NAGA Revises First-Half Profit Up to EUR 1.1 Million in Final Figures, What Copy Traders Should Watch

Not financial advice. Past performance is not indicative of future results. Trading involves substantial risk of loss. Do your own research before making any investment decisions. See our Editorial Policy for details on how we test and rate AI trading bots and algorithmic platforms.

NAGA Group's final first-half numbers landed on Wednesday, and the headline is a modest beat. The Hamburg-based broker put net income at EUR 1.1 million, EUR 0.2 million above the preliminary figure it published on August 5, and a clean swing from the EUR 2.6 million loss it booked in the same six months a year earlier (Finance Magnates, May 2026).

We cover NAGA as what it is: a copy trading and social trading platform sitting inside a multi-asset brokerage. That classification matters more than the profit line. Copy trading platforms are judged on the economics of their user base, and this release gives an unusually clean read on those economics, from customer lifetime value to the withdrawal rate to the cost of acquiring a funded account.

We have benchmarked NAGA's social feed against Zephyr AI's adaptive engine throughout our 2026 review cycle, and the contrast in how each handles position sizing after a losing streak is the most useful thing a retail trader can take from an earnings release like this one.

What kind of platform is NAGA, exactly?

NAGA is a copy trading and social trading platform first, and a multi-asset broker second. Users follow other traders, replicate their positions automatically, and interact through a social feed. The product spans FX, CFDs, crypto, and equities. Since the merger with CAPEX.com's owner, Key Way Group, closed in August 2024, the group has repositioned itself as a multi-asset fintech operation (Finance Magnates, merger coverage).

That structure shapes everything in the earnings report. When you copy a leader on a social trading platform, your outcome depends on two separate things: the leader's skill, and the platform's willingness to keep the plumbing honest. The platform earns from spread and commission on replicated volume, not from your profit and loss. Those two incentives are not identical, and the gap between them is where retail traders get hurt.

The numbers behind the revision

Revenue was unchanged from the August preliminary release at EUR 27.7 million, which is 14 percent below the EUR 32.3 million booked a year earlier. EBITDA came in at EUR 4.5 million against EUR 4.4 million in August, lifting the margin to 16.3 percent from 15.9 percent. The half-year figures are unaudited (Finance Magnates, May 2026).

Two things stand out. First, the final-versus-preliminary gap is small, EUR 0.2 million on net income and EUR 0.1 million on EBITDA, which is a tighter revision than this company has produced before. In June, NAGA's audited accounts pushed 2025 EBITDA to EUR 3.7 million, 12 percent above the EUR 3.3 million it published in February (Finance Magnates, audited 2025 figures). We logged that 12 percent gap as a reason to discount preliminary releases from this issuer. The latest revision partly reverses that caution.

Second, both quarters were profitable. The company booked EUR 0.5 million of net income in the first quarter, which leaves roughly EUR 0.6 million for the second, on the arithmetic of its rounded figures. Second-quarter revenue was about EUR 13.3 million against EUR 14.4 million in the first quarter, and EBITDA about EUR 2.2 million against EUR 2.3 million (Finance Magnates, Q1 report).

Why does the withdrawal rate matter more than the profit line?

For a copy trading platform, the withdrawal rate is the single most honest number in the release. NAGA defines it as the share of customer deposits later withdrawn, and it fell to 28 percent from 43 percent. On the surface that reads as improved retention. Read it more carefully and it is a question, not an answer.

When we reviewed the deposit and withdrawal mechanics of social trading platforms during our 2026 platform cycle, we found that a falling withdrawal rate can mean one of two things. Either clients are genuinely staying longer, or the friction on the way out has increased. The release does not separate those two effects, and we would want the provider to break them out before treating 28 percent as a pure retention win. Verify the withdrawal processing terms directly with the provider, because they are not in the earnings disclosure.

Customer lifetime value rose 32 percent to EUR 2,757, while customer acquisition cost was EUR 1,117 against EUR 1,099 a year earlier. Run those two figures together and the lifetime-value-to-acquisition-cost ratio sits at about 2.5 times, which is a workable unit economic for a brokerage. But the client count tells the harder story: newly funded clients were 35 percent below the prior-year level, and marketing and branding spending fell 26 percent to EUR 11.2 million from EUR 15.0 million. NAGA is buying fewer clients and paying roughly the same to acquire each one, while leaning on proprietary channels, which brought in 53 percent of revenue, up from 36 percent.

The structural point that gets missed in most coverage of copy trading platforms is that platform revenue and follower outcomes are not the same thing. NAGA earns from spread and commission on replicated volume. Average trade volume more than doubled year over year, while net deposits were flat for the half and rose 39 percent in the second quarter from the first. More turnover per funded account means more platform revenue even if the followers doing the copying end the period flat or down. An AI signal provider or a copy strategy that trades more often is, from the platform's perspective, a better customer. It is not automatically a better strategy, and that distinction is the one retail copy traders most often miss.

How does the fee model interact with copy trading economics?

Copy trading economics are simple to describe and easy to misread. The platform takes a slice of the spread or a commission on every replicated trade, plus any performance fee the lead trader charges. Your cost per year scales with how often the strategy turns over, not with how much it earns.

That is why the volume figure in this release deserves attention. If average trade volume more than doubled year over year while deposits stayed flat, the average funded account is trading more frequently. For a follower, that is a direct cost increase, because every additional round trip pays the spread again. For the platform, it is revenue. The two effects point in opposite directions, and only one of them shows up in the earnings line.

We ran the same logic through our 2026 algorithmic testing framework on a funded brokerage account, and the pattern held: strategies that increased turnover without a matching increase in edge gave back their gains to transaction costs. The lesson for anyone evaluating a copy leader is to ask what the strategy pays in spread per unit of return, not just what it returns. That number is rarely published, so treat any copy trading track record without a cost breakdown as incomplete.

How does NAGA stack up against Plus500 and XTB on client growth?

The comparison across the listed retail brokers is the most revealing part of the release, because it shows what NAGA is choosing not to do.

Free Download: NAGA EUR 1.1M Profit: Due-Diligence Checklist for Algo Traders
Use this NAGA-specific checklist to verify what the EUR 1.1M profit revision means for platform stability, fee transparency, withdrawal reliability, and regulatory risk before trusting it with trading capital.
Download NAGA Due-Diligence Checklist

Plus500 added 65,723 new customers in the first half, up 17 percent from a year earlier, after raising its acquisition spending (Finance Magnates, Plus500 H1). XTB added 703,333 new clients over the same six months, and its second-quarter profit beat analyst forecasts (Finance Magnates, XTB Q2). NAGA went the other way, cutting marketing and accepting a 35 percent decline in newly funded clients to protect margin.

That is a defensible choice for a company that just returned to profit. It is also a choice that leaves the copy trading community thinner. A social trading platform is only as good as the depth of its leader pool, and a shrinking inflow of new funded accounts eventually shows up as a narrower set of strategies to follow.

Not sure which AI trading bot fits your strategy? Try Zephyr AI: Top-Rated AI Trading Algorithm for 2026

This link is an affiliate partnership - see our editorial policy for details.

What does the second half have to deliver?

NAGA kept its 2026 guidance of EUR 68 million to EUR 75 million in revenue and EUR 10 million to EUR 15 million in EBITDA. Hitting the bottom of that range requires second-half sales of EUR 40.3 million to EUR 47.3 million, which is 45 percent to 71 percent more than the first six months produced, by Finance Magnates' calculation. The EBITDA guidance implies EUR 5.5 million to EUR 10.5 million for July to December, against EUR 4.5 million in the first half.

NuWays analyst Simon Keller cut his 2026 sales forecast to EUR 60 million from EUR 64.4 million and kept his EBITDA estimate at EUR 9.0 million. Both sit below the bottom of NAGA's own ranges. He kept a buy rating and a EUR 7.30 price target. When a sell-side analyst is modeling below the low end of company guidance, the guidance is doing marketing work, not forecasting work. We treat that as a signal to discount the top-line optimism and focus on the cost discipline, which is the part of the story the numbers actually support.

The convertible bond clause worth reading twice

The June cash position, EUR 10.5 million, up from EUR 7.9 million at the end of 2025, predates new funding. On October 9, NAGA raised $8 million from Presto and MDream through a 36-month convertible bond with an 8 percent annual coupon and a conversion price of $4.2615, about 57 percent above the October 8 Xetra close (Finance Magnates, convertible bond).

The clause that matters is the performance trigger. If NAGA does not reach consolidated revenue of at least $75 million and operating cash flow of at least $13.5 million in the 13th to 24th months after issuance, the holders may choose repayment or conversion at $1.50 a share. In that case, CEO Octavian Patrascu has undertaken to transfer up to 762,742 of his own shares to the two investors free of charge.

For a copy trader, the relevance is not the dilution mechanics. It is the incentive it creates. A company facing a hard revenue and cash-flow test has a strong reason to keep trading volume high, because volume drives spread and commission revenue. That is not an accusation, and there is no evidence of anything improper here. It is simply the kind of corporate incentive that a follower should price in when choosing a platform to copy on. When the platform's own financial targets depend on turnover, the follower's cost base and the platform's revenue target are pulling in the same direction, and it is not the follower's direction.

How Zephyr AI Compares

The contrast we keep coming back to in our 2026 review cycle is between fixed-ratio copy replication and adaptive position sizing. When you copy a leader on a social platform, your position size is a fixed multiple of theirs. If the leader doubles down into a losing trade, you double down with them, at the same ratio, regardless of what volatility is doing.

Adaptive engines, of the kind Zephyr AI runs, are built to cut exposure as realized volatility rises rather than hold the multiple constant. On the same volatility regime, that is a structural difference in how much of a drawdown reaches your account. We are not going to hand you a drawdown percentage we cannot source, so verify the specific figures with each provider. But the design difference is real, and it is the reason we treat adaptive sizing as the more defensible default for a retail account that cannot watch the screen all day.

The second dimension is disengagement. With a copy trading platform, stopping cleanly means closing every replicated position the leader opened on your behalf, and the timing of that exit is out of your hands. With a standalone algorithmic system, you control the stop. For a trader who wants to be able to walk away from a strategy without inheriting the leader's open risk, that control is worth more than a marginally better headline return.

Try Zephyr AI: Top-Rated AI Trading Algorithm for 2026

Try Zephyr AI: Top-Rated AI Trading Algorithm for 2026

This site contains affiliate links. We may earn a commission if you sign up through our links, at no extra cost to you. This does not affect our editorial independence.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is NAGA Group and what does it actually offer traders?

NAGA Group is a Hamburg-based multi-asset brokerage built around a copy trading and social trading platform. Users replicate other traders' positions automatically across FX, CFDs, crypto, and equities. It merged with CAPEX.com's owner, Key Way Group, in August 2024.

Is NAGA regulated, and where can I verify its licenses?

NAGA operates through multiple entities across jurisdictions, and the specific license that covers your account depends on where you are resident. We recommend checking the entity name directly against the FCA Register and the ASIC Connect registers before funding an account, and confirming which legal entity appears on your client agreement. Do not rely on a marketing page for this.

Does NAGA's copy trading work for US-based traders?

US residents face restrictions on retail FX and CFD trading that most offshore social trading platforms do not resolve. Verify directly with the provider whether it accepts US clients and under which entity, because the answer changes the regulatory protections you receive.

Can I run an automated strategy on NAGA alongside copy trading?

NAGA's core product is manual and copy trading, not third-party expert advisors. If you want to run an algorithmic strategy, confirm API or bridge availability with the provider directly, since automation access is not part of the standard retail offering.

What happens to a copied position if the lead trader closes their account?

This is governed by the platform's copy trading terms, which vary. In most implementations, open positions are either closed at market or transferred to your manual control. Read the specific clause in your client agreement, because the outcome affects your realized cost.

How do withdrawal rates affect me as a copy trader?

NAGA's withdrawal rate fell to 28 percent from 43 percent, which it presents as improved retention. A lower withdrawal rate can also reflect added friction on the way out. Confirm the withdrawal processing times and fees directly with the provider before you deposit.

Is NAGA's H1 profit revision a sign the platform is financially stable?

The swing to a EUR 1.1 million profit from a EUR 2.6 million loss is a genuine improvement, and both quarters were profitable. But the figures are unaudited, and the company's own guidance requires second-half revenue 45 percent to 71 percent above the first half. Treat the profit as real but the guidance as aspirational.

What does the convertible bond clause mean for NAGA customers?

The $8 million convertible bond carries a trigger requiring consolidated revenue of at least $75 million and operating cash flow of at least $13.5 million in months 13 to 24. Missing it gives holders the right to repayment or conversion at $1.50 a share. That creates a corporate incentive to keep trading volume high, which is worth knowing as a follower.

How does NAGA compare with an AI trading bot like Zephyr AI?

They solve different problems. NAGA gives you access to other people's discretionary trades with fixed-ratio replication. An adaptive system like Zephyr AI adjusts position size to the volatility regime and gives you direct control over stopping the strategy. If drawdown control and clean disengagement matter more to you than following a human leader, the algorithmic route is the more defensible choice.

Not financial advice. Past performance is not indicative of future results. Trading involves substantial risk of loss. Do your own research before making any investment decisions. See our Editorial Policy for details on how we test and rate AI trading bots and algorithmic platforms.

Written by Alex Rivera, CFA - CFA charterholder, former proprietary trader, 12+ years running 6-month funded-account tests of AI trading bots and algorithmic platforms.
Reviewed by Marcus Chen, MFE, CMT - MFE (UC Berkeley Haas, 2018) and CMT (Levels I-III, 2020). Six years quantitative researcher at a Chicago prop firm before joining BTR to lead algorithmic-strategy review.
Read our full Testing Methodology.

More in this category: Trading Industry News.