The eight categories and their weights
Every broker is scored 0 to 10 in each category. The eight scores are weighted and added, so the maximum is 100. 75 brokers carry a score today.
| Category | Weight | Share of the rating | Maximum points |
|---|---|---|---|
| Trading Costs | 2.5x | 25% | 25 |
| Trading Experience | 2x | 20% | 20 |
| Trust | 1.5x | 15% | 15 |
| Trading Platform | 1.5x | 15% | 15 |
| Customer Service | 1x | 10% | 10 |
| Range of Markets | 0.5x | 5% | 5 |
| Education | 0.5x | 5% | 5 |
| Funding | 0.5x | 5% | 5 |
| All eight | 10x | 100% | 100 |
The rating measures a retail forex and CFD trader's experience and is cost weighted: Trading Costs and Trading Experience carry 45 of the 100 points between them, which is why a multi-asset broker can score lower here than on a general investing site.
A published rating may include a disclosed editorial adjustment. Where one applies, the broker's review states the category-weighted score, the published rating and the size of the adjustment.
When two brokers publish the same rating, we order them by their score in the heaviest-weighted category, Trading Costs, and if that is also equal, the next category decides in weight order: Trading Experience, Trust, Trading Platform, Customer Service, Range of Markets, Education, and Funding. A category we did not score a broker on ranks below a scored one in the tie-break.
CompareForexBrokers Methodology
We have reviewed 59 established forex and CFD brokers in our global comparison table, and this number continues to grow with a major focus on firms that are regulated and active in major global markets. While most brokers’ product range is similar across the globe, there are occasional differences due to regulatory and even licensing limitations. For this reason, our reviews are designed to reflect the regulatory standards and trading conditions that apply to the region we review.
Regulation is assessed on a regional basis, with priority given to brokers authorised by well-recognised regulators. This includes the FCA in the UK, ASIC in Australia, CySEC and other recognised EU regulators in Europe, the NFA and CFTC in the United States, CIRO and provincial regulators in Canada, the DFSA, CMA and ADGM in the UAE, and the FMA in New Zealand.
In limited cases, we may include brokers based offshore for certain regions. This only occurs where the broker has an established operating history, a strong reputation, and credible regulatory oversight in at least one recognised jurisdiction. When including offshore brokers for the jurisdiction being reviewed, we always clarify that the broker is not directly regulated in that region. However, in some cases, we find their benefits compelling.
While we do review unregulated brokers, we have yet to formally recommend any. We believe there are no benefits that outweigh their risks (whether real or imagined).
Our coverage is deepest in Australia and the United Kingdom. We also maintain substantial coverage of Canada, the United States, and the UAE, with growing focus on Thailand. Other regions, including the European Union and parts of Asia such as Malaysia, are also covered where broker offerings and regulation meet our standards.
Our Scoring System
Our comparison of forex brokers is the work of a team of traders and industry experts. It draws on our 2026 execution test, Ross Collins’s spread tests, the live UK accounts we opened at 27 brokers, and research into what each broker publishes. We use a model with eight weighted criteria to formulate our comparisons.
How this method developed over the years the site has been running is set out in the Company History.
The rules the team works to while applying this method are set out in the Editorial Policy and Guidelines.
The results this method produced for the current year are published as the Forex Broker Awards 2026.
On this page, you’ll learn what factors we use to score each of these criteria, to make up our overall broker score. The weights themselves are in the table at the top of this page, and I’d keep that table in view as you read, since every category below maps back to it.
The rating is built for retail forex and CFD traders, and cost carries nearly half of it. That weighting reflects the reality that spreads and commissions dominate an active trader’s expenses, so a broker that keeps those low delivers more of what you need if you trade often. The model deliberately does not measure suitability for long-term investing, share dealing, or the depth of research a buy-and-hold client might value. In my view, this is the distinction to hold onto when you read our scores: a multi-asset broker can score lower here than on a general investing site, because the focus stays on frequent, cost-sensitive trading.
How We Collect Data and Test Brokers
Before starting, it helps to name the tests behind our figures: our 2026 execution test and Ross Collins’s spread tests. I mention them up front so you know which numbers are measured rather than broker-published.
Our writers are experienced traders themselves, so they understand exactly what matters most when choosing a broker. While we gather information from a broker’s own website, we don’t rely on this alone. We opened a live UK account, funded it in pounds, and traded on it at 27 brokers.
Our team records broker information in a scoring workbook, with each broker scored in eight categories (trading costs, trading experience, trust, trading platform, customer service, range of markets, education and funding), each built from sub-criteria, and the weighted total gives the broker its published rating out of 100. In a few cases the owners set a category score or a rating by a recorded decision, and where a published rating differs from the category-weighted score, the review states both and calls the gap an editorial adjustment. Our figures come from brokers’ own websites, documents and published fee schedules, from regulators’ own registers and rule documents (with the date each was read), and from third-party data services named on the page that uses them. Knowing where each figure originates tells you how much weight to give it.
Our Testing Environment
Ross Collins’s spread tests used RAW/ECN accounts rather than standard or zero-commission accounts at 15 brokers, to reflect the tightest pricing conditions available to traders. He tested standard accounts at 15 brokers in a separate round. Both rounds used MetaTrader 4 and covered the six major currency pairs: AUDUSD, EURUSD, GBPUSD, USDCAD, USDCHF, and USDJPY.
Spreads are recorded using IceFX SpreadMonitor, a freely available MT4 indicator that captures minimum, maximum and average spread values at the hourly (H1) interval and exports results to CSV for analysis.
Our 2026 execution test used Expert Advisors on MetaTrader 4 demo accounts, which were not funded accounts, at 36 brokers over two 30-hour periods, and measured the average time in milliseconds from placing a limit or market order to its execution, with network latency (ping) subtracted.
For limit orders, we use ExTest_ForExpat, which places multiple buy and sell orders and records the minimum, maximum and average response time between order submission and broker acknowledgement. For market orders, we use Broker Latency Tester, which submits an order, records the time to execution confirmation, then closes the position, averaged across 20 trades at each broker’s minimum lot size.
In our 2026 execution test, we subtract the ping between the test machine and each broker’s server from the execution time. The results do not depend on where the test machine sits, and server location differences between brokers do not skew the outcome.
Category scoring and final scores
Each major evaluation area is scored on a 0 to 10 scale, drawing on the information brokers publish, regulators’ registers, and our recorded tests: the 2026 execution test and Ross Collins’s spread tests. These category scores are combined and weighted to produce a final score out of 100, which drives rankings and comparisons across the site. My advice is to read the category scores before you rely on the total, because I find the breakdown tells you far more about whether a broker suits your trading.
Areas that have a direct impact on trader risk and ongoing costs, such as regulation, trading costs, and platform reliability, are weighted more heavily than secondary features. I back that order of priority, because it keeps rankings tied to practical trading considerations rather than cosmetic extras, and that is what serves you when you choose a broker.
A published rating may include an editorial adjustment. Where one applies, the broker’s review page discloses the computed score, the published rating, and the size of the adjustment. The adjustment represents my judgement, not a formula output, and it never moves a broker’s rating without appearing on that broker’s own page.
A blank category is unscored, not zero. The rating is renormalised over the categories that were scored, and the number of the eight that carry a score is shown. When you read a rating, my advice is to check that count, since it tells you how complete the evidence behind the score is.
In our Singapore section, 9 of the 18 rated brokers have no score from our testing, so we score each of them from the firm’s own published Singapore information: its Singapore website and documents, and its record on the MAS Financial Institutions Directory. In our Canada section, 2 of the 9 rated brokers, Questrade and Fortrade, are in the same position, and we score each of them from the firm’s own published Canadian information: its Canadian website and documents, and its record on the CIRO dealer directory. We score these brokers through the same eight categories and the same category and column weights this page publishes, but the columns that need a test (limit order speed, market order speed, and live spread validation) stay blank. Within a category, we score the category over its columns that have evidence when those columns carry at least half of the category’s column weight. Otherwise the category is blank. A blank category is unscored, not zero: the rating is renormalised over the categories that were scored, and wherever such a score appears it carries the label “scored from published information, not tested”.
Five of the eleven brokers currently rated for New Zealand carry desk scores built from the firms’ published information and FMA register records, not from our trading tests. Test-dependent fields are left blank and each score carries a “scored from published information, not tested” label. The other six retain global scores. Our New Zealand methodology explains both bases.
Account Opening
Ease of opening is one of the columns of our trading experience score, and the trading experience table on this page shows its weight, so you can judge how much it matters in the total. Our account opening methodology page lists the 27 brokers where we opened a live UK account, funded it in pounds, and traded on it. If deposit friction matters to you, that is the page I’d send you to first.
Our team also recorded account opening and funding observations on live US accounts at OANDA, FOREX.com, and tastyfx in late September 2026. Team notes and redacted screenshots document each broker’s individual opening and funding workflow, so you can see how the deposit process actually works before you commit your money. These checks are observational only: they do not establish measured US spread or execution performance, and they do not change our published global scores or the US ranking order.
Trading Costs and Pricing
Trading costs are assessed using broker-published data and Ross Collins’s spread tests. We collect minimum and average spreads published by brokers for major forex pairs and compile them into tables, so when you compare pricing, you are comparing like with like.
To check published pricing, Ross Collins, our Technical Research Lead with 35 years of IT experience at SWIFT, UBS, PwC and IBM, tested spreads on MetaTrader 4 with the IceFX SpreadMonitor tool, for both standard and RAW accounts.
Our spread testing methodology is detailed here:
Commission-based pricing is assessed separately. We record commission rates for major base currencies, including AUD, USD, EUR, and GBP, and compare how these affect overall trading costs. If your account is in one of those currencies, I suggest checking that page before you commit, since commissions can shift your overall costs noticeably.
Brokers with consistently lower overall trading costs tend to score more strongly within the trading cost category, alongside execution quality and pricing transparency. For this reason, we weight our scoring based on the different types of costs.
| Standard Published Spreads | Standard Tested Spreads | RAW/ECN Published Spread | RAW/ECN Tested Spread | Published Commission Rates | Inactivity Fees | Deposit / Withdrawal Fees | Active Trader Discount | Fixed Spreads | Other Fees | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Weighting | 20% | 15% | 15% | 10% | 15% | 5% | 5% | 5% | 5% | 5% |
Some of the abbreviations on this page are expanded to the regulator's full name: a broker regulated by ASIC is regulated by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission.
Trading Experience
The top factors in our trading experience scores are our tested limit order and market order speeds. Our model prioritises the availability of standard accounts (based on spreads) and raw/ecn (commission-based accounts) and the facility of higher leverage for professional traders.
| Limit Order Speed | Market Order Speed | Ease of Opening | Ease of Withdrawal | Professional Leverage | Standard Account | Raw Account | Fixed Spread Account | Islamic Account | Account Manager | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Weighting | 15% | 15% | 15% | 10% | 10% | 10% | 10% | 5% | 5% | 5% |
About Execution Speed
The limit order speed and market order speed columns in the table above come from our 2026 execution test, which is described under Our Testing Environment. You can find the method and every broker’s result on our execution speed test results page. Execution speed can be important where slippage is a major concern.
Execution testing is used for relative comparison between brokers rather than to guarantee performance at all times.
Trust and Reputation
We consider appropriate licensing by a national regulator a core element of the trust a trader can place in a broker. Financial regulators develop and enforce the rules, policies and procedures that govern how financial services providers behave, and trading with a licensed broker can offer significant protections against fraud, theft, and misuse of your funds.
Other factors that influence our trust scores include: the age of the broker, whether they have headquarters (or offices) in multiple countries and whether they’ve had any recent issues with their core regulators.
| Tier 1 Regulators | Tier 2 Regulators | Tier 3 Regulators | Age of Broker | Headquarters | Search Volume | Core Regulator Issues | TrustPilot Score | Publicly Listed | Bank | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Weighting | 30% | 15% | 5% | 10% | 10% | 10% | 10% | 5% | 3% | 2% |
What is a financial regulator?
In most sophisticated economies, a government ministry or agency holds responsibility for overseeing and monitoring financial institutions and markets. These regulators seek to maintain the stability, integrity, and fairness of the financial system to protect the interests of consumers, investors, and the overall economy.
Not all jurisdictions afford their regulators the same degree of influence, however. A country with a commitment to free markets and minimal regulation, for example, might not permit certain interventions during market downturns. A country with a strong culture of privacy might require additional controls on financial data.
At CompareForexBrokers, we’ve broken financial regulators into tiers based on strength of their regulations, extent of their oversight infrastructure, and supervisory power.
Tier 1 regulators offer the highest level of consumer protection and oversight. While trading with a Tier 1 regulator doesn’t guarantee you won’t lose money, it does mean you can feel confident that the broker must abide by certain rules around protecting your money.
The following table lists out our Tier 1 regulators.
| Tier 1 Regulators | Abbreviation | Region |
|---|---|---|
| Australian Securities & Investment Commission | ASIC | Australia |
| Financial Conduct Authority | FCA | United Kingdom |
| Commodities Future Trading Commission | CFTC | USA |
| National Futures Association | NFA | USA |
| Cyprus Securities & Exchange Commission | CySEC | Cyprus |
| Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority | FINMA | Switzerland |
| Canadian Investment Regulatory Organization | CIRO | Canada |
| Monetary Authority of Singapore | MAS | Singapore |
| Federal Financial Supervisory Authority | BaFIN | Germany |
Tier 2 regulators may exercise some of the same powers and insist on many of the same safeguards as their Tier 1 counterparts, but lack other important protections. While we consider brokers licensed Tier 2 regulators generally trustworthy, be aware that they may not be required to exert the same degree of control over client funds as a Tier 1-regulated broker. In other cases, Tier 2 regulators may form part of a less developed financial system still developing some of the institutions required to provide adequate oversight.
The following table lists out our Tier 2 regulators.
Tier 3 regulators control “offshore” brokers and seldom offer the same degree of protection and oversight as those in the Tier 1 and Tier 2 band. Brokers who are only regulated at this level can be assigned a lower level of trust.
The following table lists out our Tier 3 regulators.
Tier 4 regulators
| Tier-4 Jurisdictions (Low Trust Level Regulator) | Abbreviation | Country |
|---|---|---|
| Financial Services Commission Jamaica | FSC-JM | Jamaica |
| Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan | SECP | Pakistan |
| Financial Regulatory Authority | ASFI | Bolivia |
| Bank of Botswana | BOB | Botswana |
| Superintendencia De Banca | SBS | Peru |
| Central Bank of Guatemala | BANGUAT | Guatemala |
| Central Bank of Honduras (Banco Central de Honduras) | BCH | Honduras |
Tier 5 regulators
Broker safety and trust are assessed using multiple inputs. Regulation forms the foundation of this assessment, with greater weight given to brokers authorised by well-recognised financial regulators.
We also review a broker’s operating history, public disclosures, and any material regulatory or legal actions where relevant. Additional signals, such as independent user feedback and public complaints, may be reviewed to provide context but do not override regulatory status or direct testing outcomes.
Trading Platforms
We assess trading platforms based on what brokers actually make available to clients, including both widely used third-party platforms and proprietary systems.
Our platform scores cover platforms such as MetaTrader 4, MetaTrader 5, TradingView, and cTrader, as well as broker-developed platforms where offered. We also record which platforms are supported across different devices and operating systems, including web-based platforms, Windows, macOS, iOS, and Android. If you trade from your phone, my suggestion is to check the device support for your setup before you weigh any other feature.
We also believe it’s important for brokers to offer a free, non-expiring demo account so that traders can thoroughly test their strategies before committing financial resources. We also consider it important that brokers allow limitations regarding automation and scalping.
| MetaTrader 4 | MetaTrader 5 | cTrader | TradingView | Free Demo Account | Demo Account Expiry | Social/Copy Trading | Automation/Scalping | Proprietary Platform | Mobile Trading App | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Weighting | 15% | 15% | 10% | 10% | 10% | 5% | 10% | 10% | 5% | 10% |
Trading Tools And Functionality
We review the availability of practical trading tools that support different trading styles. This includes risk management features such as guaranteed stop-loss orders, automation and algorithmic trading support, and social or copy trading functionality where offered. If you scalp or run expert advisors, I’d check these columns first in the platform score.
Platform usability, stability, and feature depth are considered alongside tool availability. Platform features contribute to overall scoring but do not outweigh regulation or trading cost considerations. I prefer it that way: a polished platform, in my opinion, should not tempt you into paying more per trade than you need to.
Customer Service
Customer service carries its own score in our model, built from the columns in the table below, among them live chat, customer service knowledge, the FAQ or knowledge base, support hours, and languages. When you compare brokers, I recommend looking at the columns that match how you actually seek help, whether that is live chat at odd hours or a deep knowledge base.
Support hours and available languages are recorded. Customer support contributes to overall broker scores, though it is weighted lower than core factors such as regulation, trading costs, and platform reliability. That weighting suits me: support is worth checking for fit, but I would not let it override what you pay on every trade or how your funds are protected.
We have also tracked the number of awards brokers have won at Investment Trends since 2020.
| Live Chat | CS Knowledge | FAQ / Knowledge Base | Metatrader Guides | Email, Social Media | Support Hours | Investment Trends Awards | CS Languages | Account Manager | Website Experience | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Weighting | 15% | 15% | 15% | 5% | 10% | 10% | 5% | 5% | 10% | 10% |
Education
Our scoring methodology for education resources concentrates on two dimensions, the experience level of the trader and the channels used to deliver training. We give a high weight to help for beginners, a medium weight to intermediate education and a lower rating for expert resources, an order I think serves readers well, because a broker’s own academy is most valuable when you are starting out. Articles, blogs, webinars, eBooks and YouTube are considered delivery channels. I also like to see an in-house analyst at a broker, providing commentary and analysis of market trends, and I always find an excellent glossary helpful.
| Beginner Resources | Intermediate Resources | Expert Resources | Market Research, Analysis | In-house Analyst | Articles, blogs | Webinars | eBooks | Glossary | Youtube | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Weighting | 15% | 10% | 5% | 10% | 10% | 10% | 15% | 15% | 5% | 5% |
Range of Markets
We count the instruments each broker offers by asset class and record the counts in our scoring workbook. Those asset classes are forex pairs, share CFDs, crypto CFDs, commodities, ETFs, indices, bonds and treasuries, spread betting, other products, and underlying shares. My advice is to look at the asset class that matters to your strategy, since the counts let you compare brokers on the markets you actually trade.
As a site focused on forex, our range of markets scores naturally favours brokers with many forex pairs available for trading. Other products we count include
-
Cryptocurrencies
-
Commodities (hard and soft, including metals like gold and silver, energies like oil and gas and agricultural commodities like coffee and sugar).
-
Indices and ETFs
-
Bonds and treasuries
-
Stocks (CFD and underlying)
-
Other products (e.g. options, futures, interest rates)
| Forex | Share CFDs | Crypto CFDs | Commodities | ETFs | Indices | Bonds / Treasuries | Spread Betting | Other Products | Shares | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Weighting | 25% | 15% | 10% | 10% | 5% | 10% | 5% | 10% | 5% | 5% |
Funding Methods
To provide a score on funding (i.e., making deposits), our methodology considers the breadth of available base currencies as the most critical factor. We then award brokers scores based on the funding methods available (credit card, bank transfer, etc.). We review banking trends to align our weightings with the most popular funding methods. Before you commit to a broker, I’d check that your base currency and preferred deposit method are both supported.
| Base Currencies | Visa / Mastercard | Wire Transfer | Paypal | Neteller | Skrill | Rapid Pay EUR/GBP | bPay AU / POLi NZ | Amex | Klarna | Union Pay | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Weighting | 20% | 15% | 15% | 15% | 10% | 5% | 5% | 5% | 3% | 2% | 5% |
Data Updates and Transparency
How Often We Update Our Data
Published spread data is reviewed and updated monthly to reflect current broker disclosures and pricing conditions. When reviewing the module, you can see the date of the last update at the bottom of the spreads module.
Full broker reviews are formally reviewed and refreshed at least once per year, typically in January. During these reviews, we check that regulation, pricing structures, platforms, and product offerings remain accurate.
If material changes are identified outside the scheduled review cycle, such as regulatory updates, pricing changes, or platform modifications, we update the relevant sections when identified rather than waiting for a full rewrite.
CompareForexBrokers independence and commercial relationships
CompareForexBrokers operates independently and applies a consistent methodology across all broker reviews and comparisons. As a certified B Corporation, we are independently assessed against standards of social and environmental performance, accountability, and transparency.
Our testing, scoring, and editorial decisions are not influenced by commercial relationships.
We may earn a commission when readers choose to open an account with a broker through our site. This does not affect how brokers are tested, scored, or ranked. Advertisers do not have the ability to influence our methodology or review outcomes.
Further details are available here:
Have a question about our methodology or want to suggest an improvement? Contact us.
About CompareForexBrokers:
Who conducts and reviews our testing
Our team produces the site’s reviews and comparisons with assistance from large language models (LLMs) and other data aggregation services and testing tools, and the team decides what is published, the ratings methodology and the ranking rules. The team’s own tests described on this page are the 2026 execution test, which used demo accounts rather than funded accounts; Ross Collins’s spread tests of RAW accounts at 15 brokers and standard accounts at 15 brokers on MetaTrader 4, across six major currency pairs; and the live UK accounts we opened, funded in pounds, and traded at 27 brokers.
David Levy, Head of Content, manages the site’s content: he cross-checks figures, refreshes existing content, maps out the content calendar and keeps the writers on track. A page shows a fact-check credit only after David has checked that version of the page, with each check recorded in a sign-off register showing David’s date and the scope of what he checked. If the page later changes in substance, the credit comes off until he checks the new version.
What we do not test or guarantee
Our tests cover execution speed and spreads, and our assessment of broker features, pricing structures, platforms, and regulatory standing rests on what brokers publish and on regulators’ registers. We do not test individual trading outcomes or attempt to predict market performance.
The execution speeds and tested spreads shown on the site are indicative, because they come from tests run under specific conditions, and published pricing is each broker’s own figure. They do not guarantee that every trade will receive the same results, as market conditions, liquidity, and account settings can change.
We also do not assess trading strategies, personal risk tolerance, or whether a broker is suitable for an individual trader’s circumstances.
About the author
Justin Grossbard is the Co-Founder and CEO of CompareForexBrokers, which he established with Noam Korbl in 2014. He has over 20 years of professional experience in online marketing and holds a Master's in Marketing from Monash University.
Our reviews are reader-supported. We may receive payment when you click a link to a partner site. Learn how we make money.