regulators and legislators in the U.S. and European Union (“EU”) continue to craft new laws and regulations for the global OTC derivatives markets, including the recently passed “Dodd—Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act”. The Dodd-Frank act mandates or encourages several reforms, including impartiality considerations, additional transparency requirements, heightened collateral or capital standards, as well as recommendations for the obligatory use of central clearing for most standardized derivatives. The law also requires that standardized derivatives be traded in an open and non-exclusionary manner on a regulated exchange or a swap execution facility (“SEF”). The bill specifies that the SEC and Commodities Future Trading Commission (“CFTC”) must finalize rules for implementing these requirements by September 15, 2011. The actual implementation of said rules may be phased in over a longer period.

We are unable to predict how any of these new laws and proposals will be implemented or in what form, or whether any additional or similar changes to statutes or regulations, including the interpretation or implementation thereof, will occur in the future. Any such action could affect us in substantial and unpredictable ways and could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. We believe that uncertainty and potential delays around the final form such new rules might take may negatively impact trading volumes in certain markets in which we broker. Increased capital requirements may also diminish transaction velocity. While the broad framework of proposed legislation is known, we believe that it is too early for there to be clarity on the specific aspects of the U.S. legislation and EU proposals which may directly impact our businesses as exact rules have not yet been finalized. Additionally, unintended consequences of the legislation may adversely affect us in ways yet to be determined.

U.K. and European Regulation

The Financial Services Authority (“FSA”) is the statutory regulator for the United Kingdom financial services industry. The FSA is an independent non-governmental body that has been given statutory powers by the

26

Table of Contents

FSMA 2000, and regulates the financial services industry through its Handbook of Rules and Guidance, which consist of a number of sourcebooks and manuals and is prepared under powers granted by FSMA 2000. The FSA has implemented far-reaching reform rules, designed to enhance firms’ liquidity risk management practices, based on the lessons learned since the start of the credit crisis in 2007. Implications of these rules include better liquidity risk management capability (including the use of stress testing and contingency funding plans (“CFP”)); less reliance on short-term wholesale funding, and higher amounts and quality of liquid asset securities (Government securities), leading to an increased likelihood of surviving a severe liquidity stress event, the overarching principles being self-sufficiency and adequacy of liquid resources.

Currently, we have subsidiaries and branches regulated by the FSA (BGC Brokers L.P., BGC International and the U.K. branch of Aurel BGC). As a result of the FSA’s risk assessment of the BGC Partners group’s regulated entities in 2005; the FSA asked that a “skilled person” be appointed to report on various aspects of the finance department’s responsibilities. This process has now been finalized to the satisfaction of the FSA. In February 2010, FSA issued a draft requirement notice under Section 166 of FSMA 2000 to appoint a Skilled Person. The scope of the work is currently being determined but will cover a review of the systems and controls in place relating to client asset and client monies.

Our European regulated group (Aurel BGC, BGC Brokers L.P., BGC International, and other intermediate non-regulated holding entities) is subject to The Financial Groups Directive. To meet the FSA’s requirements under this Directive, the corporate structure of our European regulated group was reorganized as of July 1, 2007. The restructuring of the regulated European entities under BGC European Holdings does not affect their day-to-day operations as European Holdings is a holding entity.

Recent European Regulatory Developments

The Government of the United Kingdom passed the Bribery Act 2010, which will come into force in 2011. It creates four new offenses: two general offenses of bribing another person and being bribed, bribing a foreign public official and a corporate offence of failing to prevent bribery. The corporate offense is a strict liability offense which is subject to the defense that the relevant commercial organization had adequate procedures in place to prevent bribery. The Act has a global reach and applies to all companies, partnerships and individuals based in the United Kingdom, as well as foreign companies and individuals doing business in the United Kingdom. The Act’s extra-territorial application means that it applies to acts or omissions taking place anywhere in the world. This means that it may be more likely for bribery taking place outside the United Kingdom to attract the attention of the United Kingdom authorities, as well as the attention of authorities in multiple jurisdictions. The Government has published draft guidance on what constitutes adequate measures and final guidance is due to be published this year.

On September 15, 2010, the European Commission released a draft proposal for a set of rules similar to the Dodd- Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act to cover the EU. Among other things, the Commission proposed that information on OTC derivative contracts should be reported to trade repositories and be accessible to supervisory authorities, that some transaction and price related information should be made available to all market participants than is currently common practice, and that standard OTC derivative contracts be cleared through central counterparties (“CCPs”). While the Commission’s initial proposals are currently in consultation phase prior to being presented to the European Parliament and the EU Member States for consideration, the fact that multiple supervisory and regulatory bodies are just now being established in Europe and that initiatives need to be ratified by all 27 EU Member States before being passed into law by individual nations will mean that rules will not be operational at least until the end of 2012.

Further, the authorities of certain European countries have instituted a series of changes to tax law, including an excise tax on certain compensation payments that, if applicable to us, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

27

Table of Contents

Other Regulation

Our subsidiaries that have foreign operations are subject to regulation by the relevant regulatory authorities and self-regulatory organizations in the countries in which they do business. The following table sets forth certain jurisdictions, other than the United States, in which we do business and the applicable regulatory authority or authorities of each such jurisdiction:

Capital Requirements

U.S.

Every U.S.-registered broker-dealer is subject to the Uniform Net Capital Requirements. Registered Futures Commission Merchants (FCM), such as BGC Financial LP (BGCF), are also subject to CFTC capital requirements. These requirements are designed to ensure financial soundness and liquidity by prohibiting a broker or dealer from engaging in business at a time when it does not satisfy minimum net capital requirements.

In the United States, net capital is essentially defined as net worth (assets minus liabilities), plus qualifying subordinated borrowings and less certain mandatory deductions that result from excluding assets that are not readily convertible into cash and from conservatively valuing certain other assets, such as a firm’s positions in securities. Among these deductions are adjustments, commonly referred to as “haircuts,” to the market value of securities positions to reflect the market risk of such positions prior to their liquidation or disposition. The Uniform Net Capital Requirements also imposes a minimum ratio of debt to equity, which may include qualified subordinated borrowings.

Regulations have been adopted by the SEC that prohibit the withdrawal of equity capital of a broker-dealer, restrict the ability of a broker-dealer to distribute or engage in any transaction with a parent company or an affiliate that results in a reduction of equity capital or to provide an unsecured loan or advance against equity capital for the direct or indirect benefit of certain persons related to the broker-dealer (including partners and

28

Table of Contents

affiliates) if the broker-dealer’s net capital is, or would be as a result of such withdrawal, distribution, loan or advance, below specified thresholds of excess net capital. In addition, the SEC’s regulations require certain notifications to be provided in advance of such withdrawals, distributions, reductions, loans and advances that exceed, in the aggregate, 30% of excess net capital within any 30 day period. The SEC has the authority to restrict, for up to 20 business days, such withdrawal, distribution or reduction of capital if the SEC concludes that it may be detrimental to the financial integrity of the broker-dealer or may expose its customers or creditors to loss. Notice is required following any such withdrawal, distribution, reduction, loan or advance that exceeds, in the aggregate, 20% of excess net capital within any 30 day period. The SEC’s regulations limiting withdrawals of excess net capital do not preclude the payment to employees of “reasonable compensation.”

Two of our subsidiaries, BGCF and Seminole Financial, are registered with the SEC and are subject to the Uniform Net Capital Requirements. As such, these firms must maintain, in all respects, minimum net capital and comply with the Uniform Net Capital Requirements. Seminole Financial uses the “basic method” of calculating net capital and must maintain net capital of not less than the greater of $100,000 or 6.66% of certain of its liabilities and other obligations. BGC Financial L.P. uses the “alternative method” of calculating net capital and must maintain net capital of not less than the greater of $250,000 or 2% of its aggregate debit items (primarily receivables from customers and other broker-dealers). As a FCM, BGCF is also subject to the CFTC minimum capital requirement, which is not less than the greater of the SEC requirement, $1,000,000, or 8% of customer and non customer maintenance margin (the amount that must be maintained on deposit at all times for open futures positions). BGCF is also a member of the FICC, which imposes capital requirements on its members.

Compliance with the Uniform Net Capital Requirements may limit the extent and nature of our operations requiring the use of our registered broker-dealer subsidiaries’ capital, and could also restrict or preclude our ability to withdraw capital from our broker-dealer subsidiaries.

Non-U.S.

Our international operations are also subject to capital requirements, which we refer to as “non-U.S. net capital requirements.” Certain of our subsidiaries that are incorporated in the United Kingdom are subject to capital requirements established by the UK Financial Services Authority (“FSA”). The FSA also applies stringent provisions with respect to capital applicable to the operation of these brokerage firms, which vary depending upon the nature and extent of their activities. The provisions relating to capital requirements enforced by the FSA are likely to change with the implementation of the FSA’s response to the Turner Review (A regulatory response to the global banking crisis) and our UK subsidiaries will be required to adhere to these changes. The UK group will also need to adhere to new liquidity provisions that may impact the ability to transfer cash assets to other group members.

In addition, the majority of our other foreign subsidiaries are subject to similar regulation by the relevant authorities in the countries in which they do business. Additionally, certain other of our foreign subsidiaries are required to maintain non-U.S. net capital requirements. In Hong Kong, BGC Securities (Hong Kong), LLC and BGC Capital Markets (Hong Kong), Limited are regulated by the Securities and Futures Commission and The Hong Kong Monetary Authority, respectively. Both are subject to non-U.S. net capital requirements. In France, BGC France Holdings; in Australia, BGC Partners (Australia) Pty Limited; in Japan, BGC Shoken Kaisha Limited’s Japanese branch; in Singapore, BGC Partners (Singapore) Limited and BGC Securities (Singapore) Ltda; in Korea, BGC Capital Markets & Foreign Exchange Broker (Korea) Limited; and in Turkey, BGC Partners Menkul Degerler AS, and all have non-U.S. net capital requirements imposed upon them by local regulators. In addition, the LCH (LIFFE/LME) clearing organizations, of which BGC LP is a member, also imposes minimum capital requirements.

BGC Partners had equity capital for its regulated subsidiaries of $274.3 million and $246.9 million for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively.

29

Table of Contents

Employees

As of December 31, 2010, we had 2,743 total employees, including 1,705 brokers and salespeople as well as another 1,038 employees (back office). Approximately 34% of BGC Partners’ brokers are based in the Americas, approximately 46% are based in Europe, Middle East and Africa (including Turkey) and the remaining approximately 21% are based in the Asia-Pacific region. Generally, our employees are not subject to any collective bargaining agreements, except our employees in certain of our European offices, including France, who are covered by national, industry-wide collective bargaining agreements.

Legal Proceedings

See Part I—Item 3. Legal Proceedings.

Our Organizational Structure

On April 1, 2008, BGC Partners OldCo and eSpeed merged and the surviving entity was renamed “BGC Partners, Inc.” Immediately prior to the merger, pursuant to a separation agreement, Cantor transferred certain assets and liabilities to BGC Partners OldCo and/or its subsidiaries.

We are a holding company and our business is operated through two operating partnerships, BGC U.S., which holds our U.S. businesses, and BGC Global, which holds our non-U.S. businesses. In connection with the separation, Maxcor was contributed to BGC Partners OldCo in exchange for BGC Partners OldCo units that became shares of our common stock in the merger and the remainder of the BGC businesses was contributed to the Opcos in exchange for limited partnership interests in the Opcos. In connection with the merger, eSpeed contributed the eSpeed businesses to the Opcos in exchange for limited partnership interests in the Opcos.

The limited partnership interests of the Opcos are held by us and BGC Holdings and the limited partnership interests of BGC Holdings are currently held by Cantor and the founding/working partners. We hold the BGC Holdings general partnership interest and the BGC Holdings special voting limited partnership interest, which entitle us to remove and appoint the general partner of BGC Holdings, and serve as the general partner of BGC Holdings, which entitles us to control BGC Holdings. BGC Holdings, in turn, holds the BGC U.S. general partnership interest and the BGC U.S. special voting limited partnership interest, which entitle the holder thereof to remove and appoint the general partner of BGC U.S., and the BGC Global general partnership interest and the BGC Global special voting limited partnership interest, which entitle the holder thereof to remove and appoint the general partner of BGC Global, and serves as the general partner of BGC U.S. and BGC Global, all of which entitle BGC Holdings (and thereby us) to control each of BGC U.S. and BGC Global. BGC Holdings holds its BGC Global general partnership interest through a company incorporated in the Cayman Islands, BGC Global Holdings GP Limited.

30

Table of Contents

The following diagram illustrates our ownership structure as of March 1, 2011. The following diagram does not reflect the various subsidiaries of us, BGC U.S., BGC Global, BGC Holdings or Cantor, or, to the extent applicable, outstanding RSUs.

31

Table of Contents

Stock Ownership

As of March 1, 2011, there were approximately 72,586,770 shares of our Class A common stock outstanding, of which 1,169,458 were held by Cantor and CF Group Management Group, Inc. (“CFGM”), Cantor’s managing general partner. Each share of Class A common stock is generally entitled to one vote on matters submitted to a vote of our stockholders. In addition, as of March 1, 2011, Cantor and CFGM held 25,848,107 shares of our Class B common stock (which represents all of the outstanding shares of our Class B common stock), representing, together with our Class A common stock held by Cantor and CFGM, approximately 78.4% of our voting power. Each share of Class B common stock is generally entitled to the same rights as a share of Class A common stock, except that, on matters submitted to a vote of our stockholders, each share of Class B common stock is entitled to 10 votes. The Class B common stock generally votes together with the Class A common stock on all matters submitted to a vote of our stockholders.

We hold the BGC Holdings general partnership interest and the BGC Holdings special voting limited partnership interest, which entitle us to remove and appoint the general partner of BGC Holdings, and serve as the general partner of BGC Holdings, which entitles us to control BGC Holdings. BGC Holdings, in turn, holds the BGC U.S. general partnership interest and the BGC U.S. special voting limited partnership interest, which entitles the holder thereof to remove and appoint the general partner of BGC U.S., and the BGC Global general partnership interest and the BGC Global special voting limited partnership interest, which entitles the holder thereof to remove and appoint the general partner of BGC Global, and serves as the general partner of each of BGC U.S. and BGC Global, all of which entitle BGC Holdings (and thereby us) to control each of BGC U.S. and BGC Global. BGC Holdings holds its BGC Global general partnership interest through a company incorporated in the Cayman Islands, BGC Global Holdings GP Limited. In addition, as of March 1, 2011, we indirectly, through wholly-owned subsidiaries, held BGC U.S. limited partnership interests and BGC Global limited partnership interests consisting of approximately 98,424,877 units and 98,424,877 units, representing approximately 42.4% and 42.4% of the outstanding BGC U.S. limited partnership interests and BGC Global limited partnership interests, respectively. We are a holding company that holds these interests, serves as the general partner of BGC Holdings, and, through BGC Holdings, acts as the general partner of each of BGC U.S. and BGC Global. As a result of our ownership of the general partnership interest in BGC Holdings and BGC Holdings’ general partnership interest in each of BGC U.S. and BGC Global, we consolidate BGC U.S.’s and BGC Global’s results for financial reporting purposes.

Partners directly and Cantor indirectly hold BGC Holdings limited partnership interests. BGC Holdings, in turn, holds BGC U.S. limited partnership interests and BGC Global limited partnership interests and, as a result, founding partners, limited partnership unit holders and Cantor indirectly have, and working partners have interests in BGC U.S. limited partnership interests and BGC Global limited partnership interests.

Since the merger, and through March 1, 2011, Cantor has distributed an aggregate of 14,008,072 shares of Class A common stock (8,195,507 shares with respect to retained partners and 5,812,565 shares with respect to founding partners). By April 1, 2011, all of the remaining 19,363,672 shares will be eligible for distribution by Cantor. Partners of Cantor owning an aggregate of 16,442,654 shares have elected to defer receipt of their shares and receive a distribution equivalent. In addition, as of March 1, 2011, there were 42,923,365 limited partnership units outstanding and 27,090,032 founding/working partner units. These share amounts reflect the fact that certain retained partners have terminated service since the completion of the merger, with the result that they are not eligible to receive an accelerated distribution of their distribution rights shares.

The BGC Holdings limited partnership interests held by Cantor are exchangeable with us for our Class B common stock (or, at Cantor’s option or if there are no additional authorized but unissued shares of our Class B

32

Table of Contents

common stock, our Class A common stock) on a one-for-one basis (subject to customary anti-dilution adjustments). Upon certain circumstances, certain of the outstanding founding/working partner units and limited partnership units may become exchangeable.

In March 2010, the Amended and Restated BGC Holdings, L.P. limited partnership agreement was further amended by its general partner and Cantor to create two new types of limited partnership units, PSUs and PSIs. These new units are expected to be used by us for future compensatory grants, compensation modifications, redemptions of partnership interests and other purposes.

We are continuing our global program in 2011 whereby partners redeem their REUs or RPUs in exchange for PSUs or PSIs and receive exchangeability or cash for certain of their limited partnership units and, in many cases, a modification or extension of their employment arrangements.

Convertible Notes

On March 12, 2010 the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors of the Company authorized the Company or one of its subsidiaries to sell $150,000,000 aggregate principal amount of 8.75% Convertible Senior Notes due 2015 to Cantor or any of its affiliates. On March 16, 2010, the Company, BGC Holdings and Cantor executed an agreement with respect to this transaction. In connection with the foregoing, on April 1, 2010 BGC Holdings issued an aggregate of $150,000,000 principal amount of 8.75% Convertible Senior Notes due 2015 (the “BGC Holdings Notes”) in a private placement transaction to Cantor. On April 1, 2010, BGC Holdings lent the proceeds from the issuance of the BGC Holdings Notes to the Company in exchange for $150,000,000 principal amount of 8.75% Convertible Senior Notes due 2015 (the “BGCP Notes” and, together with the BGC Holdings Notes, the “Notes”) on substantially the same economic terms as the BGC Holdings Notes. In connection with the issuance of the BGCP Notes, the Company entered into an Indenture, dated April 1, 2010, with Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as trustee (the “Indenture”).

The Company lent the proceeds from the issuance of the BGCP Notes to its operating subsidiary, BGC Partners, L.P. (“BGC U.S.”). BGC U.S. used the proceeds to repay at maturity $150,000,000 aggregate principal amount of senior notes due April 1, 2010.

The Notes are senior unsecured obligations and rank equally and ratably with all existing and future senior unsecured obligations of BGC Holdings and the Company, respectively. The Notes bear an annual interest rate of 8.75%, which are payable semi-annually in arrears on April 15 and October 15 of each year, beginning on October 15, 2010. The Notes will mature on April 15, 2015, unless earlier repurchased, exchanged or converted.

Holders may exchange or convert the Notes at their option at any time until the close of business on the second scheduled trading day of the Class A common stock immediately preceding the maturity date. The Notes are exchangeable and convertible as follows:

The conversion rate of the BGC Holdings Notes into BGC Holdings exchangeable limited partnership interests and the conversion rate of the BGCP Notes into shares of Class A common stock are subject to customary adjustments upon certain corporate events, including stock dividends and stock splits on the Class A common stock and the Company’s payment of a quarterly cash dividend in excess of $0.10 per share of Class A common stock. The conversion rate will not be adjusted for accrued and unpaid interest to the conversion date.

33

Table of Contents

RISKS RELATED TO OUR BUSINESS

Global Market Conditions

Our business and results of operations have been and may continue to be adversely affected by conditions in the global financial markets and economic conditions generally.

Our business and results of operations have been and may continue to be adversely affected by conditions in the global financial markets and economic conditions generally. For example, from mid-2007, and particularly during the second half of 2008 and through the first nine months of 2009, the financial services industry and the securities markets generally were materially and adversely affected by significant declines in the values of nearly all asset classes and by low levels of liquidity. This was initially triggered by declines in the values of subprime mortgages, but spread to all mortgage and real estate asset classes, to leveraged bank loans and to nearly all asset classes, including equities. Over this 2007-2009 timeframe the global markets were characterized by substantially increased volatility and short-selling and an overall loss of investor confidence, initially in financial institutions, but eventually in companies in a number of other industries and in the broader markets.

Since 2008, governments, regulators and central banks in the United States and worldwide have taken numerous steps to increase liquidity and to restore investor confidence. In addition, there are numerous legislative and regulatory actions that have been taken to deal with what regulators, politicians and others believe to be the root causes of the financial crisis, including laws and regulations relating to financial institution capital requirements and compensation practices, restrictions on the type of activities in which financial institutions are permitted to engage, and generally increased regulatory scrutiny. Many of the regulations that are required to implement recently adopted legislation (including the Dodd-Frank Act (as defined below)) are still being drafted or are not yet in effect; therefore, the exact impact that these regulations will have on our businesses and results of operations is presently unclear.

Declining asset values, defaults on mortgages and consumer loans, and the lack of market and investor confidence, as well as other factors, all combined to increase credit default swap spreads, to cause rating agencies to lower credit ratings, and to otherwise increase the cost and decrease the availability of liquidity, despite very significant declines in central bank borrowing rates and other government actions. These market conditions have adversely affected our business and financial condition as customers or potential customers liquidated or consolidated, our ability to borrow money became restricted, and capital and margin requirements for our business lines increased. In addition, our operations suffered to the extent that ongoing market volatility caused individuals and institutional traders and other market participants to curtail or forego trading activities.

Although market conditions improved during the fourth quarter of 2009 and during 2010 when compared to the year-earlier periods, there can be no assurance that these conditions will continue to improve in the near or long term. If they do not, our results of operations may be adversely affected.

Difficult market conditions, economic conditions and geopolitical uncertainties have in the past adversely affected and may in the future adversely affect our business and profitability. The brokerage and financial services industry, as in general are directly affected by national and international economic and political conditions, broad trends in business and finance, the level and volatility of interest rates, changes in and uncertainty regarding tax laws and substantial fluctuations in the volume and price levels of securities transactions. On a consolidated basis, for the year ended December 31, 2010 and the year ended December 31, 2009, over 92% of our total revenues were generated by brokerage operations. As a result, our revenues and profitability are likely to decline significantly during periods of low trading volume in the financial markets in which we offer our services. The financial markets and the global financial services business are, by their nature, risky and volatile and are directly affected by many national and international factors that are beyond our control. Any one of these factors may cause a substantial decline in the U.S. and global financial services markets, resulting in reduced trading volume. The stress experienced by global capital markets that began in the second

34

Table of Contents

half of 2007 continued and substantially increased during the third and fourth quarters of 2008 and continued throughout 2009 greatly impacted volumes in the markets we broker and thus our revenues. Although market conditions improved into 2010, our operations may suffer to the extent that future market volatility causes individuals and institutional traders and other market participants to curtail or forego trading activities. These events could have a material adverse effect on our results and profitability. These factors include:

Low trading volume generally results in reduced revenues. Under these conditions, profitability is adversely affected since many costs are fixed. In addition, although less common, some of our brokerage revenues are determined on the basis of the value of transactions or on spreads. For these reasons, substantial decreases in trading volume or declining prices or spreads could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Consolidation in the brokerage, exchange and financial services industries could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations because we may not be able to compete successfully.

In recent years, there has been substantial consolidation and convergence among companies in the brokerage, exchange and financial services industries, resulting in increasingly large potential and existing competitors, and increased concentration among markets dominated by some of our largest customers. During 2008 and 2009, as a result of the global financial crisis, this trend accelerated as many of the world’s largest banks and investment banks consolidated. For example, Washington Mutual and Bear Stearns were acquired by J.P. Morgan Chase; Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. declared bankruptcy and its investment banking operations were largely absorbed by Barclays in the U.S. and by Nomura elsewhere; Bank of America Corp. acquired Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc. and Countrywide Financial; and Wells Fargo acquired Wachovia.

These and other financial services firms are our customers. Continued consolidation in the financial services industry and especially among our customers could lead to the exertion of additional pricing pressure by our customers, impacting the commissions we generate from our brokerage services. Further, the recent consolidation among exchange firms, and expansion by these firms into derivative and other non-equity trading markets, will increase competition for customer trades and place additional pricing pressure on commissions and spreads. These developments have increased competition from firms with potentially greater access to capital resources than we have. Finally, consolidation among our competitors other than exchange firms could result in increased resources and product or service offerings for our competitors. If we are not able to compete successfully in the future, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially adversely affected.

35

Table of Contents

Liquidity/Funding

Liquidity is essential to our business and insufficient liquidity could have an adverse affect on our business and financial condition.

Liquidity is essential to our business. Failures of financial institutions have often been attributable in large part to insufficient liquidity. Liquidity is of particular importance to our trading business and perceived liquidity issues may affect our customers and counterparties’ willingness to engage in brokerage transactions with us. Our liquidity could be impaired due to circumstances that we may be unable to control, such as a general market disruption or an operational problem that affects our trading customers, third parties or us.

Our ability to raise funding in the long-term or short-term debt capital markets or the equity capital markets, or to access secured lending markets, has in the past been and could in the future be adversely affected by conditions in the U.S. and international markets and economy. For example, global market and economic conditions were disrupted during most of 2008 and 2009 and during that time reached unprecedented levels of disruption and volatility. Should such conditions return, our cost and availability of funding would be adversely affected by illiquid credit markets and wider credit spreads. To the extent we are not able to access the debt capital markets on acceptable terms in the future, we may seek to raise funding and capital through equity issuance or other means. Future turbulence in the U.S. and international markets and economy may adversely affect our liquidity and financial condition and the willingness of certain counterparties and customers to do business with each other or with us.

Our funding base consists of longer-term capital (equity, notes payable and collateralized borrowings) and shorter-term liabilities/accruals that are a natural outgrowth of specific assets and/or the business model, such as matched fails and accrued commission compensation. With respect to our operating business, we have limited need for and use of short-term unsecured funding. Contingent liquidity needs are largely limited to potential cash collateral that may be needed to meet clearinghouse/exchange margins and/or fund fails. Current cash balances substantially exceed a very modest amount of unsecured letters of credit and the amortization of our term debt. All of the cash on the balance sheet, some of which is held at regulated broker dealer subsidiaries, would not be available to meet these potential liquidity needs.

Following the merger of eSpeed and BGC Partners on April 1, 2008, we received regulatory approval from FINRA for the self-clearing of our own securities transactions, and we have begun self-clearing transactions in mortgage-backed securities, corporate and other DTC-eligible bonds and repurchase agreements. However, we have not begun to clear our own transactions in U.S. Treasury and U.S. Government Agency securities and there is no assurance at what point we will do so.

Accordingly, since the closing of the merger, we have continued to receive from Cantor and its affiliates certain clearing services in the U.S. pursuant to its pre-existing clearing agreement (“Clearing Services”). These Clearing Services have been provided since April 1, 2008 in exchange for payment by us of third-party clearing costs and allocated costs, and margin requirements and clearing deposits have been posted by Cantor with the FICC on our behalf.

On November 5, 2008, we entered into an Agreement (the “Clearing Agreement”) with Cantor. Pursuant to the terms of the Agreement, Cantor is entitled to request from us, and we shall post as soon as practicable, cash or other property acceptable to Cantor in the amount reasonably requested by Cantor under the Clearing Agreement. The amounts requested shall reflect Cantor’s reasonable determination of its or its affiliates’ required margin requirements in connection with the Clearing Services and/or potential additional funds which may be required to replace Cantor funds being otherwise utilized to post margin requirements for our benefit. To date, no amounts have been requested by Cantor.

We rely upon Cantor and others to provide Clearing Services and, in the absence of the Clearing Agreement, we would have to secure an alternative third-party clearing arrangement to provide such Clearing Services, which

36

Table of Contents

might be at higher rates or on less favorable terms. We intend to continue this relationship with Cantor. Accordingly, we expect that Cantor will continue to post clearing margin on our behalf and we will post clearing margin with Cantor as and when requested under the Clearing Agreement. In the absence of such an arrangement, we may be required to raise additional capital, borrow funds or take other action to meet the margin requirements in connection with the clearing of these transactions. The increased funding requirements required in connection with the clearing of our securities transactions could have a material adverse impact on our ability to make distributions, repurchase our stock or partnership units or effect strategic acquisitions or other opportunities.

We are leveraged, which could adversely affect our ability to raise additional capital to fund our operations, limit our ability to react to changes in the economy or our industry, expose us to interest rate risk and prevent us from meeting our obligations under our indebtedness.

On April 1, 2010 BGC Holdings L.P. (“BGC Holdings”), a subsidiary of the Company, issued an aggregate of $150,000,000 principal amount of 8.75% Convertible Senior Notes due 2015 (the “BGC Holdings Notes”) in a private placement transaction to Cantor. On April 1, 2010, BGC Holdings lent the proceeds from the issuance of the BGC Holdings Notes to the Company in exchange for $150,000,000 principal amount of 8.75% Convertible Senior Notes due 2015 (the “BGCP Notes” and, together with the BGC Holdings Notes, the “Notes”) on substantially the same economic terms as the BGC Holdings Notes. In connection with the issuance of the BGCP Notes, the Company entered into an Indenture, dated April 1, 2010, with Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as trustee (the “Indenture”). The Company lent the proceeds from the issuance of the BGCP Notes to its operating subsidiary, BGC Partners, L.P. (“BGC U.S.”). BGC U.S. used the proceeds to repay at maturity $150,000,000 aggregate principal amount of senior notes due April 1, 2010. The Notes are senior unsecured obligations and rank equally and ratably with all existing and future senior unsecured obligations of BGC Holdings and the Company, respectively. The Notes bear an annual interest rate of 8.75%, which will be payable semi-annually in arrears on April 15 and October 15 of each year, beginning on October 15, 2010. The Notes will mature on April 15, 2015, unless earlier repurchased, exchanged or converted. Holders may exchange or convert the Notes at their option at any time until the close of business on the second scheduled trading day of the Company’s Class A common stock, par value $0.01 per share (the “Class A common stock”), immediately preceding the maturity date. The Notes are exchangeable and convertible as follows:

The conversion rate of the BGC Holdings Notes into BGC Holdings exchangeable limited partnership interests and the conversion rate of the BGCP Notes into shares of Class A common stock are subject to customary adjustments upon certain corporate events, including stock dividends and stock splits on the Class A common stock and the Company’s payment of a quarterly cash dividend in excess of $0.10 per share of Class A common stock. The conversion rate will not be adjusted for accrued and unpaid interest to the conversion date.

Our indebtedness could have important consequences, including:

37

Table of Contents

We are dependent upon the availability of adequate funding and sufficient regulatory capital and clearing margin. Clearing capital is the amount of cash, guarantees or similar collateral that we must provide or deposit with our third-party clearing organizations in support of our obligations under contractual clearing arrangements with these organizations. Historically, these needs have been satisfied from internally generated funds and capital contributions by limited partners of Cantor. We have also relied on Cantor’s support to clear our transactions in U.S. Treasury and U.S. government agency products since the merger on April 1, 2008. Because each of BGC U.S. and BGC Global is expected to distribute, on a quarterly basis, all of its net income to its limited partners, we may not have sufficient internally generated funds and may need to ease this policy or raise additional funds. If for any reason we need to raise additional funds, including in order to meet increased regulatory capital requirements and/or increased clearing margin requirements arising from growth in our brokerage business, to complete acquisitions or otherwise, we may not be able to obtain additional financing when needed. If we cannot raise additional funds on acceptable terms, we may not be able to develop or enhance our business, take advantage of future opportunities or respond to competitive pressure or unanticipated requirements.

Regulatory/Legal

Our business, financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected by new regulations or laws or by changes in other regulations or laws or the application thereof.

The financial services industry, in general, is heavily regulated. In light of recent events in the U.S. and global financial markets and economy, regulators and legislators in the U.S. and European Union (“EU”) continue to craft new laws and regulations for the global OTC derivatives markets, including the recently passed the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“Dodd-Frank”). The Dodd-Frank act mandates or encourages several reforms, including new regulations for swaps markets creating impartiality considerations, additional pre- and post-trade transparency requirements, heightened collateral or capital standards, as well as recommendations for the obligatory use of central clearing for most standardized derivatives. The law also requires that standardized derivatives be traded in an open and non-exclusionary manner on a regulated exchange or a swap execution facility (“SEF”). The bill specifies that the SEC and Commodities Future Trading Commission (“CFTC”) must finalize rules for implementing these requirements by September 15, 2011. The actual implementation of said rules may be phased in over a longer period.

On September 15, 2010, the European Commission released a draft proposal for a similar set of rules to cover the EU. Among other things, the Commission proposed that information on OTC derivative contracts should be reported to trade repositories and be accessible to supervisory authorities, that some transaction and price related information should be made available to all market participants than is currently common practice, and that standard OTC derivative contracts be cleared through central counterparties (“CCPs”). While the Commission’s initial proposals are currently in consultation phase prior to being presented to the European Parliament and the EU Member States for consideration, the fact that multiple supervisory and regulatory bodies are just now being established in Europe and that initiatives need to be ratified by all 27 EU Member States before being passed into law by individual nations will mean that rules will not be operational at least until the end of 2012.

In addition, proposals for legislation further regulating the financial services industry are periodically introduced in the United States Congress and in state legislatures. Moreover, the agencies regulating the financial services industry also periodically adopt changes to their regulations, particularly as these regulators have increased their focus on the regulation of the financial services industry.

38

Table of Contents

We are unable to predict how any of these new laws and proposals will be implemented or in what form, or whether any additional or similar changes to statutes or regulations, including the interpretation or implementation thereof, will occur in the future. Any such action could affect us in substantial and unpredictable ways and could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. We believe that uncertainty and potential delays around the final form such new rules might take may negatively impact trading volumes in certain markets in which we broker. Increased capital requirements may also diminish transaction velocity. While the broad framework of proposed legislation is known, we believe that it is too early for there to be clarity on the specific aspects of the U.S. legislation and EU proposals which may directly impact our businesses as exact rules have not yet been finalized. Additionally, unintended consequences of the legislation may adversely affect us in ways yet to be determined.

We are also affected by the policies adopted by regulatory authorities and bodies of the U.S. and other governments. For example, the actions of the U.S. Federal Reserve and international central banking authorities directly impact our cost of funds for lending, capital raising and investment activities and may impact the value of financial instruments we hold. In addition, such changes in monetary policy may affect the credit quality of our customers. Changes in domestic and international monetary policy are beyond our control and difficult to predict.

Although we currently broker a number of centrally cleared products, and believe that we will qualify as a SEF in the U.S. and its equivalent in Europe, there can be no guarantee that the final rules will not negatively impact our volumes or revenues. In the event that the U.S. government, EU or other countries’ authorities ultimately were to mandate central clearing without ensuring fair and open access, or forcing trading via SEFs or exchanges for large portions of the OTC marketplace and we were unable to provide transaction execution and reporting in an authorized manner, or to do so on a competitive basis, our business would be negatively impacted. Further, it is conceivable that the new regulatory landscape will fundamentally alter the historical relationship between OTC wholesale brokers and our clients which may have a negative influence on our operations.

In the UK, the Financial Services Authority (“FSA”) has implemented far-reaching reform rules, designed to enhance firms’ liquidity risk management practices, based on the lessons learned since the start of the credit crisis in 2007. Implications of these rules include better liquidity risk management capability (including the use of stress testing and contingency funding plans (“CFP”)); less reliance on short-term wholesale funding, and higher amounts and quality of liquid asset securities (Government securities), leading to an increased likelihood of surviving a severe liquidity stress event, the overarching principles being self-sufficiency and adequacy of liquid resources.

Further, the authorities of certain European countries have instituted a series of changes to tax law, including an excise tax on certain compensation payments that, if applicable to us, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Similarly, the current U.S. administration has proposed a series of changes to tax law, some of which could apply to us. It is not possible to predict if any of these new provisions will be enacted or, if they are, what form they would take. It is possible that one or more of such provisions could negatively impact our costs and our effective tax rate, which would affect our after-tax earnings. If any of such changes to tax law were implemented and/or deemed to apply to us, they could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations and on our ability to attract and retain executives and brokers.

The Government of the United Kingdom has passed the Bribery Act 2010, which will come into force in 2011. It creates four new offenses: two general offenses of bribing another person and being bribed, bribing a foreign public official and a corporate offense of failing to prevent bribery. The corporate offense is a strict liability offense which is subject to the defense that the relevant commercial organization had adequate procedures in place to prevent bribery. The Government has published draft guidance on what constitutes adequate measures and final guidance is due to be published this year.

39

Table of Contents

The Act has a global reach and applies to all companies, partnerships and individuals based in the United Kingdom, as well as foreign companies and individuals doing business in the United Kingdom. The Act’s extra-territorial application means that it applies to acts or omissions taking place anywhere in the world. This means that it may be more likely for bribery taking place outside the United Kingdom to attract the attention of the United Kingdom authorities, as well as the attention of authorities in multiple jurisdictions.

Failure to comply with the Act could result in unlimited fines for commercial organizations, debarment from competing for public contracts and/or imprisonment of individuals – which could have a material adverse effect on business.

There is uncertainty regarding the impact of the Act, as it could restrict the way business is currently conducted, particularly in relation to corporate hospitality, gifts and facilitation payments. The ability to attract and retain clients and business may be constrained, compared with competitors who are not subject to the same restrictions and levels of scrutiny. Ensuring compliance with the Act and introducing adequate measures may also necessitate the adoption of new policies, controls and procedures which could result in increased costs and use of personnel resources.

The industry in which we operate is subject to significant regulation and as a result we are subject to regulatory capital requirements on our regulated entities, and a significant operating loss or any extraordinary charge against capital could adversely affect our ability to expand or, depending upon the magnitude of the loss or charge, even to maintain the current level of our business.

Many aspects of our business, like those of other financial intermediary firms, are subject to significant capital requirements. In the United States, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”) and various other regulatory bodies (including the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, which we refer to as the “CFTC,” and the National Futures Association (“NFA”)) have stringent provisions with respect to capital applicable to the operation of brokerage firms, which vary depending upon the nature and extent of the broker-dealer’s activities. We currently operate two U.S.-registered broker-dealers. In addition, we hold a 49% limited partnership interest in Aqua Securities, L.P. (“Aqua”), a U.S. registered broker-dealer. These broker-dealers are subject to SEC, FINRA and CFTC net capital requirements.

Our international operations are also subject to capital requirements, which we refer to as “non-U.S. net capital requirements.” Certain of our subsidiaries that are incorporated in the United Kingdom are subject to capital requirements established by the UK Financial Services Authority (“FSA”). The FSA also applies stringent provisions with respect to capital applicable to the operation of these brokerage firms, which vary depending upon the nature and extent of their activities. The provisions relating to capital requirements enforced by the FSA are likely to change with the implementation of the FSA’s response to the Turner Review (a regulatory response to the global banking crisis) and our UK subsidiaries will be required to adhere to these changes. The UK group will also need to adhere to new liquidity provisions that may impact the ability to transfer cash assets to other group members. In addition, the majority of our other foreign subsidiaries are subject to similar regulation by the relevant authorities in the countries in which they do business. These regulations often include minimum capital requirements which are subject to change. Similar requirements are applied to certain of our other subsidiaries which are regulated in other countries such as Australia, France and Hong Kong.

While we expect to continue to maintain levels of capital in excess of regulatory minimums, there can be no assurance that this will be the case in the future. If we fail to maintain the required capital, we will be required to suspend our broker-dealer operations during the period that we are not in compliance with capital requirements, and may be subject to suspension or revocation of registration by the SEC and FINRA or withdrawal of authorization or other disciplinary action from domestic and international regulators, which would have a material adverse effect on our business. In addition, if we fail to maintain the capital required by clearing organizations of which we are a member, our ability to clear through those clearing organizations may be impaired, which may adversely affect our ability to process trades. If the capital rules are changed or expanded, or if there is an unusually large charge against capital, operations that require the intensive use of capital would

40

Table of Contents

be limited. Our ability to withdraw capital from our regulated subsidiaries is subject to restrictions, which, in turn, could limit our ability to pay dividends, repay debt and redeem or repurchase shares of our common stock or purchase BGC Holdings limited partnership interests or other equity interests in our subsidiaries, including from Cantor or our executive officers. In addition, we may become subject to capital requirements in other foreign jurisdictions in which we currently operate or in which we may enter. We cannot predict our future capital needs or our ability to obtain additional financing.

Extensive regulation of our businesses limits our activities and results in ongoing exposure to the potential for significant penalties, including fines or limitations on our ability to conduct our businesses.

Firms in the financial services industry, including our businesses, have experienced increased scrutiny in recent years and penalties and fines sought by regulatory authorities, including the SEC, FINRA, state securities commissions, state attorneys general and the FSA, have increased accordingly. This trend toward a heightened regulatory and enforcement environment looks set to continue for the foreseeable future and this environment may create uncertainty.

The financial services industry, including our business, is subject to extensive regulation. Our subsidiaries are subject to regulation by governmental and self-regulatory organizations in the jurisdictions in which we operate around the world. Many of these regulators, including U.S. and non-U.S. government agencies and self-regulatory organizations, as well as state securities commissions in the United States, are empowered to conduct administrative proceedings that can result in censure, fine, the issuance of cease-and-desist orders or suspension or expulsion. From time to time, “associated persons” of our company have been and are subject to periodic investigations that have and may result in disciplinary actions by the SEC, self-regulatory organizations and state securities administrators. Currently, we and certain other inter-dealer brokers are being investigated by the SEC with respect to trading practices. In addition, the latest FSA annual risk assessment of the BGC Partners group’s regulated entities identified certain weaknesses in the BGC Partners group’s risk and control functionality, including governance procedures. Self-regulatory organizations such as FINRA and the NFA, along with statutory bodies such as the SEC and the FSA, require strict compliance with their rules and regulations. The requirements imposed by regulators are designed to ensure the integrity of the financial markets and to protect customers and other third parties who deal with us and are not designed to protect our stockholders. These regulations will often serve to limit our activities, including through capital, customer protection and market conduct requirements.

Changes in legislation and in the rules and regulations promulgated by the SEC, the CFTC, the U.S. Department of Treasury (“Treasury”), the FSA and other domestic and international regulators and self-regulatory organizations, as well as changes in the interpretation or enforcement of existing laws and rules, often directly affect the method of operation and profitability of broker-dealers and could result in restrictions in the way we conduct our business. For example, the U.S. Congress, the U.S. Treasury, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the SEC are continuing to review the nature and scope of their regulation and oversight of the government securities markets and U.S. markets. In Europe, the implementation of the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive in Europe (“MIFID”) in November 2007 involved wide-ranging changes to European financial services regulation. Future legislation and/or regulation, and uncertainties resulting from the possibility of legislation and/or regulation, could adversely impact our business. Failure to comply with any of these laws, rules or regulations could result in fines, limitations on business activity, suspension or expulsion from the industry, any of which could have a material adverse effect upon us. Changes in tax laws, such as the bank payroll taxes introduced in the UK and France at the end of the 2009, could have a material adverse effect on our compensation policies or business, financial condition and results of operations. Further, new rules and regulations proposed, or which may be proposed, by the U.S. president and his administration could have a significant impact on our business. See also “Risk Factors—Our business, financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected by new regulations or by changes in other regulations or the application thereof.”

41

Table of Contents

In addition, financial intermediary firms are subject to numerous conflicts of interests or perceived conflicts, including for example principal trading and trading to make markets. We have adopted various policies, controls and procedures to address or limit actual or perceived conflicts and we will regularly seek to review and update our policies, controls and procedures. However, these policies, controls and procedures may result in increased costs and additional operational personnel. Failure to adhere to these policies, controls and procedures may result in regulatory sanctions or customer litigation.

The brokerage and financial services industries in general face substantial litigation and regulatory risks, and we may face damage to our professional reputation and legal liability if our services are not regarded as satisfactory or for other reasons, all of which could adversely affect our revenues and liabilities and as a result could have a materially adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Many aspects of our business involve substantial risks of liability and, in the normal course of business, we have been a party to lawsuits, arbitrations, investigations and other actions involving primarily claims for damages. Regulatory inquiries and subpoenas or other requests for information or testimony in connection with litigation may cause us to incur significant expenses, including fees for legal representation and fees associated with document production. Such regulatory or other inquiries may also be directed at certain executives or individuals who may be critical to our business or to a particular brokerage desk. The risks associated with such potential liabilities often may be difficult to assess or quantify and their existence and magnitude often remain unknown for substantial periods of time. The expansion of our business, including into new areas, imposes additional risks of liability. A settlement of, or judgment related to, any such claim, litigation, arbitration, investigation or other action could result in civil or criminal liability, fines, limitations on business activities and other sanctions and otherwise have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition. Any such action could also cause us significant reputational harm, which, in turn, could seriously harm our business and prospects. In addition, regardless of the outcome of these lawsuits, arbitrations, investigations and other actions, we may incur significant legal and other costs, including substantial management time, dealing with such matters, even if we are not a party to the litigation or a target of the inquiry.

As a brokerage and financial services firm, we depend to a large extent on our relationships with our customers and our reputation for integrity and high-caliber professional services to attract and retain customers. As a result, if our customers are not satisfied with our services, such dissatisfaction may be more damaging to our business than to other types of businesses. Substantial legal liability or significant regulatory action against us could adversely affect our revenues and liquidity and, as a result, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations or cause significant reputational harm to us, which could seriously harm our business and prospects.

Competition/Retention

Because competition for the services of brokers is intense, we may not be able to attract and retain highly skilled brokers, which could adversely impact our revenues and as a result could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our ability to provide high-quality brokerage services and maintain long-term relationships with our customers depends, in large part, upon our brokers. As a result, we must attract and retain highly qualified brokerage personnel. In recent years, we have significantly grown the number of brokers in our business through new hires and acquisitions of existing businesses, and we expect to continue to do so in the future. Competition for the services of brokers is intense, especially for brokers with experience in the specialized markets in which we participate or we may seek to enter. If we are unable to hire or retain highly qualified brokers, including retaining those employed by businesses we acquire in the future, we may not be able to enter new brokerage markets or develop new products. If we lose one or more of our brokers in a particular market in which we participate, our revenues may decrease and we may lose market share in that particular market.

In addition, recruitment and retention of qualified brokers could result in substantial additional costs. We have been and are currently a party to, or otherwise involved in, several litigations and arbitrations involving

42

Table of Contents

competitor claims in connection with employee hires and/or departures. We may also pursue our rights through litigation when competitors hire our employees who are under contract with us. We believe such proceedings are common in our industry due to its highly competitive nature. An adverse settlement or judgment related to these or similar types of claims could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Regardless of the outcome of these claims, we generally incur significant expenses and substantial management time in dealing with these claims.

If we fail to attract new personnel, or fail to retain and motivate our current personnel, or if we incur increased costs associated with attracting and retaining personnel (such as litigations, arbitrations, sign-on or guaranteed bonuses or forgivable loans), our revenues and expenses could be adversely impacted and, as a result, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially adversely affected.

We face strong competition from brokerages, broker-dealers, financial services firms and exchanges, many of which have greater market presence, marketing capabilities and technological and personnel resources than we have, which could lead to pricing pressures that could adversely impact our revenues and as a result could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The brokerage and financial services industries are intensely competitive, and are expected to remain so. We primarily compete with four major, diversified inter-dealer brokers and financial intermediaries. These inter-dealer brokers are ICAP plc, Tullett Prebon plc, GFI Group Inc. and Compagnie Financière Tradition (which is majority owned by Viel & Cie), all of which are currently publicly traded companies. Other inter-dealer broker and financial intermediary competitors include a number of smaller, private firms that tend to specialize in specific product areas or geographies. We also compete with companies that provide alternative products, such as contracts traded on futures exchanges, and trading processes, such as the direct dealer-to-dealer market for government securities and stock exchange markets for corporate equities and other securities. We increasingly compete with exchanges for the execution of trades in certain products, mainly in derivatives such as futures, swaps, options and options on futures. Certain exchanges have made and will likely continue to make attempts to move certain OTC-traded products to exchange-based execution. We also compete with consortia, such as those operated by Tradeweb Markets LLC, which are created or funded from time to time by banks, broker dealers and other companies involved in financial services, such as Thomson Reuters Corporation to compete in various markets with exchanges and inter-dealer brokers. In addition, financial data firms such as Thomson Reuters and Bloomberg L.P. operate trading platforms for both OTC and listed products, and may attempt to compete with us for trade execution in the future. Some of our competitors have greater market presence, marketing capabilities and financial, technological and personnel resources than we have and, as a result, our competitors may be able to:

43

Table of Contents

In addition, new competitors may emerge and entire product lines may be threatened by new technologies or market trends that reduce the value of our existing product lines. If we are not able to compete successfully in the future, our revenues could be adversely impacted and as a result our business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially adversely affected.

Competition for brokerage transactions also has resulted in substantial commission discounting by brokers that compete with us for our brokerage business. Further discounting could adversely impact our revenues and margins and as a result could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. The market for hiring brokers of various securities and financial products is also highly competitive and, from time to time, may result in litigation and/or arbitration.

Our operations also include the sale of pricing and transactional information produced by our brokerage operations to securities information processors and/or vendors. There is a high degree of competition in pricing and transaction reporting products and services, and such businesses may become more competitive in the future. Competitors and customers of our brokerage businesses have together and individually offered market information services in competition with those offered and expected to be offered by us.

Our ability to retain our key employees and the ability of certain key employees to devote adequate time to us are critical to the success of our business, and failure to do so may adversely affect our revenues and as a result could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our people are our most important resource. We must retain the services of our key employees and strategically recruit and hire new talented employees to obtain customer transactions that generate most of our revenues.

Howard W. Lutnick, who serves as our Chief Executive Officer and Chairman, is also the Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer of Cantor and President of Cantor Fitzgerald Group Management, Inc. (“CFGM”). Stephen M. Merkel, who serves as our Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary, is employed as Executive Managing Director, General Counsel and Secretary of Cantor. These key employees are not subject to employment agreements with us or any of our subsidiaries although we do have an employment agreement with our President, Shaun Lynn. In addition, Messrs. Lutnick and Merkel also hold offices at various other affiliates of Cantor. Currently Mr. Lutnick spends approximately 50% of his time on our matters, and Mr. Merkel currently spends approximately 50% of his time on our matters, although these percentages may vary depending on business developments at our company or Cantor or any of our or Cantor’s affiliates. As a result, these key employees dedicate only a portion of their professional efforts to our business and operations, and there is no contractual obligation for them to spend a specific amount of their time with us and/or Cantor. These key employees may not be able to dedicate adequate time to our business and operations and we could experience an adverse effect on our operations due to the demands placed on our management team by their other professional obligations. In addition, these key employees’ other responsibilities could cause conflicts of interest with us.

The BGC Holdings limited partnership agreement, which includes non-competition and other arrangements applicable to our key employees who are limited partners of BGC Holdings, may not prevent our key employees, including Messrs. Lutnick and Merkel, who as Cantor partners are not subject to these provisions in the BGC Holdings limited partnership agreement, from resigning or competing against us. See “Certain Relationships and Related Transactions.” In addition, our success has largely been dependent on the efforts of Messrs. Lutnick and Lynn and other executive officers and former executive officers. Should Mr. Lutnick leave or otherwise become unavailable to render services to us, control of BGC Partners would likely pass to Cantor, and indirectly pass to the then-controlling stockholder of CFGM (which is Mr. Lutnick), Cantor’s managing general partner, or to such other managing general partner as CFGM would appoint, and as a result control could remain with Mr. Lutnick. If any of our key employees, including Messrs. Lutnick and Lynn, were to join an existing competitor, form a competing company, offer services to Cantor that compete with our services or otherwise leave us, some of our customers could choose to use the services of that competitor or another competitor instead of our services, which could adversely affect our revenues and as a result could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

44

Table of Contents

International Operations

We are generally subject to risks inherent in doing business in the international markets, particularly in the regulated brokerage industry, and any failure to develop effective compliance and reporting systems could result in regulatory penalties in the applicable jurisdiction and our business could be adversely affected.

We currently provide services and products to customers in North America, Europe and the Asia-Pacific region through offices in New York and London, as well as Aspen, Beijing, Chicago, Copenhagen, Dubai, Garden City, Hong Kong, Istanbul, Johannesburg, Mexico City, Moscow, Nyon, Paris, Rio de Janeiro, São Paulo, Sarasota, Seoul, Singapore, Sydney, Tokyo, Toronto and West Palm Beach and we may seek to further expand our operations. On a consolidated basis, revenues from foreign countries were $958.7 million, or 72.0% of total revenues, and $885.6 million, or 76.2% of total revenues, for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively. There are certain additional political, economic, legal, regulatory, operational and other risks inherent in doing business in international markets, particularly in the regulated brokerage industry. These risks include:

In many countries, the laws and regulations applicable to the securities and financial services industries are uncertain and evolving, and it may be difficult for us to determine the exact requirements of local laws in every market. Our inability to remain in compliance with local laws and regulations in a particular foreign market could have a significant and negative effect not only on our businesses in that market but also on our reputation generally. If we are unable to manage any of these risks effectively, our business could be adversely affected.

Acquisitions/New Opportunities

We may pursue strategic alliances, acquisitions or joint ventures or hire brokers for new or existing brokerage desks, which could present unforeseen integration obstacles or costs and could dilute the common stock owned by our stockholders. We may also face competition in our acquisition strategy, which may limit our number of acquisitions and growth opportunities.

We have explored a wide range of strategic alliances, acquisitions or joint ventures with other brokers and with other companies that have interests in businesses in which there are brokerage or other strategic opportunities. We also may seek to hire brokers for new or existing brokerage desks and may seek to hire brokers

45

Table of Contents

or make acquisitions outside of the financial services industry. In addition, from time to time, we have and we expect to continue to evaluate and potentially pursue possible strategic alliances, acquisitions, joint ventures or broker hires. These acquisitions or new hires may be necessary in order for us to enter into or develop new product and geographic areas.

Strategic alliances, acquisitions, joint ventures and new hires involve a number of risks and present financial, managerial and operational challenges, including:

In addition, we expect to face competition for acquisition candidates, which may limit the number of acquisitions and growth opportunities and may lead to higher acquisition prices. There can be no assurance that we will be able to identify, acquire or manage profitably additional businesses or to integrate successfully any acquired businesses without substantial costs, delays or other operational or financial difficulties.

As a result of these risks and challenges, we may not realize any anticipated benefits from strategic alliances, acquisitions, joint ventures or new hires, and such strategic alliances, acquisitions, joint ventures or new hires may in fact materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. In addition, future strategic alliances, acquisitions or joint ventures or the hiring of new brokerage personnel may involve the issuance of additional shares of our common stock, which may dilute your ownership of us or may involve litigation.

If we are unable to identify and exploit new market opportunities, our revenues may decline and as a result our business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially adversely affected.

As more participants enter the markets in which we operate, the resulting competition often leads to lower commissions. This may result in a decrease in revenues in a particular market even if the volume of trades we handle in that market increases. As a result, our strategy is to broker more trades and increase market share in existing markets and to seek out new markets in which we believe we can charge higher commissions. Pursuing this strategy may require significant management attention and broker expense. We may not be able to attract new customers or successfully enter new markets. If we are unable to identify and exploit new market opportunities on a timely and cost-effective basis, our revenues may decline and as a result our business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially adversely affected.

46

Table of Contents

We operate in a rapidly evolving business environment. If we are unable to adapt our business effectively to keep pace with these changes, our ability to succeed will be adversely affected, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The pace of change in the industry in which we operate is extremely rapid. Operating in such a rapidly changing business environment involves a high degree of risk. Our ability to succeed will depend on our ability to adapt effectively to these changing market conditions. If we are unable to keep up with rapid technological changes, we may not be able to compete effectively.

To remain competitive, we must continue to enhance and improve the responsiveness, functionality, accessibility and features of our proprietary software, network distribution systems and technologies. Our business environment is characterized by rapid technological changes, changes in use and customer requirements and preferences, frequent product and service introductions embodying new technologies and the emergence of new industry standards and practices that could render our existing proprietary technology and systems obsolete. Our success will depend, in part, on our ability to:

There can be no assurance that we will be able to respond in a timely manner to changing market conditions or customer requirements. The development of proprietary electronic trading technology entails significant technical, financial and business risks. Further, the adoption of new internet, networking or telecommunications technologies may require us to devote substantial resources to modify, adapt and defend our technology. There can be no assurance that we will successfully implement new technologies or adapt our proprietary technology and transaction-processing systems to customer requirements or emerging industry standards, or that we will be able to successfully defend any challenges to any technology we develop. Any failure on our part to anticipate or respond adequately to technological advancements, customer requirements or changing industry standards, or any significant delays in the development, introduction or availability of new services, products or enhancements, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Credit Risk

Defaults by Cantor or another large financial institution could adversely affect us or financial markets generally.

The commercial soundness of many financial institutions may be closely interrelated as a result of credit, trading, clearing or other relationships between the institutions. For example, we rely on Cantor as our clearing agent for certain securities transactions, primarily U.S. government securities, while we self-clear certain other products. A default by one of our customers could lead to liquidity concerns in our business and further, to the extent that Cantor, or another entity that clears for us, has difficulty meeting capital requirements or otherwise meeting its obligations, we may need to provide our own liquidity. See “—Our liquidity and financial condition have been and could continue to be adversely affected by recent U.S. and international markets and economic conditions.”

47

Table of Contents

As a result, concerns about, or a default or threatened default by, one institution could lead to significant market-wide liquidity problems, losses or defaults by other institutions. This is sometimes referred to as “systemic risk” and may adversely affect financial intermediaries, such as clearing agencies, clearing houses, banks, securities firms and exchanges, with which we interact on a daily basis, and therefore could adversely affect us. Similarly, our vendors, including insurance companies and other providers, are subject to normal business risks as well as risks related to the recent U.S. and international market and economic conditions. Failure of any of these vendor institutions could also adversely affect us.

Our activities are subject to credit and performance risks, which could result in us incurring significant losses and as a result could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our activities are subject to credit and performance risks. For example, our customers may not deliver securities to one of our operating subsidiaries which has sold those securities to another customer. If the securities due to be delivered have increased in value, there is a risk that we may have to expend our own funds in connection with the purchase of other securities to consummate the transaction. While we will take steps to ensure that our customers and counterparties have high credit standings and that financing transactions are adequately collateralized, the large dollar amounts that may be involved in our broker-dealer and financing transactions could subject us to significant losses if, as a result of customer or counterparty failures to meet commitments, we were to incur significant losses in liquidating or covering our positions in the open market.

We have adopted policies and procedures to identify, monitor and manage credit risk, in both agency and principal transactions, through reporting and control procedures and by monitoring credit standards applicable to our customers or counterparties. These policies and procedures, however, may not be fully effective, particularly against fraud, unauthorized trading and similar incidents. Some of these risk management methods depend upon the evaluation of information regarding markets, customers or other matters that are publicly available or otherwise accessible by us. That information may not, in all cases, be accurate, complete, up-to-date or properly evaluated. If our policies and procedures are not fully effective or we are not always successful in monitoring or evaluating the risks to which we are, or may be, exposed, our financial condition and results of operations could be materially adversely affected. In addition, our insurance policies will not provide coverage for these risks.

Transactions executed on a matched principal basis where the instrument has the same or similar characteristics to the counterparty may expose us to correlation risk. In this case, the counterparty’s inability to meet its obligations will also result in the value of the instrument declining. For example, if we were to enter into a transaction to sell to a customer a bond or structured note where the issuer or credit support provider was such customer’s affiliate, the value of the instrument would decline in value in tandem with the default. This correlation has the effect of magnifying the credit loss.

We are subject to financing risk in these circumstances because if a transaction does not settle on a timely basis, the resulting unmatched position may need to be financed, either directly by us or through one of the clearing organizations, at our expense. These charges may be recoverable from the failing counterparty, but sometimes they are not. In addition, in instances where the unmatched position or failure to deliver is prolonged or widespread due to rapid or widespread declines in liquidity for an instrument, there may also be regulatory capital charges required to be taken by us, which, depending on their size and duration, could limit our business flexibility or even force the curtailment of those portions of our business requiring higher levels of capital. Credit or settlement losses of this nature may impact our liquidity and profitability and as a result could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. Decline in the financial markets has also led to the exposure of several cases of financial fraud. If we were to have trading activity on an agency or principal basis with an entity engaged in defrauding investor or counterparties, we could bear the risk that the counterparty would not have the financial resources to meet their obligations, resulting in a credit loss. Similarly, we may engage in financial transactions with third parties that have been victims of financial fraud which may not have the financial resources to meet obligations to us.

48

Table of Contents

In agency transactions, we charge a commission for connecting buyers and sellers and assisting in the negotiation of the price and other material terms of the transaction. After all material terms of a transaction are agreed upon, we identify the buyer and seller to each other and leave them to settle the trade directly. We are exposed to credit risk for commissions, as we bill customers for our agency brokerage services. Our customers may default on their obligations to us due to disputes, bankruptcy, lack of liquidity, operational failure or other reasons. Any losses arising from such defaults could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

In emerging market countries, we primarily conduct business on an agency and matched principal basis, where the risk of counterparty default, inconvertibility events and sovereign default is greater than in more developed countries.

We enter into transactions in cash and derivative instruments primarily on an agency and matched principal basis with counterparties domiciled in countries in Latin America, Eastern Europe and Asia. Transactions with these counterparties are generally in instruments or contracts of sovereign or corporate issuers located in the same country as the counterparty. This exposes us to a higher degree of sovereign or convertibility risk than in more developed countries. In addition, these risks may be correlated risks. A correlated risk arises when the counterparty’s inability to meet its obligations will also correspond to a decline in the value of the instrument traded. In the case of a sovereign convertibility event or outright default, the counterparty to the trade may be unable to pay or transfer payment of an instrument purchased out of the country when the value of the instrument has declined due to the default or convertibility event. The current global financial crisis heightens the risk of sovereign or convertibility events in emerging markets similar to the events that occurred in previous financial downturns. Risk Management monitors the creditworthiness of emerging countries and counterparties on an ongoing basis and when the risk of inconvertibility or sovereign default is deemed to be too great, correlated transactions or all transactions may be restricted or suspended. However, there can be no assurance that these procedures will be effective in controlling these risks.

Revenue Concentration

Our business is geographically concentrated and could be significantly affected by any adverse change in the regions in which we operate.

Historically, our operations have been substantially located in the United Kingdom and the United States. While we are expanding our business to new geographies, we are still highly concentrated in these geographies. Because we derived approximately 42.8% and approximately 28.0%, respectively, of our total revenues on a consolidated basis for the year ended December 31, 2010, from our operations in the United Kingdom and the United States, respectively, and approximately 43.7% and approximately 23.8%, respectively, of our total revenues on a consolidated basis for the year ended December 31, 2009, from our operations in the United Kingdom and the United States, respectively, our business is exposed to adverse regulatory and competitive changes, economic downturns and changes in political conditions in these countries. Moreover, due to the concentration of our business in these geographies, our business is less diversified and, accordingly, is subject to greater regional risks than some of our competitors.

Our business is substantially concentrated on rates products and could be significantly affected by any downturn or negative fluctuations in the rates product market.

We offer our services in four broad product categories: rates, credit, foreign exchange and other asset classes. However, our brokerage revenues are substantially derived from our rates products, which accounted for approximately 45.3% and approximately 45.0% of our total brokerage revenues on a consolidated basis, for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively. While we focus on expanding and diversifying our product offerings, we are currently exposed to any adverse change or condition affecting the rates product market. Accordingly, the concentration of our operations on rates products subjects our results to a greater market risk than if we had a more diversified products offering.

49

Table of Contents

Our revenues and profitability could be reduced or otherwise adversely affected by pricing plans relating to commissions and fees on our trading platform.

We negotiate from time to time with certain customers (including many of our largest customers) to enter into customized volume discount pricing plans. While the pricing plans are designed to encourage customers to be more active on our electronic trading platform, they reduce the amount of commissions payable to us by certain of our most active customers for certain products, which could reduce our revenues and constrain our profitability. From time to time, these pricing plans come up for renewal. Failure of a number of our larger customers to enter into renewed agreements, or agreements on terms as favorable as existing agreements, could have a material adverse effect on volumes on our electronic trading platform, the commissions payable to us, our revenues or our profitability.

Reduced spreads in securities pricing, levels of trading activity and trading through market makers and/or specialists could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Computer-generated buy/sell programs and other technological advances and regulatory changes in the marketplace may continue to tighten securities spreads. In addition, new and enhanced alternative trading systems, such as electronic communications networks, have emerged as an alternative for individual and institutional investors, as well as broker-dealers. As such systems do not direct trades through market makers, their use could result in reduced revenues for us or for our customers. In addition, reduced trading levels could lead to lower revenues which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Customer Concentration

Due to our current customer concentration, a loss of one or more of our significant customers could harm our business, financial condition and results of operations.

For each of the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009, and on a consolidated basis, our top 10 customers, collectively, accounted for approximately 42% and 43% of our total revenues, respectively. We have limited long-term contracts with these customers. If we were to lose one or more of these significant customers for any reason, including the recent consolidation in the financial services industry, and not be compensated for such loss by doing additional business with other customers or by adding new customers, our revenues would decline significantly and our business, financial condition and results of operations would suffer.

Market Risk

We have market risk exposure from unmatched principal transactions entered into by some of our desks, which could result in losses and have a disproportionate effect on our revenues, financial condition and results of operations for any particular reporting period. In addition, financial fraud or unauthorized trading activity could also impact our revenues, financial condition or results of operations.

On a limited basis, our desks enter into unmatched principal transactions in the ordinary course of business to facilitate transactions, add liquidity, improve customer satisfaction, increase revenue opportunities, attract additional order flow or in certain instances as the result of an error and, in a limited number of instances and subject to risk management limits, for the purpose of proprietary trading. As a result, we have market risk exposure on these unmatched principal transactions. Our exposure varies based on the size of the overall positions, the terms and liquidity of the instruments brokered and the amount of time the positions are held before we dispose of the position. This exposure could be more significant in the event that any unauthorized trading activity, financial fraud or similar incidents were to occur.

All trades executed on the eSpeed platform settle for clearing purposes against CF&Co., our affiliate. CF&Co. is a member of FINRA (formerly NASD) and the Fixed Income Clearing Corporation, a subsidiary of the Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation. We, CF&Co. and other of our affiliates participate in U.S. Treasuries as

50

Table of Contents

well as other markets by posting quotations for their account and by acting as principal on trades with platform users. Such activity is intended, among other things, to assist us, CF&Co. and our affiliates in managing their proprietary positions (including, but not limited to, those established as a result of combination trades and errors), facilitating transactions, framing markets, adding liquidity, increasing commissions and attracting order flow.

From a risk management perspective, we monitor risk on an end-of-day basis and desk managers generally monitor such exposure on a continuous basis. Any unmatched positions are intended to be disposed of in the short-term. However, due to a number of factors, including the nature of the position and access to the market on which we trade, we may not be able to match the position or effectively hedge its exposure and often may be forced to hold a position overnight that has not been hedged. To the extent these unmatched positions are not disposed of intra-day, we mark these positions to market. Adverse movements in the securities underlying these positions or a downturn or disruption in the markets for these positions could result in a loss. In the event of any unauthorized trading activity or financial fraud that is not detected by management, it is possible that these unmatched positions could be outstanding for a longer period. Any principal gains and losses resulting from these positions could on occasion have a disproportionate effect, positive or negative, on our revenues, financial condition and results of operations for any particular reporting period.

Intellectual Property

We may not be able to protect our intellectual property rights or may be prevented from using intellectual property necessary for our business.

Our success is dependent, in part, upon our intellectual property and proprietary technology. We generally rely primarily on trade secret, contract, copyright, trademark and patent law in the U.S. and other jurisdictions as well as confidentiality procedures and contractual provisions to establish and protect our rights to proprietary technologies, methods and products, and our brand. For example, we regularly file patent applications to protect inventions arising from our research and development, and we are currently pursuing patent applications around the world. We also enter into confidentiality and invention assignment agreements with our employees and consultants and confidentiality agreements with other third parties, and we control access to our proprietary technology.

It is possible that third parties may copy or otherwise obtain and use our proprietary technologies without authorization or otherwise infringe on our rights despite our precautions. Unauthorized use of our intellectual property could make it more expensive to do business and harm our operating results. We cannot assure that our intellectual property rights are sufficient to protect our competitive advantages or that any particular patent, copyright, or trademark is valid and enforceable, and all patents ultimately expire. In addition, the laws of some foreign countries may not protect our proprietary rights to the same extent as the laws in the United States, or at all. Any significant impairment of our intellectual property rights could harm our business or our ability to compete. For example, reductions in the legal protection for software intellectual property rights could adversely affect revenue. Also, protecting our intellectual property rights is costly and time consuming.

Many companies in the computer and financial services industries own large numbers of patents, copyrights, and trademarks and sometimes file lawsuits based on allegations of infringement or other violations of intellectual property rights. In addition, over the past several years there has been a proliferation of “business method patents” applicable to these industries. There has also been a substantial increase in the number of such patent applications filed. Under current law, U.S. patent applications remain secret for 18 months or, in some cases, until a patent is issued. Because of technological changes in these industries, current extensive patent coverage, and the rapid rate of issuance of new patents, it is possible certain components of our products and business methods may unknowingly infringe existing patents or intellectual property rights of others. Although we have taken steps to protect ourselves, there can be no assurance that we will be aware of all patents or copyrights containing claims that may pose a risk of infringement by our products and services. Generally, it is not economically practicable to determine in advance whether our products or services may infringe the present or future patent rights of others.

51

Table of Contents

Accordingly, we may face claims of infringement or other violations of intellectual property rights that could interfere with our ability to use intellectual property or technology that is material to our business operations. For example, we have been subject to new and ongoing claims by Trading Technologies International, Inc., discussed in more length in our litigation section. Restrictions on the distribution of some of the market data generated by our brokerage desks could limit the comprehensiveness and quality of the data we are able to distribute or sell. The number of such third party claims may grow. Our technologies may not be able to withstand such third-party claims or rights against their use.

In the future, we may have to rely on litigation to enforce our intellectual property rights, protect our trade secrets, determine the validity and scope of the proprietary rights of others or defend against claims of infringement or invalidity. Any such claims or litigation, whether successful or unsuccessful, could result in substantial costs, the diversion of resources, and the attention of management, any of which could negatively affect our business. Responding to these claims could also require us to enter into royalty or licensing agreements with the third parties claiming infringement, stop selling or redesign affected products, or pay damages on our own behalf or to satisfy indemnification commitments with our customers. Such royalty or licensing agreements, if available, may not be available on terms acceptable to us, and may cause operating margins to decline.

If our software licenses from third parties are terminated or adversely changed or amended or if any of these third parties were to cease doing business, our ability to operate our business may be materially adversely affected.

We license databases and other software from third parties, much of which is integral to our systems and our business. The licenses are terminable if we breach our obligations under the license agreements. If any material relationships were terminated or adversely changed or amended, or if any of these third parties were to cease doing business, we may be forced to spend significant time and money to replace the licensed software, and our ability to operate our business may be materially adversely affected. Although we take steps to locate replacements, there can be no assurance that the necessary replacements will be available on reasonable terms, if at all. There can be no assurance that we will have an ongoing license to use all intellectual property which our systems require, the failure of which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

IT/Systems Risk

Our networks and those of our third-party service providers may be vulnerable to security risks, which could make our customers hesitant to use our electronic marketplaces.

The secure transmission of confidential information over public networks is a critical element of our operations. Our networks, those of our third-party service vendors, including Cantor and associated clearing corporations, and those of our customers may be vulnerable to unauthorized access, computer viruses and other security problems. These networks are provisioned using redundant connections, service providers and routes to provide a high level of redundancy and availability and also to allow partitioning and containment of potential security threats. However, there can be no assurance such measures will be effective against all future threats. People who circumvent security measures could wrongfully use our information or cause interruptions or malfunctions in our operations, which could make our customers hesitant to use our electronic marketplaces. We may be required to expend significant resources to protect against the threat of security breaches or to alleviate problems, including reputational harm and litigation, caused by any breaches.

If we experience computer systems failures or capacity constraints, our ability to conduct our operations could be harmed.

We support and maintain many of our computer systems and networks internally. Our failure to monitor or maintain these systems and networks or, if necessary, to find a replacement for this technology in a timely and cost-effective manner would have a material adverse effect on our ability to conduct our operations. Although all of our business critical systems have been designed and implemented with fault tolerant and/or redundant

52

Table of Contents

clustered hardware and diversely routed network connectivity, our redundant systems or disaster recovery plans may prove to be inadequate. Although we have four geographically disparate main data centers, they could be subject to failure due to environmental factors, power outage and other factors. Accordingly, we may be subject to system failures and outages which might impact our revenues and relationships with customers. In addition, we will be subject to risk in the event that systems of our partners, customers or vendors are subject to failures and outages.

We rely on third parties for various computer and communications systems, such as telephone companies, online service providers, data processors, clearance organizations and software and hardware vendors. Our systems, or those of our third-party providers, may fail or operate slowly, causing one or more of the following:

There can be no assurance that we will not experience additional systems failures in the future from power or telecommunications failures, acts of God or war, terrorist attacks, human error, natural disasters, fire, power loss, sabotage, hardware or software malfunctions or defects, computer viruses, intentional acts of vandalism and similar events. Any system failure that causes an interruption in service or decreases the responsiveness of our service, including failures caused by customer error or misuse of our systems, could damage our reputation, business and brand name.

Internal Controls

If we fail to implement and maintain an effective internal control environment, our business and stock price could suffer and we may need to restate our financial statements.

We are subject to the requirements of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and the applicable SEC rules and regulations that require an annual management report on our internal controls over financial reporting. Such a report includes, among other matters, management’s assessment of the effectiveness of our internal controls over financial reporting and an attestation report by our independent registered public accounting firm addressing this assessment.

During the quarter ended June 30, 2009, our management identified a material weakness in our internal controls related to four unauthorized trades and failure to submit confirmations in one of our foreign offices. We determined that we lacked certain controls with respect to the activities of the broker and that the operational and risk management controls in place to monitor the broker’s activities were not properly performed in this instance and therefore were not effective with respect to this event. Performance of secondary controls resulted in the identification of these trades, which management believes, were an isolated occurrence. During the quarter ended September 30, 2009, the Company’s management implemented control enhancements to remediate this material weakness in internal controls. These control enhancements included: improving management oversight controls to enable increased awareness of unauthorized or unmatched activity; increased controls around monitoring and recording of client instructions and settlements; enhanced procedures for pre-settlement matching of trades; automated trade confirmation processes; implementing a process to ensure that all trade date reconciliation procedures are being properly performed and reviewed; and improved management reporting regarding compliance, risk monitoring and P&L activity. Although this material weakness was remediated as of December 31, 2009, there can be no assurance that a similar incident could not occur.

53

Table of Contents

Internal control over financial reporting, no matter how well designed, has inherent limitations. Therefore, internal controls over financial reporting determined to be effective can provide only reasonable assurance with respect to financial statement preparation and may not prevent or detect all misstatements. Due to the inherent limitations in all control systems, no evaluation of controls can provide absolute assurance that all control issues and instances of fraud, if any, within our company have been detected. These inherent limitations include the realities that judgments in decision-making can be faulty, and that breakdowns can occur because of simple error or mistake. Additionally, controls can be circumvented by the individual acts of some persons, by collusion of two or more people, or by management override of the internal controls. Moreover, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate due to changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate. As such, we could lose investor confidence in the accuracy and completeness of our financial reports, which may have a material adverse effect on our stock price.

Ongoing compliance with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act may require significant expenses and management resources that would need to be diverted from our operations and could require a restructuring of our internal controls over financial reporting. Any such expenses, time reallocations or restructuring could have a material adverse effect on our operations.

Tax

We may be required to pay Cantor for a significant portion of the tax benefit relating to any additional tax depreciation or amortization deductions we claim as a result of any step-up in the tax basis in the assets of BGC U.S. and BGC Global resulting from the exchange of interests in BGC Holdings for BGC Partners common stock.

Certain interests in BGC Holdings may, in effect, be exchanged in the future for shares of BGC Partners Class A common stock or BGC Partners Class B common stock on a one-for-one basis (subject to customary anti-dilution adjustments). The exchanges may result in increases to our share of the tax basis of the tangible and intangible assets of each of BGC U.S. and BGC Global that otherwise would not have been available, although the Internal Revenue Service may challenge all or part of that tax basis increase, and a court could sustain such a challenge by the Internal Revenue Service. These increases in tax basis, if sustained, may reduce the amount of tax that we would otherwise be required to pay in the future.

In connection with the separation and related transactions, BGC Partners OldCo entered into, and, in the merger, we assumed BGC Partners OldCo’s rights and obligations under, the tax receivable agreement with Cantor that provides for the payment by us to Cantor of 85% of the amount of cash savings, if any, in U.S. federal, state and local income tax or franchise tax that we actually realize as a result of these increases in tax basis and of certain other tax benefits related to its entering into the tax receivable agreement, including tax benefits attributable to payments under the tax receivable agreement. It is expected that we will benefit from the remaining 15% of cash savings, if any, in income tax that we realize.

Other General Risks

Our business is global and exchange rate fluctuations impact our results.

We are exposed to risks associated with changes in foreign exchange rates. Changes in foreign currency rates create volatility in the U.S. dollar equivalent of revenues and expenses, in particular with regard to British Pounds and Euros. In addition, changes in the remeasurement of our foreign currency denominated net assets are recorded as part of our results of operations and fluctuate with changes in foreign currency rates. We monitor the net exposure in foreign currencies on a daily basis and hedge our exposure as deemed appropriate with highly rated major financial institutions. However, potential movements in the U.S. dollar against other currencies in which we earn revenues could also adversely affect our financial results.

54

Table of Contents

Employee misconduct or error could harm us by impairing our ability to attract and retain customers and subjecting us to significant legal liability and reputational harm; moreover, this type of misconduct is difficult to detect and deter and error is difficult to prevent.

Employee misconduct or error could subject us to financial losses and regulatory sanctions and could seriously harm our reputation and negatively affect our business. Misconduct by employees could include engaging in improper or unauthorized transactions or activities, failing to properly supervise other employees or improperly using confidential information. Employee errors, including mistakes in executing, recording or processing transactions for customers, could cause us to enter into transactions that customers may disavow and refuse to settle, which could expose us to the risk of material losses even if the errors are detected and the transactions are unwound or reversed. If our customers are not able to settle their transactions on a timely basis, the time in which employee errors are detected may be increased and our risk of material loss could be increased. The risk of employee error or miscommunication may be greater for products that are new or have non-standardized terms. It is not always possible to deter employee misconduct or error, and the precautions we take to detect and prevent this activity may not be effective in all cases.

The financial markets in which we operate are generally affected by seasonality which could have a material adverse effect on our financial performance in a given period.

Traditionally, the financial markets around the world experience lower volume during the summer and at the end of the year due to a general slowdown in the business environment and, therefore, our transaction volume levels may decrease during those periods. The timing of local holidays also affects transaction volume. These factors could have a material adverse effect on our financial performance in a given period.

While portions of our compensation structure are variable, significant parts of our cost structure are fixed, and if our revenues decline and we are unable to reduce our costs in the amount that our revenues decline, our profitability could be materially adversely affected.

While portions of our compensation structure are variable, significant parts of our cost structure are fixed. We base our overall cost structure on historical and expected levels of demand for our products and services. If demand for these products and services and our resulting revenues decline, we may not be able to adjust our cost structure on a timely basis. If we are unable to reduce our costs in the amount that our revenues decline, our profitability could be materially adversely affected.

Merger Related

The impact of the separation and merger on our partners and future working partners may adversely affect our ability to retain, recruit and motivate these persons.

While we believe that our April 2008 separation and merger have promoted retention and recruitment, some employee partners may be more attracted to the benefits of working at a private, controlled partnership which may adversely affect our ability to retain, recruit and motivate these persons. The impact of the separation on the employee partners and other employee retention and recruitment remains uncertain.

Many of our key employees were limited partners of Cantor prior to the separation and merger. We believe that the possibility of becoming a limited partner of Cantor has been an important tool in its ability to hire and retain key employees. Prior to the merger, Cantor redeemed Cantor limited partnership interests held by BGC Holdings founding partners in exchange for BGC Holdings limited partnership interests and distribution rights in respect of our common stock. Following the merger, it is not expected that our key employees will have the right to become limited partners in Cantor. In addition, we expect that from time to time, key employees of BGC Partners will have the opportunity to become limited partners of BGC Holdings.

55

Table of Contents

While these BGC Holdings limited partnership interests entitle founding/working partners and limited partnership unit holders to participate in distributions of income from the operations of our business, upon leaving BGC Holdings (or upon any other redemption or purchase of such limited partnership interests as described below), any such founding/working partners or limited partnership unit holders are, unless Cantor, in the case of the founding partners, and us, as the general partner of BGC Holdings, otherwise determine, only entitled to receive over time, and provided he or she does not violate certain partner obligations, an amount for his or her BGC Holdings limited partnership interests that reflects such partner’s capital account, if any, and not any goodwill or going concern value of BGC Partners’ business. Further, certain working partner units, such as PSUs and PSIs, have no right to a post termination payment. Moreover, unlike Cantor, founding/working partners and limited partnership unit holders have no right to exchange their BGC Holdings limited partnership interests for shares of BGC Partners common stock (except, in the case of founding partners, as otherwise determined by Cantor in accordance with the terms of the BGC Holdings limited partnership agreement, and Cantor has provided that certain founding partner interests are exchangeable with us for Class A common stock on a one-for-one basis (subject to customary anti-dilution adjustments), in accordance with the terms of the BGC Holdings limited partnership agreement.

The BGC Holdings limited partnership interests are also subject to redemption, with respect to the founding partners, upon mutual agreement of Cantor and the general partner of BGC Holdings, and with respect to the working partners, at the election of the general partner of BGC Holdings, and subject founding/working partners and limited partnership unit holders to non-competition and non-solicitation covenants, as well as other obligations. In addition, the exercise of Cantor’s right to purchase from BGC Holdings, founding partner interests and, in certain circumstances, working partner interests and limited partnership units (in each case, that have not become exchangeable) redeemed by BGC Holdings will result in the share of distributions of income from the operations of BGC Partners’ business on other outstanding BGC Holdings limited partnership interests, including those held by founding/working or limited partnership unit holders, to remain the same rather than increasing as would be the case if such interests were redeemed by BGC Holdings.

The terms of the BGC Holdings limited partnership interests held by founding/working partners and limited partnership unit holders also differ from the terms of the limited partnership interests in Cantor previously held by certain partners as follows:

Founding partners may find any of these terms of the BGC Holdings limited partnership interests to be less attractive than the arrangements for limited partners of Cantor, which may reduce the effectiveness of these interests as retention tools.

In addition, the ownership of the distribution rights and underlying shares of our common stock received by founding partners and other persons providing services to BGC Partners is not dependent upon a founding partner’s continued employment with us or Cantor or compliance with the partner obligations, and with respect to those shares founding partners are therefore not restricted from leaving us by the potential loss of the shares distributable pursuant to these distribution rights.

56

Table of Contents

Risks Related to our Relationship with Cantor and its Affiliates

We are controlled by Cantor, which has potential conflicts of interest with us and may exercise its control in a way that favors its interests to our detriment.

Cantor effectively is able to exercise control over our management and affairs and all matters requiring stockholder approval, including the election of our directors and determinations with respect to acquisitions and dispositions, as well as material expansions or contractions of our business, entry into new lines of business and borrowings and issuances of Class A common stock and Class B common stock or other securities. This control is subject to the approval of our independent directors on those matters requiring such approval. Cantor’s voting power may also have the effect of delaying or preventing a change of control of us. Conflicts of interest may arise between us and Cantor in a number of areas relating to our past and ongoing relationships, including:

We also expect Cantor to manage its ownership of us so that it will not be deemed to be an investment company under the Investment Company Act, including by maintaining its voting power in us above a majority absent an applicable exemption from the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the “Investment Company Act”). This may result in conflicts with us including those relating to acquisitions or offerings by us involving issuances of Class A common stock or Class B common stock, or securities convertible or exchangeable into shares of Class A common stock or Class B common stock, that would dilute the voting power in us of the holders of BGC Holdings exchangeable limited partnership interests.

In addition, Cantor has from time to time in the past and may in the future consider possible strategic realignments of its own business and/or of the relationships that exist between and among Cantor and us. Any future related party transaction or arrangement between Cantor and us, until Cantor ceases to hold 5% of our voting power, is subject to the prior approval by a majority of our independent directors, but generally does not

57

Table of Contents

otherwise require the separate approval of our stockholders, and if such approval is required, Cantor will retain sufficient voting power to provide any such requisite approval without the affirmative consent of the other stockholders.

In addition, the service of officers or partners of Cantor as our executive officers and directors, and those persons’ ownership interests in and payments from Cantor, and its affiliates, could create conflicts of interest when we and those directors or officers are faced with decisions that could have different implications for us and Cantor. See “—Risks Related to our Business—Our ability to retain our key employees and the ability of certain key employees to devote adequate time to us are critical to the success of our business, and failure to do so may adversely affect our revenues and as a result could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.”

Our agreements and other arrangements with Cantor may be amended upon agreement of the parties to those agreements upon approval of our audit committee. During the time that we are controlled by Cantor, Cantor may be able to require us to agree to amendments to these agreements. We may not be able to resolve any potential conflicts and, even if we do, the resolution may be less favorable to us than if we were dealing with an unaffiliated party.

In order to address potential conflicts of interest between Cantor and its representatives and us, our certificate of incorporation contains provisions regulating and defining the conduct of our affairs as they may involve Cantor and its representatives, and our powers, rights, duties and liabilities and those of our representatives in connection with our relationship with Cantor and its affiliates, officers, directors, general partners or employees. Our certificate of incorporation provides that no Cantor Company, as defined in our certificate of incorporation, or any of the representatives, as defined in our certificate of incorporation, of a Cantor Company will owe any fiduciary duty to, nor will any Cantor Company or any of their respective representatives be liable for breach of fiduciary duty to, us or any of our stockholders. The corporate opportunity policy that is included in our certificate of incorporation is designed to resolve potential conflicts of interest between us and Cantor and its representatives.

In addition, our certificate of incorporation provides that Cantor and its respective representatives will have no duty to refrain from:

The BGC Holdings limited partnership agreement contains similar provisions with respect to BGC Partners and/or Cantor and their respective representatives, and the BGC U.S. and BGC Global limited partnership agreements contain similar provisions with respect to BGC Partners and/or BGC Holdings and their respective representatives.

If Cantor competes with us, it could materially harm our business operations.

Agreements between us and Cantor are between related parties and the terms of these agreements may be less favorable to us than those that we could have negotiated with third parties.

Our relationship with Cantor results in agreements with Cantor that are between related parties. As a result, the prices charged to us or by us for services provided under agreements with Cantor may be higher or lower than prices that may be charged by third parties and the terms of these agreements may be less favorable to us than those that we could have negotiated with third parties. For example, pursuant to the separation agreement, Cantor has a right, subject to certain conditions, to be our customer and to pay the lowest commissions paid by any other customer, whether by volume, dollar or other applicable measure. In addition, Cantor has an unlimited right to

58

Table of Contents

internally use market data from BGCantor Market Data without any cost. Any future related party transactions or arrangements between us and Cantor, until Cantor ceases to hold 5% of our voting power, is subject to the prior approval by a majority of our independent directors, but generally does not otherwise require the separate approval of our stockholders, and if such approval were required, Cantor will retain sufficient voting power to provide any such requisite approval without the affirmative consent of the other stockholders.

Risks Related to our Class A Common Stock, Sales of Class A Common Stock and Our Structure

We are controlled by Cantor, which in turn controls its wholly owned subsidiary, CF&Co., which is acting as our sales agent in our controlled equity offering. In addition, we have retained Cantor and its affiliates to provide us with additional investment banking services.

We are controlled by Cantor, which in turn controls its wholly owned subsidiary, CF&Co., which acted as our sales agent pursuant to a controlled equity offering sales agreement entered into on June 2, 2010 (the “June 2010 Sales Agreement”) under which we sold 5.5 million shares of Class A common stock and is acting as our sales agent pursuant to a controlled equity offering sales agreement entered into on September 3, 2010 (the “Sales Agreement”) under which we may issue and sell from time to time up to 5.5 million shares of our Class A common stock (subject to a maximum aggregate gross sales price remaining under our effective Shelf Registration Statement on Form S-3 (as described below)). As of March 1, 2011, we have issued and sold an aggregate of approximately 5.9 million shares of Class A common stock under the Sales Agreements. In addition, Cantor, CF&Co. and their affiliates have provided investment banking services to us and our affiliates in the past and may be expected to do so in the future. They receive customary fees and commissions for these services. In addition, they may also receive brokerage services and market data and analytics products from us and our respective affiliates. We repurchased or redeemed 13.3 million shares of Class A common stock and limited partnership interests during 2010.

Our general policy and that of our audit committee is that all transactions with a related party are subject to prior review and approval by our audit committee. Accordingly, our audit committee considered and approved the terms of the June 2010 Sales Agreement and the Sales Agreement and the retention of Cantor and its affiliates to provide us with additional investment banking services. We believe that the compensation paid and to be paid to Cantor, CF&Co. and their affiliates will not be greater than the typical compensation that would be charged by them to a third party issuer on an arm’s-length basis for similar types of services.

CF&Co. has retained independent legal advisors in connection with its role as sales agent under the Sales Agreement, but for the reasons described below it may not be in a position to provide us with independent financial input in connection with the offering of shares of our Class A common stock pursuant to the Sales Agreement. We are not required to, and have not engaged, an independent investment banking firm to act as a qualified independent underwriter or to otherwise provide us with independent input in our controlled equity offering.

While our board of directors and audit committee will be involved with any future decision by us to terminate the Sales Agreement or to enter into new sales agreements with CF&Co., our management has been delegated the authority to determine, and to so instruct CF&Co. with respect to, matters involving the manner, timing, number of shares, and minimum prices per share or proceeds for sales of our shares, or the suspension thereof, in our controlled equity offering pursuant to the Sales Agreement. Our management may be expected to consult with appropriate personnel from CF&Co. in making such determinations, but given the overlap between our senior management and that of Cantor and its wholly owned subsidiary, CF&Co., it may be expected that any joint determinations by our senior management and that of CF&Co. with respect to our controlled equity offering will involve the same individuals. In making such joint determinations, our audit committee has instructed our senior management to act in the best interests of us and our stockholders. Nevertheless, in making such determinations, such individuals will not have the benefit of input from an independent investment banking firm that is able to make its own determinations with respect to our controlled equity offering, including, but not limited to, whether to suspend sales under the Sales Agreement or to terminate the Sales Agreement.

59

Table of Contents

For further information about our relationship with Cantor, CF&Co. and their affiliates, including Cantor, see the section entitled “Certain Relationships and Related Transactions” and Note 10—“Related Party Transactions,” to the consolidated financial statements in Part II, Item 8 in this Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010.

Purchasers, as well as existing stockholders, may experience significant dilution as a result of offerings of our shares of Class A common stock.

We currently have in place an effective equity shelf Registration Statement on Form S-3 (the “Form S-3”) with respect to the issuance and sale up to $100.0 million of shares of our Class A common stock from time to time on a delayed or continuous basis. As of March 1, 2011, we have issued and sold an aggregate of approximately 5.9 million shares of Class A common stock under the Form S-3 pursuant to the June 2010 Sales Agreement and the Sales Agreement. In addition, on September 3, 2010, the Company filed a registration statement on Form S-4 (the “Form S-4 Registration Statement”), which was declared effective by the SEC on October 12, 2010, for the offer and sale of up to 20,000,000 shares of Class A common stock from time to time in connection with business combination transactions, including acquisitions of other businesses, assets, properties or securities. In addition to the approximately 5.1 million shares of Class A common stock that remain available for issuance and sale under the Sales Agreement and the shares that may be issued under the Form S-4 Registration Statement, we may in the future sell additional shares of Class A common stock under the Form S-3 pursuant to new sales agreements or otherwise.

Because the sales of shares of our Class A common stock under the Sales Agreement have been made, and any other future sales of our Class A common stock under the Form S-3 may be made, in privately negotiated transactions or directly into the market at prevailing market prices or at prices related to such prevailing market prices, the prices at which these shares have been sold and may be sold in the future will vary, and these variations may be significant. Purchasers of these shares may suffer significant dilution if the price they pay is higher than the price paid by other purchasers of shares of our Class A common stock under the Sales Agreement and any future offerings of our shares of Class A common stock.

In selling shares of our Class A common stock under the Sales Agreement, we may determine to instruct CF&Co. not to sell our shares at less than a minimum price per share designated by us. Alternatively, we may instruct CF&Co. to sell our shares so as to seek to realize a designated minimum price per share for all shares sold over a designated time period, or so as to seek to raise a designated minimum dollar amount of gross proceeds from sales of all such shares over a designated time period. These approaches may result in some purchasers of our shares paying a significantly higher price per share than other purchasers, depending upon the number of shares sold, the market prices for our shares, and the liquidity and depth of our market. In particular, this could be the case near the end of any designated sales period, especially if we determine at that time to authorize CF&Co. to seek to sell our shares in privately negotiated transactions at a discount to prevailing market prices.

In addition, the sale by us of any shares of our Class A common stock may have the following effects:

60

Table of Contents

Because we intend to use the net proceeds from the sale of shares of Class A common stock under the Sales Agreements, and may use the net proceeds from future offerings, for general corporate purposes, which, among other things, are expected to include principally repurchases of shares of our Class A common stock and purchases of BGC Holdings units or other equity interests in us or in our subsidiaries from Cantor, our executive officers, other employees, partners, and others, and/or to replenish cash used to effect such repurchases and purchases, investors should be aware that such net proceeds will not be available for other corporate purposes, and that, depending upon the timing and prices of such repurchases of shares and purchases of units and of the sales of our shares under the Sales Agreement and the liquidity and depth of our market, we may sell a greater aggregate number of shares, at a lower average price per share, under the Sales Agreement than the number of shares or units repurchased or purchased, thereby increasing the aggregate number of shares and units outstanding and decreasing our fully diluted earnings per share.

We intend to use the net proceeds of the sale of shares of Class A common stock under the Sales Agreement, and may use the net proceeds from future offerings, for general corporate purposes, which among other things, are expected to include principally repurchases of shares of our Class A common stock and purchases of BGC Holdings units or other equity interests in us or in our subsidiaries from Cantor, our executive officers, other employees, partners, and others, and/or to replenish cash used to effect such repurchases and purchases. During the year ended December 31, 2010, we repurchased approximately 3.4 million shares of Class A common stock at an aggregate purchase price of approximately $19.9 million, at an average repurchase price of $5.85 per share. During the year ended December 31, 2010, the Company, as part of its redemption and compensation restructuring program (see Note 15—“Compensation,” for more information), redeemed approximately 5.9 million limited partnership units at an average price of $5.89 per unit. For the year ending December 31, 2010, the Company redeemed approximately 4.0 million founding partner units for an average price of $6.23 per unit. In the future we expect to continue to repurchase shares of our Class A common stock and purchase BGC Holdings units from Cantor, our executive officers, other employees, partners, and others, and these repurchases and purchases may be significant, particularly as we continue our redemption and compensation restructuring program.

As of March 1, 2011, we have issued and sold under the June 2010 Sales Agreement and the September 2010 Sales Agreement an aggregate of approximately 5.9 million shares of Class A common stock, for an average price per share of $5.77, net of costs.

To the extent that we continue to use the net proceeds of the sale of shares of our Class A common stock to fund repurchases of shares and purchases of units, or to replenish cash used to effect repurchases and purchases, net proceeds will not be available for other corporate purposes. In addition, to the extent that we seek to sell shares of our Class A common stock to raise net proceeds for repurchases of shares and purchases of units, depending upon the timing and prices of the repurchases of shares and purchases of units and of the sales of our shares and the liquidity and depth of our market, we may in fact sell a greater aggregate number of shares of our Class A common stock, at a lower average price per share, in our offerings than the aggregate number of shares repurchased and units purchased by us and the average price per share or unit that we are paying in such repurchases and purchases. Thus, our strategy may result in an increase in the number of our shares and units outstanding and a decrease in our earnings per share on both a basic and a fully diluted basis. Nevertheless, our management believes that selling our shares, and using the net proceeds of such sales to repurchase shares and purchase units, is in our best interest and that of our stockholders. While we believe that we can successfully manage our strategy, and that our share price may in fact increase as we increase the amount of cash available for dividends and share repurchases and unit purchases by increasing the percentage of compensation our partners receive in the form of restricted partnership units, gradually lowering our compensation expenses for purposes of distributable earnings, and lowering our long-term effective tax rate for distributable earnings, there can be no assurance that our strategy will be successful or that we can achieve any or all of such objectives.

61

Table of Contents

The market price of our Class A common stock has fluctuated significantly and may continue to do so. In addition, future sales of shares of Class A common stock could adversely affect the market price of our Class A common stock.

The market price of our Class A common stock has fluctuated widely since eSpeed’s initial public offering in December 1999, and the market price of our Class A common stock may continue to do so depending upon many factors, including our actual results of operations and perceived prospects, the prospects of our competition and of the financial marketplaces in general, differences between our actual financial and operating results and those expected by investors and analysts, changes in analysts’ recommendations or projections, seasonality, changes in general valuations for companies in our business segment, changes in general economic or market conditions and broad market fluctuations. The market price of our Class A common stock may continue to be subject to similar market fluctuations which may be unrelated to our operating performance or prospects, and increased volatility could result in a decline in the market price of our Class A common stock. Declines in the price of our Class A common stock may adversely affect our ability to recruit and retain key employees, including our working partners and other key professional employees.

Future sales of our shares also could adversely affect the market price of our Class A common stock. If our existing stockholders sell a large number of shares, or if we issue a large number of shares of our common stock in connection with public offerings, future acquisitions, strategic alliances, third-party investments and private placements or otherwise, the market price of common stock could decline significantly. In addition, our stockholders could be diluted by such future sales.

Recent events which could have such an effect include the sales of shares of Class A common stock under the Sales Agreement, and future sales of our shares, described above, as well as the following:

62

Table of Contents

In addition, we have registered under the U.S. Securities Act of 1933, as amended, which we refer to as the “Securities Act,” 100,430,000 shares of common stock, which are reserved for issuance upon exercise of options, restricted stock, exchange rights and other incentive compensation granted under our Long-Term Incentive Plan. These shares can be sold in the public market upon issuance, subject to restrictions under the securities laws applicable to resales by affiliates. We may in the future register additional shares of common stock under the Securities Act that become reserved for issuance under our Long-Term Incentive Plan or other benefit plans. In addition, we have registered under the Securities Act 425,000 shares of common stock issuable under our stock purchase plan.

We are continuing our global program in 2011 whereby partners redeem their REUs or RPUs in exchange for PSUs or PSIs and receive exchangeability or cash for certain of their limited partnership units and, in many cases, a modification or extension of their employment arrangement.

Certain of the BGC Holdings founding partner interests that Cantor has provided are exchangeable with us for Class A common stock on a one-for-one basis (subject to customary anti-dilution adjustments) and are described in further detail in “Certain Relationships and Related Transactions and Director Independence.”

In addition, Cantor is obligated to distribute shares of Class A common stock to satisfy certain of its distribution rights and obligations to certain current and former partners. Cantor expects to use shares of our Class A common stock received upon its conversion of Class B common stock, shares of our Class A common stock received upon exchange of BGC Holdings exchangeable limited partnership interests and purchases of shares of our Class A common stock in the open market to satisfy its distribution obligation under the distribution rights.

As of April 1, 2011, the aggregate number of remaining shares of Class A common stock that Cantor will be required to distribute to retained and founding partners will be 19,363,672 shares of Class A common stock (17,287,343 shares with respect to retained partners and 2,076,329 shares with respect to founding partners).

In addition, we have issued shares of our common stock, warrants and convertible preferred stock and granted registration rights in connection with certain of our strategic alliances.

During 2010, we repurchased 3,399,015 shares of Class A common stock at an aggregate purchase price of $19.9 million. The reacquired shares were designated treasury shares and will be used for general corporate purposes. As of December 31, 2010, $97.5 million was remaining from the authorization of our board of directors and our audit committee to repurchase our Class A common stock, BGC Holdings limited partnership interests or other equity interests in our subsidiaries, including from Cantor or our executive officers. We may continue to make stock repurchases in 2011 and from time to time we may actively repurchase shares and may cease making repurchases at anytime.

Despite our current consolidated debt levels, we may still incur substantially more debt or take other actions which would intensify the risks discussed herein.

Despite our current consolidated debt levels, we and our subsidiaries may be able to incur substantial additional debt in the future, some of which may be secured debt. We are not restricted under the terms of the Indenture or our secured loan arrangement from incurring additional debt, securing existing or future debt (except to the extent already secured), recapitalizing our debt or taking a number of other actions that are not limited by the terms of our debt instruments that could have the effect of diminishing our ability to make payments on our debt when due.

Increased debt levels could have other important consequences, including:

63

Table of Contents

We may not have the ability to raise the funds necessary to settle conversions of the BGCP Notes or to repurchase the BGCP Notes upon a fundamental change, and our future debt may contain limitations on our ability to pay cash upon conversion or repurchase of the notes.

Pursuant to the Indenture, if we undergo a “fundamental change” (as defined in the Indenture), holders of the BGCP Notes may elect to have all or a portion of the convertible notes repurchased for cash at a price equal to 100% of the principal amount of the convertible notes, plus any accrued and unpaid interest. However, we may not have enough available cash or be able to obtain financing at the time we are required to make repurchases of convertible notes surrendered therefor. In addition, our ability to repurchase the BGCP Notes may be limited by law, by regulatory authority or by agreements governing any of our future indebtedness. Our failure to repurchase the BGCP Notes at a time when the repurchase is required by the Indenture would constitute a default under the Indenture. A default under the Indenture or the fundamental change itself could also lead to a default under agreements governing our future indebtedness. If the repayment of the related indebtedness were to be accelerated after any applicable notice or grace periods, we may not have sufficient funds to repay the indebtedness and repurchase the BGCP Notes or make cash payments upon conversions thereof.

The fundamental change provisions in the BGCP Notes may delay or prevent an otherwise beneficial takeover attempt of us and, to the extent that Cantor or its affiliates continue to hold the BGCP Notes, these provisions may enhance Cantor’s control of us.

Pursuant to the terms of the BGCP Notes, holders of our convertible notes will have the right to require us to repurchase all or a portion such notes upon the occurrence of a “fundamental change” at 100% of their principal amount, plus any accrued and unpaid interest. In addition, if a “make-whole fundamental change occurs” (as defined in the Indenture) prior to maturity of the BGCP Notes, under certain circumstances, we will increase the number of shares of our Class A common stock issuable upon conversion of the BGCP Notes converted in connection with such “make-whole fundamental change.” The fundamental change purchase rights and the provisions requiring an increase to the conversion rate for conversions in connection with make-whole fundamental changes may in certain circumstances delay or prevent a takeover of us and/or the removal of incumbent management that might otherwise be beneficial to investors. To the extent that Cantor or its affiliates continue to hold the BGC Holdings Notes or hold the BGCP Notes, these provisions may enhance Cantor’s control of us even if Cantor were to reduce its voting power in us by, among other things, converting shares of our Class B common stock held by it into shares of our Class A common stock or selling or distributing shares of our Class A common stock.

Because our voting control is concentrated among the holders of Class B common stock, the market price of Class A common stock may be adversely affected by disparate voting rights.

As of December 31, 2010, Cantor beneficially owned 79.0% of our voting power. As long as Cantor beneficially owns a majority of our combined voting power, it will have the ability, without the consent of the public stockholders, to elect all of the members of our board of directors and to control our management and affairs. In addition, it will be able to determine the outcome of matters submitted to a vote of our stockholders for approval and will be able to cause or prevent a change of control of us. In certain circumstances, such as when transferred to an entity controlled by Cantor or Howard W. Lutnick, the shares of Class B common stock issued to Cantor may be transferred without conversion to Class A common stock.

64

Table of Contents

The holders of Class A common stock and Class B common stock have substantially identical rights, except that holders of Class A common stock are entitled to one vote per share, while holders of Class B common stock are entitled to 10 votes per share on all matters to be voted on by stockholders in general. These votes are controlled by Cantor and are not subject to conversion or termination by our board of directors or any committee thereof, or any other stockholder or third-party. This differential in the voting rights could adversely affect the market price of common stock.

We are a holding company, and accordingly we are dependent upon distributions from BGC U.S. and BGC Global to pay dividends, taxes and other expenses and to make repurchases.

We are a holding company with no independent means of generating revenues. Any dividends declared by us and all applicable taxes payable in respect of our net taxable income, if any, are paid from distributions to us from BGC U.S. and BGC Global. To the extent that we need funds to pay dividends or to pay taxes on our share of BGC U.S.’s and BGC Global’s net taxable income, or to repurchase shares of our common stock or BGC Holdings exchangeable limited partnership interests or if we need funds to pay dividends, make repurchases or for any other purpose, and either BGC U.S. or BGC Global or their respective subsidiaries are restricted from making such distributions under applicable law or regulation, or is otherwise unable to provide such funds, it could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations and our ability to declare dividends. In addition, any unanticipated accounting, tax or other charges against net income could adversely affect our ability to pay dividends, taxes and other expenses and to make repurchases.

We may not be able to pay dividends on our common stock.

We are a holding company with no direct operations and will be able to pay dividends only from our available cash on hand and funds received from distributions from BGC U.S. and BGC Global. BGC U.S. and BGC Global intend to distribute to their limited partners, including us, on a pro rata and quarterly basis, cash that is not required to meet BGC U.S.’s and BGC Global’s anticipated business needs. As a result, BGC U.S.’s and BGC Global’s ability, and in turn our ability, to make any distributions will depend upon the continuing profitability and strategic and operating needs of our business, including various capital adequacy and clearing capital requirements promulgated by regulatory, banking and exchange authorities to which our subsidiaries are subject. We expect to pay not less than 75% of our post-tax distributable earnings per fully diluted share as cash dividends to all common stockholders, with the balance of such distributable earnings to be available to repurchase shares of our common stock or purchase BGC Holdings limited partnership interests or other equity interests in our subsidiaries, including from Cantor or our executive officers. Our board of directors and our audit committee have authorized repurchases of our common stock and purchases of BGC Holdings limited partnership interests or other equity interests in our subsidiaries as part of this policy, including those held by Cantor or our executive officers, at the volume weighted average price, to the extent available, of such securities on the date on which such purchase or repurchase is made, or, in some cases, at the closing stock price. On May 4, 2010 the Company’s Board of Directors authorized an $85 million increase in the BGC Partners stock repurchase authorization, bringing the total amount available for future repurchases of Class A common stock to $100 million. As of December 31, 2010, we had $97.5 million remaining under this stock repurchase authorization and may continue to make stock repurchases from time to time, we may actively repurchase shares and may cease making purchases at anytime. In addition, from time to time, we may reinvest all or a portion of the distributions we receive in BGC U.S.’s and BGC Global’s respective businesses, although we neither have current plans to do so nor do we expect to so long as we maintain our current dividend policy. As a result, there can be no assurance that future dividends will be paid. See “Dividend Policy”.

Delaware law and our organizational documents may impede or discourage a takeover, which could deprive our investors of the opportunity to receive a premium for their shares.

We are a Delaware corporation, and the anti-takeover provisions of Delaware law impose various impediments to the ability of a third party to acquire control of us, even if a change of control would be beneficial to our existing stockholders. Some provisions of the Delaware General Corporation Law, which we

65

Table of Contents

refer to as the “DGCL,” and our amended and restated certificate of incorporation, which we refer to as the “certificate of incorporation,” and amended and restated bylaws, which we refer to as the “bylaws,” could make the following more difficult:

These provisions, summarized below, are expected to discourage coercive takeover practices and inadequate takeover bids. These provisions are also designed to encourage persons seeking to acquire control of us to first negotiate with our board of directors. We believe that the benefits of increased protection give us the potential ability to negotiate with the proponent of an unfriendly or unsolicited proposal to acquire or restructure us and outweigh the disadvantages of discouraging those proposals because negotiation of them could result in an improvement of their terms.

Our bylaws provide that special meetings of stockholders may be called only by the Chairman of our board of directors, or in the event the Chairman of our board of directors is unavailable, by the Chief Executive Officer or by the holders of a majority of the voting power of our Class B common stock, which is held by Cantor and CFGM, the managing general partner of Cantor, an entity controlled by our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Howard W. Lutnick. In addition, our certificate of incorporation permits us to issue “blank check” preferred stock.

Our bylaws require advance written notice prior to a meeting of stockholders of a proposal or director nomination which a stockholder desires to present at such a meeting, which generally must be received by our Secretary not later than 120 days prior to the first anniversary of the date of our proxy statement for the preceding year’s annual meeting. Our bylaws provide that all amendments to our bylaws must be approved by either the holders of a majority of the voting power of all outstanding capital stock entitled to vote or by a majority of our board of directors.

We are subject to Section 203 of the DGCL. In general, Section 203 of the DGCL prohibits a publicly held Delaware corporation from engaging in a “business combination” with an “interested stockholder” for a period of three years following the date the person became an interested stockholder, unless the “business combination” or the transaction in which the person became an “interested stockholder” is approved in a prescribed manner. Generally, a “business combination” includes a merger, asset or stock sale or other transaction resulting in a financial benefit to the “interested stockholder.” An “interested stockholder” is a person who, together with affiliates and associates, owns 15% or more of a corporation’s outstanding voting stock, or was the owner of 15% or more of a corporation’s outstanding voting stock at any time within the prior three years, other than “interested stockholders” prior to the time our common stock was quoted on the NASDAQ Global Select Market. The existence of this provision would be expected to have an anti-takeover effect with respect to transactions not approved in advance by our board of directors, including discouraging takeover attempts that might result in a premium over the market price for the shares of our common stock held by stockholders.

In addition, our brokerage businesses are heavily regulated and some of our regulators require that they approve transactions which could result in a change of control, as defined by the then-applicable rules of our regulators. The requirement that this approval be obtained may prevent or delay transactions that would result in a change of control.

Further, our Long Term Incentive Plan contains provisions pursuant to which grants that are unexercisable or unvested may automatically become exercisable or vested as of the date immediately prior to certain change of control events. Additionally, change in control and employment agreements between us and our named executive officers also provide for payments in the event of certain change of control events.

66

Table of Contents

The foregoing factors, as well as the significant common stock ownership by Cantor, could impede a merger, takeover or other business combination or discourage a potential investor from making a tender offer for our common stock, which, under certain circumstances, could reduce the market value of our common stock.

Delaware law may protect decisions of our board of directors that have a different effect on holders of Class A common stock and Class B common stock.

Stockholders may not be able to challenge decisions that have an adverse effect upon holders of Class A common stock if our board of directors acts in a disinterested, informed manner with respect to these decisions, in good faith and in the belief that it is acting in the best interests of our stockholders. Delaware law generally provides that a board of directors owes an equal duty to all stockholders, regardless of class or series, and does not have separate or additional duties to either group of stockholders, subject to applicable provisions set forth in a company’s charter.

If our dividend policy is materially different than the distribution policy of BGC Holdings, upon the exchange of any BGC Holdings limited partnership interests, such BGC Holdings limited partners could receive a disproportionate interest in the aggregate distributions by BGC U.S. and BGC Global that have not been distributed by us.

To the extent BGC Holdings distributes to its limited partners a greater share of income received from BGC U.S. and BGC Global than we distribute to our stockholders, then as founding/working partners, limited partnership unit holders and/or Cantor exercise any exchange right to acquire Class A common stock or Class B common stock, as applicable, exchanging partners may receive a disproportionate interest in the aggregate distributions by BGC U.S. and BGC Global that have not been distributed by us. The reason is that the exchanging partner could receive both (1) the benefit of the distribution that have not been distributed by us from BGC U.S. and BGC Global to BGC Holdings (in the form of a distribution by BGC Holdings to its limited partners) and (2) the benefit of the distribution from BGC U.S. and BGC Global to us (in the form of a subsequent cash dividend, a greater percentage indirect interest in BGC U.S. and BGC Global following a repurchase by us or a greater value of assets following a purchase of assets with the cash that otherwise would be distributed to our stockholders). Consequently, if our dividend policy does not match the distribution policy of BGC Holdings, holders of Class A common stock and Class B common stock as of the date of an exchange could experience a reduction in their interest in the profits previously distributed by BGC U.S. and BGC Global that have not been distributed by us. Our previously described intention to match the distribution policy of BGC Holdings was superseded by a decision (which we announced on May 7, 2008) by our board of directors to provide for greater flexibility by our management. Our current dividend policy could result in distributions to our common stockholders that are different from the distributions made by BGC Holdings to its equity holders.

If we were deemed an “investment company” under the Investment Company Act as a result of our ownership of BGC U.S., BGC Global or BGC Holdings, applicable restrictions could make it impractical for us to continue our business as contemplated and could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operation.

If Cantor ceases to hold a majority of our voting power, Cantor’s interest in us could be deemed an investment security under the Investment Company Act. If we were to cease participation in the management of BGC Holdings (or if BGC Holdings, in turn, was to cease participation in the management of BGC U.S. or BGC Global) or not be deemed to have a majority of the voting power of BGC Holdings (or if BGC Holdings, in turn, was deemed not to have a majority of the voting power of BGC U.S. or BGC Global), our interest in BGC Holdings or BGC U.S. or BGC Global could be deemed an “investment security” for purposes of the Investment Company Act. If BGC Holdings ceased to participate in the management of BGC U.S. or BGC Global or be deemed not to have a majority of the voting power of BGC U.S. or BGC Global, its interest in BGC U.S. or BGC Global could be deemed an “investment security” for purposes of the Investment Company Act. Generally, an entity is an “investment company” if it owns investment securities having a value exceeding 40% of the value of its total assets (exclusive of U.S. government securities and cash items), absent an applicable exemption. We are

67

Table of Contents

a holding company and hold BGC U.S. limited partnership interests, BGC Global limited partnership interests, the BGC Holdings general partnership interest and the BGC Holdings special voting limited partnership interest, which entitles the holder thereof to remove and appoint the general partner of BGC Holdings. A determination that we hold more than 40% of our assets in investment securities could result in us being an investment company under the Investment Company Act and becoming subject to registration and other requirements of the Investment Company Act.

The Investment Company Act and the rules thereunder contain detailed prescriptions for the organization and operations of investment companies. Among other things, the Investment Company Act and the rules thereunder limit or prohibit transactions with affiliates, limit the issuance of debt and equity securities, prohibit the issuance of stock options and impose certain governance requirements. If anything were to happen that would cause us, BGC Holdings or Cantor to be deemed to be an investment company under the Investment Company Act, the Investment Company Act would limit our or its capital structure, ability to transact business with affiliates (including Cantor, BGC Holdings or us, as the case may be) and ability to compensate key employees. Therefore, if Cantor, BGC Holdings or we became subject to the Investment Company Act, it could make it impractical to continue our business, impair agreements and arrangements, and the transactions contemplated by those agreements and arrangements, between and among us, BGC Holdings, BGC U.S., BGC Global and Cantor or any combination thereof and materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Not applicable.

We have offices in the United States, Canada, Europe, United Kingdom, Latin America, Asia, Africa and the Middle East. Our principal executive offices are located at space at 499 Park Avenue, New York, New York. We also occupy a large space at 199 Water Street, New York, New York. Under the Administrative Services Agreement, we are obligated to Cantor for our pro rata portion (based on square footage used) of rental expense during the 16-year term of the lease for such spaces.

Our largest presence outside of the New York metropolitan area is in London, located at One Churchill Place, Canary Wharf.

We occupy concurrent computing centers in Rochelle Park, New Jersey and Trumbull, Connecticut. Our U.S. operations also lease office space in Chicago, Illinois, West Palm Beach and Sarasota, Florida, and Garden City, Long Island, New York. In addition to two London locations, in 2010 we signed a 14-year lease for a concurrent data center in Romford, U.K. Our foreign operations lease office space in Beijing, Copenhagen, Hong Kong, Istanbul, Johannesburg, Mexico City, Moscow, Nyon, Paris, Rio de Janeiro, São Paulo, Seoul, Singapore, Sydney, Tokyo and Toronto. We believe that our facilities are adequate for our current operations.

In the ordinary course of business, various legal actions are brought and are pending against the Company and its affiliates in the U.S. and internationally. In some of these actions, substantial amounts are claimed. The Company is also involved, from time to time, in reviews, examinations, investigations and proceedings by governmental and self-regulatory agencies (both formal and informal) regarding the Company’s business, which may result in judgments, settlements, fines, penalties, injunctions or other relief. The following generally does not include matters that the Company has pending against other parties which, if successful, would result in awards in favor of the Company or its subsidiaries.

68

Table of Contents

Employment and Competitor-Related Litigation

From time to time, the Company and its affiliates are involved in litigation, claims and arbitrations in the U.S. and internationally, relating to various employment matters, including with respect to termination of employment, hiring of employees currently or previously employed by competitors, terms and conditions of employment and other matters. In light of the competitive nature of the brokerage industry, litigation, claims and arbitration between competitors regarding employee hiring are not uncommon.

Other Matters

On February 15, 2006, the SEC issued a formal order of investigation into trading by certain inter-dealer brokers in the government and fixed income securities markets. The formal order alleges that the broker-dealers named therein, including us, (1) may have made fictitious quotations or made false or misleading statements about the prices at which U.S. Treasury or other fixed income securities would be purchased or sold, (2) may have fabricated market quotations or trading activity in U.S. Treasury or other fixed income securities to stimulate trading and to generate commissions, (3) may have engaged in “front running” or “interpositioning,” (4) may have engaged in fraudulent, deceptive or manipulative acts to induce the purchase or sale of government securities, (5) may have failed to keep and preserve certain books and records as required by the SEC and/or the U.S. Treasury and (6) may have failed to supervise with a view to preventing violations of applicable rules and regulations as required by the Exchange Act. We are cooperating in the investigation, which has been inactive for over a year. Our management believes that, based on the currently available information, the final outcome of the investigation will not have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

In August 2004, Trading Technologies International, Inc. (“TT”) commenced an action in the United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, against us. In its complaint, TT alleged that we infringed two of its patents. TT later added eSpeed International Ltd., ECCO LLC and ECCO Ware LLC as defendants. On June 20, 2007, the Court granted eSpeed’s motion for partial summary judgment on TT’s claims of infringement covering the then current versions of certain products. As a result, the remaining products at issue in the case were the versions of the eSpeed and ECCO products that have not been on the market in the U.S. since around the end of 2004. After a trial, a jury rendered a verdict that eSpeed and ECCO willfully infringed. The jury awarded TT damages in the amount of $3.5 million. Thereafter, the Court granted eSpeed’s motion for directed verdict that eSpeed’s infringement was not willful as a matter of law, and denied eSpeed’s general motions for directed verdict and for a new trial. eSpeed’s remittitur motion was conditionally granted, and TT indicated by letter that it accepted the remittitur, which would reduce the principal amount of the verdict to $2,539,468. Although ultimately the Court’s “Final Judgment in a Civil Case” contained no provision for monetary damages, TT’s motion for pre-judgment interest was granted, and interest was set at the prime rate, compounded monthly. On May 23, 2008, the Court granted TT’s motion for a permanent injunction and on June 13, 2008 denied its motion for attorneys’ fees. On July 16, 2008, TT’s costs were assessed by the Court clerk in the amount of $3,321,776 against eSpeed. eSpeed filed a motion to strike many of these costs, which a magistrate judge said on October 29, 2010 should be assessed at $381,831. We have asked the district court to reduce that amount. Both parties appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which issued an opinion on February 25, 2010, affirming the District Court on all issues presented on appeal. The mandate of the Court of Appeals was issued on April 28, 2010.

On June 9, 2010, TT filed in the District Court a “Motion to Enforce the Money Judgment.” We have opposed this motion on the ground that no money judgment was entered prior to the taking of the appeal by TT. A Magistrate Judge concluded there was no money judgment, but on its own initiative recommended the District Court amend the Final Judgment to include damages in the principal amount of $2,539,468. The issues are being briefed before the District Judge. We may be required to pay TT damages and/or certain costs. We have accrued the amount of the District Court jury’s verdict as remitted plus interest and a portion of the preliminarily assessed costs that we believe would cover the amount if any were actually awarded.

69

Table of Contents

On February 3, 2010, TT filed another civil action against the Company in the Northern District of Illinois, alleging infringement of three additional patents, U.S. Patents Nos. 7,533,056, 7,587,357, and 7,613,651, and by later amendment to the complaint No. 7,676,411, by the eSpeedometer product. On June 24, 2010, TT filed a second amended complaint to add certain of our affiliates. The Company moved to dismiss the action on jurisdictional grounds.

On August 24, 2009, Tullett Liberty Securities LLC (“Tullett Liberty”) filed a claim with Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”) dispute resolution (the “FINRA Arbitration”) in New York, New York against BGC Financial, L.P., an affiliate of BGC Partners (“BGC Financial”), one of BGC Financial’s officers, and certain persons formerly or currently employed by Tullett Liberty subsidiaries. Tullett Liberty thereafter added Tullett Prebon Americas Corp. (“Tullett Americas,” together with Tullett Liberty, the “Tullett Subsidiaries”) as a claimant, and added 35 individual employees, who were formerly employed by the Tullett Subsidiaries, as respondents. In the FINRA Arbitration, the Tullett Subsidiaries allege that BGC Financial harmed their inter-dealer brokerage business by hiring 79 of their employees, and that BGC Financial aided and abetted various alleged wrongs by the employees, engaged in unfair competition, misappropriated trade secrets and confidential information, tortiously interfered with contract and economic relationships, and violated FINRA Rules of Conduct. The Tullett Subsidiaries also alleged certain breaches of contract and duties of loyalty and fiduciary duties against the employees. BGC Financial has generally agreed to indemnify the employees. The Tullett Subsidiaries claim compensatory damages of not less than $779 million and exemplary damages of not less than $500 million. The Tullett Subsidiaries also seek costs and permanent injunctions against the defendants.

The parties stipulated to consolidate the FINRA Arbitration with five other related arbitrations (FINRA Case Nos. 09-04807, 09-04842, 09-06377, 10-00139 and 10-01265)—two arbitrations previously commenced against Tullett Liberty by certain of its former brokers now employed by BGC Financial, as well as three arbitrations commenced against BGC Financial by brokers who were previously employed by BGC Financial before returning to Tullett Liberty. FINRA did consolidate them. BGC Partners and the employee filed their Statement of Answer and BGC’s Statement of Counterclaim. Tullett Liberty responded to BGC’s Counterclaim.

On October 22, 2009, Tullett Prebon plc (“Tullett”) filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey against BGC Partners captioned Tullett Prebon plc vs. BGC Partners, Inc. (the “New Jersey Action”). In the New Jersey Action, Tullett asserted claims relating to decisions made by approximately 81 brokers to terminate their employment with the Tullett Subsidiaries and join BGC Partners’ affiliates. In its complaint, Tullett made a number of allegations against BGC Partners related to raiding, unfair competition, New Jersey RICO, and other claims arising from the brokers’ current or prospective employment by BGC Partners’ affiliates. Tullett claimed compensatory damages against BGC Partners in excess of $1 billion for various alleged injuries as well as exemplary damages. It also sought costs and an injunction against additional hirings.

In response to a BGC motion, Tullett filed its First Amended Complaint (the “Amended New Jersey Complaint”), which largely repeated the allegations of injury and the claims asserted in the initial complaint. The Amended New Jersey Complaint incorporates the damages sought in the FINRA Arbitration, repeats many of the allegations raised in the FINRA Arbitration and also references hiring of employees of Tullett affiliates by BGC Partners or BGC Partners’ affiliates overseas, for which Tullett and/or the Tullett Subsidiaries have filed suit outside of the United States, including one currently pending in the High Court in London and another commenced by a Tullett affiliate against seven of our brokers in Hong Kong, on which we may have certain indemnity obligations. In the London action, the High Court found liability for certain of BGC Partners’ actions, affirmed on appeal, and will hold a damages hearing thereafter. BGC Partners moved to dismiss the Amended New Jersey Complaint, or in the alternative, to stay the action pending the resolution of the FINRA Arbitration. In that motion, BGC Partners argued that Tullett lacked standing to pursue its claims, that the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction and that each of the causes of action in the Amended New Jersey Complaint failed to state a legally sufficient claim. On June 18, 2010, the District Court ordered that the First Amended Complaint be dismissed with prejudice. Tullett has appealed. Oral argument is tentatively scheduled for April 14, 2011. Tullett

70

Table of Contents

filed an action in the Supreme Court, New York County against three of BGC’s executives involved in the recruitment in the New York metropolitan area. Tullett has agreed to add these claims to the FINRA Arbitration. Tullett and the Company have also agreed to join Tullett’s claims against BGC Capital Markets, L.P. to the FINRA Arbitration.

BGC Partners and its affiliates intend to vigorously defend against and seek appropriate affirmative relief in the FINRA Arbitration and the other actions, and believe that they have substantial defenses to the claims asserted against them in those proceedings, believe that the damages and injunctive relief sought against them in those proceedings are unwarranted and unprecedented, and believe that Tullett Liberty, Tullett and the Tullett Subsidiaries are attempting to use the judicial and industry dispute resolution mechanisms in an effort to shift blame to BGC Partners for their own failures. However, no assurance can be given as to whether Tullett, Tullett Liberty or any of the Tullett Subsidiaries may actually succeed against either BGC Partners or any of its affiliates.

In November, 2010, our affiliates filed three proceedings against Tullett Prebon Information (C.I.) Ltd and certain of its affiliates. In these proceedings, our affiliates seek to recover hundreds of millions of dollars relating to Tullett’s theft of BGCantor Market Data’s proprietary data. BGCantor Market Data (and two predecessors in interest) seek contractual damages and two of our brokerage affiliates seek disgorgement of profits due to unfair competition.

In addition to the matters discussed above, we are a party to several pending legal proceedings and claims that have arisen during the ordinary course of business. The outcome of such matters cannot be determined with certainty; therefore, we cannot predict what the eventual loss or range of losses related to such matters will be. Management believes that, based on currently available information, the final outcome of such matters will not have a material effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

Legal reserves are established in accordance with FASB guidance on Accounting for Contingencies, when a material legal liability is both probable and reasonably estimable. Once established, reserves are adjusted when there is more information available or when an event occurs requiring a change. The outcome of such items cannot be determined with certainty; therefore, we cannot predict what the eventual loss related to such matters will be. Our management believes that, based on currently available information, the final outcome of these current pending matters will not have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations, or cash flows.

71

Table of Contents

PART II

Price Range of Class A Common Stock

Our Class A common stock is traded in the NASDAQ Global Select Market under the symbol “BGCP.” There is no public trading market for our Class B common stock which is held by Cantor and CFGM. The following table sets forth, for the fiscal quarters indicated, the high and low sales prices per share of our Class A common stock, as reported in the consolidated transaction reporting system.

The Company declared quarterly dividends of $0.14, $0.14, $0.14 and $0.14 for the first, second, third and fourth quarters of 2010, respectively.

On March 14, 2011, the last reported closing price of our Class A common stock on the NASDAQ Global Select Market was $8.94. As of March 14, 2011, there were 326 holders of record of our Class A common stock and 2 holders of record of our Class B common stock.

Dividend Policy and Partnership and Equity Repurchases

Our board of directors has authorized a dividend policy which provides that we expect to pay not less than 75% of our post-tax distributable earnings per fully diluted share (defined below) as cash dividends to all common stockholders, with the balance of such distributable earnings to be available to repurchase shares of our common stock or purchase BGC Holdings limited partnership interests or other equity interests in our subsidiaries, including from Cantor or our executive officers. We calculate our “post-tax distributable earnings” generally as our GAAP income (loss) from continuing operations before minority interest and income taxes and excluding certain non-cash compensation and other non-cash expenses as well as non-cash undistributed income or non-cash losses from our equity investments, adjusted to assume that such earnings were taxed at the same effective tax rate as BGC Partners, Inc. (please see below for a more detailed definition of post-tax distributable earnings).

Our board of directors and our audit committee have authorized repurchases of our common stock and purchases of BGC Holdings limited partnership interests or other equity interests in our subsidiaries as part of this policy, including those held by Cantor or our executive officers, at the volume weighted average price, to the extent available, of such securities on the date on which such purchase or repurchase is made. As of March 3, 2011, we had $97.5 million remaining under this authorization and may continue to actively make

72

Table of Contents

repurchases or cease to make repurchases, from time to time. We expect to pay such dividends, if and when declared by our board of directors and our audit committee, on a quarterly basis. The dividend to stockholders is expected to be calculated based on post-tax distributable earnings allocated to BGC Partners, Inc. and generated over the fiscal quarter ending prior to the record date for the dividend.

We are a holding company with no direct operations and therefore we are able to pay dividends only from our available cash on hand and funds received from distributions from BGC U.S. and BGC Global. The declaration, payment, timing and amount of any future dividends payable by us will be at the sole discretion of our board of directors. Our ability to pay dividends may also be limited by regulatory considerations as well as covenants contained in future financing or other agreements. In addition, under Delaware law, dividends may be payable only out of surplus, which is our net assets minus our liabilities and our capital, or, if we have no surplus, out of our net profits for the fiscal year in which the dividend is declared and/or the preceding fiscal year. Accordingly, any unanticipated accounting, tax or other charges against net income may adversely affect our ability to declare dividends. While we intend to declare and pay dividends quarterly, there can be no assurance that our board of directors will declare dividends at all or on a regular basis or that the amount of dividend will not change.

Certain Definitions

“Revenues for distributable earnings,” “pre-tax distributable earnings” and “post-tax distributable earnings,” are supplemental measures of operating performance that are used by management to evaluate the financial performance of the Company and its subsidiaries. BGC Partners believes that distributable earnings best reflects the operating earnings generated by the Company on a consolidated basis and are the earnings which management considers available for distribution to BGC Partners, Inc. and its common stockholders, as well as to holders of BGC Holdings partnership units during any period.

As compared with “income (loss) from operations before income taxes,” “net income (loss) for fully diluted shares,” and “fully diluted earnings (loss) per share,” all prepared in accordance with GAAP, distributable earnings calculations primarily exclude certain non-cash compensation and other expenses which generally do not involve the receipt or outlay of cash by the Company, which do not dilute existing stockholders, and which do not have economic consequences, as described below.

Revenues for distributable earnings are defined as GAAP revenues excluding the impact of BGC Partners, Inc.’s non-cash earnings or losses related to its equity investments, such as in Aqua Securities, L.P. and ELX Futures, L.P., and its holding company general partner, ELX Futures Holdings LLC.

Pre-tax distributable earnings are defined as GAAP income (loss) from operations before income taxes excluding items that are primarily non-cash, non-dilutive, and non-economic items, such as:

Distributable earnings calculations also exclude charges related to purchases, cancellations or redemptions of partnership interests and certain one-time or non-recurring items, if any.

73

Table of Contents

Since distributable earnings are calculated on a pre-tax basis, management intends to also report “post-tax distributable earnings” and “post-tax distributable earnings per fully diluted share”:

Each quarter, the dividend to common stockholders is expected to be determined by the Company’s Board of Directors with reference to post-tax distributable earnings per share. In addition to the Company’s quarterly dividend to common stockholders, BGC Partners expects to pay a pro rata distribution of net income to BGC Holdings founding/working partner and other units, including REUs, RPUs, PSUs and PSIs, and to Cantor for its noncontrolling interest. The amount of all of these payments is expected to be determined using the above definition of pretax distributable earnings per share.

Certain employees who are holders of RSUs are granted pro-rata payments equivalent to the amount of dividends paid to common stockholders. Under GAAP, dividend equivalents on RSUs are required to be taken as a compensation charge in the period paid. However, to the extent that they represent cash payments made from the prior period’s distributable earnings, they do not dilute existing stockholders and are therefore excluded from the calculation of distributable earnings.

Distributable earnings is not meant to be an exact measure of cash generated by operations and available for distribution, nor should it be considered in isolation or as an alternative to cash flow from operations or income (loss) for fully diluted shares. The Company views distributable earnings as a metric that is not necessarily indicative of liquidity or the cash available to fund its operations.

Pre- and post-tax distributable earnings are not intended to replace the Company’s presentation of GAAP financial results. However, management believes that they help provide investors with a clearer understanding of BGC Partners’ financial performance and offer useful information to both management and investors regarding certain financial and business trends related to the Company’s financial condition and results of operations. Management believes that distributable earnings and the GAAP measures of financial performance should be considered together.

74

Table of Contents

The following table sets forth selected consolidated financial data for the last five years ended December 31, 2010. This selected consolidated financial data should be read in conjunction with “Item 7.—Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and our Consolidated Financial Statements and the accompanying Notes thereto included elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Amounts in thousands, except per share data.

75

Table of Contents

The following discussion of BGC Partners, Inc. financial condition and results of operations should be read together with BGC Partners, Inc. consolidated financial statements and notes to those statements, included elsewhere in this document. When used herein, the terms “BGC Partners,” “BGC” the “Company,” “we,” “us” and “our” refer to BGC Partners, Inc., including consolidated subsidiaries.

This Form 10-K contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”). Such statements are based upon current expectations that involve risks and uncertainties. Any statements contained herein that are not statements of historical fact may be deemed to be forward-looking statements. For example, words such as “may,” “will,” “should,” “estimates,” “predicts,” “potential,” “continue,” “strategy,” “believes,” “anticipates,” “plans,” “expects,” “intends” and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements.

Our actual results and the outcome and timing of certain events may differ significantly from the expectations discussed in the forward-looking statements. Factors that might cause or contribute to such a discrepancy include, but are not limited to:

76

Table of Contents

The foregoing risks and uncertainties, as well as those risks discussed under the heading “Item 7A.—Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Risk” and elsewhere in this Form 10-K, may cause actual results to differ materially from the forward-looking statements. The information included herein is given as of the filing date of this Form 10-K with the SEC, and future events or circumstances could differ significantly from these forward-looking statements. The Company does not undertake to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

This discussion summarizes the significant factors affecting our results of operations and financial condition during the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009. This discussion is provided to increase the understanding of, and should be read in conjunction with, our consolidated financial statements and the accompanying notes thereto included elsewhere in this Report.

Overview and Business Environment

BGC Partners is a leading global intermediary to the wholesale financial markets, specializing in the brokering of a broad range of financial products, including fixed income securities, interest rate swaps, foreign exchange, equities, equity derivatives, credit derivatives, commodities, futures, structured products and other instruments. BGC Partners also provides a full range of services, including trade execution, broker-dealer services, clearing, processing, information, and other back office services to a broad range of financial and non-financial institutions. BGC Partners’ integrated platform is designed to provide flexibility to customers with regard to price discovery, execution and processing of transactions, and enables them to use voice, hybrid, or, where available, fully electronic brokerage services in connection with transactions executed either over-the-counter (“OTC”) or through an exchange. Through its eSpeed and BGC Trader brands, BGC Partners uses its technology to operate multiple buyer, multiple seller real-time electronic marketplaces for many of the world’s most liquid capital markets. BGC Partners’ neutral platform, reliable network, straight-through processing and superior products make it the trusted source for electronic trading for the world’s largest financial

77

Table of Contents

firms. Through its BGCantor Market Data brand, the Company also offers globally distributed and innovative market data and analysis products for numerous financial instruments and markets. BGC Partners’ customers include many of the world’s largest banks, broker-dealers, investment banks, trading firms, hedge funds, governments and investment firms. Named after fixed income trading innovator B. Gerald Cantor, BGC Partners has offices in 24 cities, located in New York and London, as well as in Aspen, Beijing, Chicago, Copenhagen, Dubai, Garden City, Hong Kong, Istanbul, Johannesburg, Mexico City, Moscow, Nyon, Paris, Rio de Janeiro, São Paulo, Sarasota, Seoul, Singapore, Sydney, Tokyo, Toronto and West Palm Beach.

The financial intermediary sector has been a competitive area that has had strong revenue growth over the past decade due to several factors. One factor is the increasing use of derivatives to manage risk or to take advantage of the anticipated direction of a market by allowing users to protect gains and/or guard against losses in the price of underlying assets without having to buy or sell the underlying assets. Derivatives are often used to mitigate the risks associated with interest rate movements, equity ownership, changes in the value of foreign currency, credit defaults by corporate and sovereign debtors and changes in the prices of commodity products. Over the past decade, demand from financial institutions, financial services intermediaries and large corporations have increased volumes in the wholesale derivatives market, thereby increasing the business opportunity for financial intermediaries.

Another key factor in the growth of the financial intermediary sector over the past decade has been the increase in the number of new products. As market participants and their customers strive to mitigate risk, new types of equity and fixed income securities, futures, options and other financial instruments are developed. These new securities and derivatives are often not immediately ready for more liquid and standardized electronic markets, and generally increase the need for trading and require broker-assisted execution.

From the second half of 2008, and through the first three quarters of 2009, the onset of the credit crisis and ensuing global economic slowdown resulted in an industry-wide slowdown in growth or outright decline in the volumes for many of the OTC and listed products we broker. Beginning in December 2009, and continuing through the end of 2010, industry wide monthly volumes for many of the products we broker once again increased year-over-year. These industry volumes are generally good proxies for the volumes in our Rates, Foreign Exchange, and Equities and Other Asset Classes brokerage businesses.

BGC Growth Drivers

As a wholesale intermediary, our business is driven by several key drivers in addition to those listed above. These include: overall industry volumes in the markets in which we broker, the size and productivity of our front-office headcount (sales people and brokers alike), regulatory issues, and the percentage of our revenues related to fully electronic brokerage.

Many of these main drivers had a positive impact on our results in 2010 compared to the year earlier.

Overall Market Volumes and Volatility

Trading volume is driven by a number of items, including the level of issuance for financial instruments, the price volatility of these financial instruments, overall macro-economic conditions, the creation and adoption of new financial products, the regulatory environment, and the introduction and adoption of new trading technologies. In general, increased price volatility increases the demand for hedging instruments, including many of the cash and derivative products which we broker.

Rates Volumes

BGC’s Rates business is particularly influenced by the level of sovereign debt issuance globally, and during 2010, this issuance continued to grow substantially. For example, according to the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association (“SIFMA”), gross U.S. Treasury issuance, excluding bills, during 2010 increased

78

Table of Contents

by approximately 5% compared to 2009, and was over 2.2 times the level for 2008. Largely as a result of this increase, the U.S. Federal Reserve reported that U.S. Treasury volumes traded by primary dealers increased by 25% year-over-year.

Analysts and economists expect sovereign debt issuance to remain at these high levels for the foreseeable future as governments finance their future deficits and roll over their sizable existing debt. For instance, according to the Congressional Budget Office (the “CBO”), U.S. federal debt will be 62% of GDP at the end of fiscal year 2010, versus 36% at the end of fiscal year 2007. The CBO currently estimates that U.S. federal debt will remain at or above these levels for at least the next decade. Similarly, the European Commission says that, in the aggregate, European Union (the “EU”) government debt as a percent of GDP will increase from 59% in 2007 to 83% by 2012. For certain EU countries, the Commission expects this figure to be over 100% for the next few years.

Credit Volumes

The cash portion of BGC’s Credit business is impacted by the level of global corporate bond issuance, while both the cash and credit derivatives sides of this business are impacted by sovereign and corporate issuance. BGC’s Credit revenues decreased in 2010 compared to 2009, reflecting an industry-wide softening in corporate bond and credit derivative activity. For example, TRACE eligible corporate securities volumes were down 3.4% year-over-year. Although overall credit default swap (“CDS”) market activity remains below its 2008 peak, the notional value of CDS on government bonds increased due to concern by market participants over the large deficits facing various governments. According to the Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation (“DTCC”), the gross notional amount of credit derivatives outstanding increased by less than 2 percent year-over-year in 2010, while the corresponding figure for single-name sovereign CDS increased by over 17 percent. Because of BGC’s strength in this area, revenues from our sovereign CDS desks outpaced the overall sovereign CDS market, with our overall revenues from Credit e-broking more than doubling in 2010 as compared to 2009. The uncertainty caused by these sovereign fiscal issues also positively impacted volumes, and thus our revenues in our Rates and Foreign Exchange (“FX”) businesses.

Foreign Exchange Volumes

The overall FX market grew by double digits year-over-year in 2010, as credit is returning for many local banks that trade foreign exchange, particularly in emerging markets. CLS Group (“CLS”), which settles the majority of bank-to-bank spot and forward FX transactions, reports that its average daily value traded grew by 26% year-over-year in 2010, after being down 12% for the full year 2009. With respect to BGC’s overall FX business, our volumes and revenues grew even faster than the corresponding industry figures in 2010.

Equity-Related Volumes and Volatility

BGC’s revenues from Equities and Other Asset Classes were positively impacted in 2010 due in part to increases in equity- and energy-related volumes and volatility. For example, during 2010, while overall U.S. cash equities volumes were lower year-on-year, equity derivatives volumes (including indices) as reported by the Options Clearing Corporation, Eurex, and Euronext were up by approximately 8%, 7% and 18%, respectively. Average daily energy volume at the Chicago Mercantile Exchange including OTC products was up 11% from the year earlier period while ICE OTC energy average daily commissions increased by 15%. With respect to BGC’s overall Equities and Other Asset Classes business, our volumes and revenues grew faster than the corresponding industry figures.

Hybrid and Fully Electronic Trading

Historically, e-broking growth has led to higher margins and greater profits over time for exchanges and wholesale financial intermediaries alike, even if overall company revenues remain consistent. This is largely because fewer front-office employees are needed to process the same amount of volume as trading becomes automated. Over time, electronification of exchange-traded and OTC markets has also generally led to volumes

79

Table of Contents

increasing faster than commissions decline, and thus often an overall increase in the rate of growth in revenues. BGC has been a pioneer in creating and encouraging hybrid and fully electronic trading, and continually works with its customers to expand such trading across more asset classes and geographies.

Outside of U.S. Treasuries and spot FX, the banks and broker-dealers who dominate the OTC markets had generally been hesitant in adopting e-broking. However, in recent years, hybrid and fully electronic inter-dealer OTC markets for products including CDS indices, FX options, and most recently interest rate swaps have sprung up as banks and dealers have become more open to e-broking and as firms like BGC have invested in the kinds of technology favored by our clients.

The combination of more market acceptance of hybrid and fully electronic trading and BGC Partners’ competitive advantage in terms of technology and experience has contributed to our strong gains in e-broking. During 2010, we continued to invest in hybrid and fully electronic technology broadly across our product categories. For example, since the beginning of 2009, we have more than doubled the number of desks that offer our e-broking product BGC Trader and more than tripled the number of desks that offer another product called Volume Match. Now, approximately 75 of our 200 desks offer hybrid and fully electronic trading, and we expect this number to continue to rise.

This is largely why BGC’s fully electronic volumes for 2010 were up 35.7% and annual revenues related to fully electronic trading increased by 30.7% year-on-year. E-broking represented 9.4% of brokerage revenues in 2010, compared with 8.2% in the year earlier period.

Our growth in revenues from e-broking was broad based across Rates, Credit, and FX, and was generated by multiple desks in Europe, the Americas, and Asia. As we continue to benefit from the tailwind of massive global government debt issuance, and as we roll out BGC Trader and Volume Match to more of our desks, we expect our strong fully electronic trading performance to continue.

Regulatory Environment

In addition, regulators and legislators in the U.S. and EU continue to craft new laws and regulations for the global OTC derivatives markets, including, most recently, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. The new rules and proposals for rules have mainly called for additional transparency, position limits and collateral or capital requirements, as well as for central clearing of most standardized derivatives. We believe that uncertainty around the final form such new rules might take may have negatively impacted trading volumes in certain markets in which we broker. We believe that it is too early to comment on specific aspects of the U.S. regulations as rules are still being created, and much too early to comment on laws not yet passed in Europe.

Hiring and Acquisitions

Another key driver of our revenue growth is front-office headcount. We believe that our strong technology platform and unique partnership structure have enabled us to use both acquisitions and recruiting to profitably increase our front-office staff at a faster rate than our largest competitors over the past year and since the formation of BGC in 2004.

BGC Partners has invested significantly to capitalize on the current business environment through acquisitions, technology spending and the hiring of new brokers. The business climate for these acquisitions has been competitive, and it is expected that these conditions will persist for the foreseeable future. BGC Partners has been able to attract businesses and brokers to its platform as it believes they recognize that BGC Partners has the scale, technology, experience and expertise to succeed in the current business environment.

As of December 31, 2010, our front-office headcount was up by 9.8% year-on-year to 1,705 brokers and salespeople. For 2010, average revenue generated per broker or salesperson was approximately $785,000, down approximately 1.8% from 2009 when it was approximately $799,000.

80

Table of Contents

Our revenue per front-office employee tends to decline following periods of rapid headcount growth. This is because our newer revenue producers generally achieve higher productivity levels in their second year with the Company. We expect the productivity of our newer brokers throughout the Company to improve, especially in our newest offices in Brazil, Russia, and China as well as our new employees who joined with respect to our recent acquisition of Mint Partners in the UK.

The laws and regulations passed or proposed on both sides of the Atlantic concerning OTC trading seem likely to favor increased use of technology by all market participants, and are likely to accelerate the adoption of both hybrid and fully electronic trading. We believe these developments will favor the larger inter-dealer brokers over smaller, non-public ones, as the smaller ones generally do not have the financial wherewithal to invest the necessary sums in technology. We believe this will lead to further consolidation in our industry, and thus further allow us to profitably grow our front-office headcount.

Financial Overview

Revenues

Our revenues are derived primarily from brokerage commissions charged for either agency or matched principal transactions, fees charged for market data and analytics products, fees from software solutions, fees from related parties and interest income.

Brokerage

We earn revenues from inter-dealer voice brokerage services on both an agency and matched principal basis. In agency transactions, we charge a commission for connecting buyers and sellers and assisting in the negotiation of the price and other material terms of the transaction. After all material terms of a transaction are agreed upon, we identify the buyer and seller to each other and leave them to settle the trade directly. Principal transaction revenues are primarily derived from matched principal transactions, whereby revenues are earned on the spread between the buy and the sell price of the brokered security, commodity or derivative. Customers either see the buy or sell price on a screen or are given this information over the phone. The brokerage fee is then added to the buy or sell price, which represents the spread we earn as principal transactions revenues. On a limited basis, we enter into unmatched principal transactions to facilitate a customer’s execution needs for transactions initiated by such customers. We also provide market data products for selected financial institutions.

81

Table of Contents

We offer our brokerage services in four broad product categories: Rates, Credit, FX and Equities and Other Asset Classes. The chart below details brokerage revenues by product category and by voice/hybrid versus fully electronic (in thousands):