BROKER RATINGS · OPEN EVERY LAYER

One rating.
Every reason.

Choose your residence or explore the entities behind the brands.

Where is the broker company regulated? · A broker brand can operate through several companies. Select a country to explore the companies regulated there.

Pilot · includes simulated editorial inputs
How this becomes a full rating

Published observations and completed editorial assessments replace the demo inputs as coverage grows. Scores update using the published method.

Current data coverage: 2% of planned weight. Coverage describes our evidence, not broker quality. Method →

SingaporeCalculated from: Singapore · 1 shared parameters · 1/11 monitored jurisdictionsRated: IG, OANDA. Same parameters for the rated brokers. Missing ratings are not zero. Criteria can differ between countries.
Colour guide — what do the country markers mean?

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.

Colours show how much information we have — not whether a broker is good or bad.

  • Green · both measures availableBoth tracked measures are available for every displayed broker.
  • Yellow · partial informationSome observations are available, but coverage differs or is incomplete.
  • Red · rating data missingCompanies are identified, but their rating observations are not available yet.
  • Empty · still checkingAt least one company or offer still needs verification; no observations are available for this selection.
  • Grey with a slash · not applicableWe have verified that this option does not apply.
  • Square outline · your selectionThe chosen country applies to all three brokers.

ALL shows the overall comparison across included companies. It is not a country.

Explore ratings: calculations, criteria & sources

Comparing all displayed brokers.

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: 4.7/5

Editorial input: 50.0% (test only)

(4.7 ÷ 5 × 60) + (50 ÷ 100 × 40)
≈ 56.8 + 20.0
= 76.8% = 3.8/5

Assessment scope: brand

User-requested uniform test input. No editorial review has been performed; not derived from Trustpilot or a website audit.

Explore the data component →

OANDA

Data component: 4.2/5

Editorial input: 50.0% (test only)

(4.2 ÷ 5 × 60) + (50 ÷ 100 × 40)
≈ 50.4 + 20.0
= 70.4% = 3.5/5

Assessment scope: brand

User-requested uniform test input. No editorial review has been performed; not derived from Trustpilot or a website audit.

Explore the data component →

Pepperstone

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.

Explore the data component →

Editorial review — published weights

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.

IG

(4.7) ÷ 1 = 4.7/5

Singapore 4.7/5 · weight 100.0%

OANDA

(4.2) ÷ 1 = 4.2/5

Singapore 4.2/5 · weight 100.0%

Pepperstone

No common set to average.

Display values are rounded; calculations use unrounded inputs.

02 · Dimensions — what is assessed

Only Trading costs currently has usable evidence. Other dimensions are excluded, not scored zero.

Trading costsPartial · 10% of cost weight availableOpen cost parameters ↓
Client experienceNo comparable evidence
Funding experienceNo comparable evidence
Service responseNo comparable evidence
Digital experienceNo comparable evidence

IG

Trading costs · partial

4.7/5

Effective dimension weight: 100% of the partial score.

OANDA

Trading costs · partial

4.2/5

Effective dimension weight: 100% of the partial score.

Pepperstone

Trading costs · partial

/5

Effective dimension weight: 0% 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 10% planned cost weight → 100.0% of this partial score

IG

Regulated in Singapore

4.7/5

Contribution: 4.7 × 100.0% = 4.7

04 · Input, conversion & source

Original input: 0.6 pips

clamp(1 + 4 × (2 − 0.6) ÷ (2 − 0.5), 1, 5) = 4.7/5

IG Asia Pte Ltd

Singapore retail Forex CFD standard contract. EUR/USD advertised minimum 0.6 pips; variable spread, not an execution average. Product article dated 3 July 2026. Historical average-spread columns relate to 2021 and are not used.

Original source ↗

Observed 2026-09-12 · review due 2026-10-12
Record ig-sg-eurusd-2026-09-12
One broker-published source; no independent execution sample or statistical confidence estimate.

OANDA

Regulated in Singapore

4.2/5

Contribution: 4.2 × 100.0% = 4.2

04 · Input, conversion & source

Original input: 0.8 pips

clamp(1 + 4 × (2 − 0.8) ÷ (2 − 0.5), 1, 5) = 4.2/5

OANDA Asia Pacific Pte Ltd

Singapore retail Forex CFD spread-only pricing: EUR/USD from 0.8 pips. The 0.0 core spread requires commission and is excluded. Advertised minimum, not a realised average.

Original source ↗

Observed 2026-09-12 · review due 2026-10-12
Record oanda-sg-eurusd-2026-09-12
One broker-published source; no independent execution sample or statistical confidence estimate.

Pepperstone

No verified comparable input for this broker.

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 Excluded · no common evidence

This parameter contributes no weight. Missing evidence does not indicate poor performance.

05 · Methodology, thresholds and limitations →