Interfaz traducida. Los textos de fuentes y algunos detalles metodológicos se conservan en inglés.
VALORACIONES · EXPLORA CADA NIVEL
Una valoración. Todas las razones.
Elige tu residencia o explora las empresas detrás de las marcas.
¿Dónde está regulada la empresa? · Una marca puede operar mediante varias empresas. Elige un país para ver sus empresas reguladas.
Piloto · incluye valoraciones editoriales simuladasCómo se convierte en una valoración completa
Los datos publicados y las evaluaciones editoriales completas sustituyen la demo al aumentar la cobertura. Se aplica el método publicado.
Current data coverage: 2% of planned weight. Coverage describes our evidence, not broker quality. Método →
AlemaniaCalculated from: Germany · 1 shared parameters · 1/11 monitored jurisdictionsRated: Pepperstone. Single-broker evidence only; no peer comparison. Missing ratings are not zero. Criteria can differ between countries.
Guía de colores — ¿qué indican los países?
Market priority: UK, US, Singapore and Hong Kong lead by FX turnover in the BIS 2025 survey. Remaining countries follow an editorial priority order, not a statistical ranking. This order does not change rating weights.
Los colores indican cuánta información tenemos, no la calidad del bróker.
Verde · ambas medidas disponiblesBoth tracked measures are available for every displayed broker.
Amarillo · información parcialSome observations are available, but coverage differs or is incomplete.
Rojo · faltan datos de valoraciónCompanies are identified, but their rating observations are not available yet.
…Vacío · en verificaciónAt least one company or offer still needs verification; no observations are available for this selection.
∕Gris con barra · no aplicableWe have verified that this option does not apply.
Borde cuadrado · tu selecciónThe chosen country applies to all three brokers.
ALL shows the overall comparison across included companies. It is not a country.
Explorar valoraciones: cálculos, criterios y fuentes
Comparando todos los brókeres mostrados.
Score mix — data and editorial contribution
60% · Data40% · Editorial
First convert the data score to a percentage. Add its 60% contribution to the editorial percentage’s 40% contribution. A simulated 50% editorial input contributes 20 percentage points. Real assessments use the published criterion weights. Displayed inputs are rounded; contributions use the unrounded data score.
IG
Data component: —/5
Editorial input: 50.0% (test only)
No combined score: both components are required.
Assessment scope: brand
User-requested uniform test input. No editorial review has been performed; not derived from Trustpilot or a website audit.
These criterion weights are managed in the editorial database. They apply to completed editorial assessments; simulated inputs remain explicitly labelled and are not derived from these criteria.
Public review evidence, including Trustpilot30% of editorial
Website navigation and usability25%
Clarity of pricing, conditions and information30%
Visibility of the contracting company and key documents15%
Published documentary audits have dated observations, cited sources and explicit scope. See the UK audit and checklist. Review-platform scores alone are not editorial assessments. Brand-wide review evidence must not be presented as jurisdiction-specific evidence, and evidence already scored in the data component must not be counted twice.
01 · Data component: Jurisdictions — where the rating comes from
Identical included jurisdictions and equal jurisdiction weights for all brands. Missing values are never zero.
Effective dimension weight: 0% of the partial score.
OANDA
Trading costs · partial
—/5
Effective dimension weight: 0% of the partial score.
Pepperstone
Trading costs · partial
5.0/5
Effective dimension weight: 100% of the partial score.
Each planned dimension has 20% of the data-component weight (the data component itself has 60% of the combined rating). The partial score normalises only shared available weights.
03 · Cost parameters — compare each contribution
Open a parameter to see each rated broker, including conversion, weight and source. Unrated brokers have no contribution.
Advertised EUR/USD minimum spread Excluded · no common evidence
This parameter contributes no weight. Missing evidence does not indicate poor performance.
Realised average spread Excluded · no common evidence
This parameter contributes no weight. Missing evidence does not indicate poor performance.
Trading commissions Excluded · no common evidence
This parameter contributes no weight. Missing evidence does not indicate poor performance.
Overnight holding cost Excluded · no common evidence
This parameter contributes no weight. Missing evidence does not indicate poor performance.
Inactivity charge policy 10% planned cost weight → 100.0% of this partial score
IG
No verified comparable input for this broker.
OANDA
No verified comparable input for this broker.
Pepperstone
Regulated in Germany
5.0/5
Contribution: 5.0 × 100.0% = 5.0
04 · Input, conversion & source
Original input: 0 · no inactivity charge stated
Policy rubric: no stated charge → 5/5. This does not measure fee amount or severity.
Pepperstone GmbH
Pepperstone GmbH German costs document, page 4, section Inaktivitaetsgebuehr: no account-maintenance or inactivity fees. Policy indicator only; does not measure execution or total costs. No publication date stated; checked 12 September 2026.
Observed 2026-09-12 · review due 2026-10-12 Record pepperstone-de-inactivity-2026-09-12 One broker-published source; no independent execution sample or statistical confidence estimate.
