Written by ForexBrokers.com
In this head to head comparison of Trading 212 vs IFC Markets, we will compare the trading platforms, mobile apps, range of investments, costs, market research, and more. Let's dive in.
CFDs are complex instruments and come with a high risk of losing money rapidly due to leverage. Between 51% and 89% of retail investor accounts lose money when trading CFDs. You should consider whether you understand how CFDs work and whether you can afford to take the high risk of losing your money.
Trading 212 and IFC Markets are both online brokers, each offering distinct regulatory advantages. Trading 212, established in 2004, stands out with a ForexBrokers.com Trust Score of 80, placing it in the "trusted" category. It holds three Tier-1 licenses, considered the gold standard in broker licensing, showcasing a strong regulatory framework. In comparison, IFC Markets, founded in 2006, has a Trust Score of 73, categorizing it as "average risk" according to ForexBrokers.com's ratings. Although it holds one Tier-2 license, it does not possess any Tier-1 licenses like Trading 212, indicating different levels of regulatory oversight. Both companies are privately held and do not operate as banks, offering a clear choice for users prioritizing varied trust levels and regulatory standings.
| Feature |
Trading 212
|
IFC Markets
|
|---|---|---|
| Year Founded | 2004 | 2006 |
| Publicly Traded (Listed) | No | No |
| Bank | No | No |
| Tier-1 Licenses | 3 | 0 |
| Tier-2 Licenses | 0 | 1 |
| Tier-3 Licenses | 0 | 0 |
| Tier-4 Licenses | 0 | 1 |
Comparing commissions and fees for Trading 212 vs IFC Markets starts with account types. Trading 212 offers an Invest account (minimum €1) and a CFD account (minimum €10); fees below refer to the CFD account. Trading 212 markets zero-commission trading, but you still pay the spread on CFDs and forex.
Trading 212 has begun publishing average spreads, and in April 2025 its EUR/USD spread averaged 2.7 pips—higher than the industry average, which can make trading more expensive versus top low-cost brokers. Commission-free pricing aside, the spread is the main cost to watch. Commissions & Fees rating: 4 out of 5 stars; ForexBrokers.com ranking: #27 of 63.
IFC Markets lists an average EUR/USD spread of 1.44 pips (above the 1.08 industry average), but its ECN account can improve effective costs to about 1.1 pips after a 0.005% commission is charged on both sides of each trade. There are no inactivity fees, and active trader discounts can lower costs further. Commissions & Fees rating: 4 out of 5 stars; ForexBrokers.com ranking: #32 of 63.
| Feature |
Trading 212
|
IFC Markets
|
|---|---|---|
| Minimum Deposit | €1 | $1 |
| Average spread (EUR/USD) - Standard account | 2.7 | 1.44 |
| All-in Cost EUR/USD - Active | 2.7 | 1.1 |
| Non-wire bank transfer | Yes | No |
| PayPal (Deposit/Withdraw) | Yes | No |
| Skrill (Deposit/Withdraw) | No | No |
| Bank Wire (Deposit/Withdraw) | Yes | Yes |
Dive deeper: Best Low Spread Forex Brokers.
Trading 212 and IFC Markets both let you trade forex as CFDs or spot and both support cryptocurrency CFDs (neither lets you buy actual crypto). Where they differ most is breadth. Trading 212 lists 7,868 tradeable symbols and 146 forex pairs, while IFC Markets offers 630 symbols and 49 pairs. Trading 212 also lets you buy real, exchange-traded securities on both U.S. and international exchanges, so you can purchase individual shares directly. IFC Markets provides access to real international shares but not U.S.-listed shares. If you want copy trading, IFC Markets includes it; Trading 212 does not.
For range of investments, Trading 212 earns 5 stars and ranks 15th out of 63 brokers at ForexBrokers.com, reflecting its much wider selection. IFC Markets earns 3.5 stars and ranks 31st. In short, choose Trading 212 for the largest choice of markets and direct stock buying on U.S. and global exchanges, or pick IFC Markets if you value copy trading and are comfortable without access to U.S.-listed shares.
| Feature |
Trading 212
|
IFC Markets
|
|---|---|---|
| Forex Trading (Spot or CFDs) | Yes | Yes |
| Tradeable Symbols (Total) | 7868 | 630 |
| Forex Pairs (Total) | 146 | 49 |
| U.S. Stocks (Shares) | Yes | No |
| Global Stocks (Non-U.S. Shares) | Yes | Yes |
| Copy Trading | No | Yes |
| Cryptocurrency (Underlying) | No | No |
| Cryptocurrency (CFDs) | Yes | Yes |
| Disclaimers | Note: Crypto CFDs are not available to retail traders from any broker's U.K. entity, nor to U.K. residents (except to Professional clients). |
Dive deeper: Best Copy Trading Platforms.
Trading 212 vs IFC Markets for trading platforms and tools: both offer free demo (paper) accounts and their own proprietary platforms. Each provides a web-based platform and lets you trade directly from price charts. Key differences: Trading 212 does not have a Windows desktop download and does not support MetaTrader 4 (MT4) or MetaTrader 5 (MT5). IFC Markets offers a Windows desktop platform, supports both MT4 and MT5, and includes copy trading.
In ForexBrokers.com testing, both brokers earned 4 stars for Platforms and Tools. Trading 212 ranked 19th out of 63 brokers, while IFC Markets ranked 29th. Choose Trading 212 if you want an in-house web experience with paper trading. Pick IFC Markets if you prefer desktop software, MetaTrader compatibility, and copy trading features.
| Feature |
Trading 212
|
IFC Markets
|
|---|---|---|
| Virtual Trading (Demo) | Yes | Yes |
| Proprietary Desktop Trading Platform | Yes | Yes |
| Desktop Platform (Windows) | No | Yes |
| Web Platform | Yes | Yes |
| Copy Trading | No | Yes |
| MetaTrader 4 (MT4) | No | Yes |
| MetaTrader 5 (MT5) | No | Yes |
| Charting - Indicators / Studies (Total) | 54 | 30 |
| Charting - Trade From Chart | Yes | Yes |
Dive deeper: Best MetaTrader 4 Brokers, Best MetaTrader 5 Brokers.
Both Trading 212 and IFC Markets deliver well-rounded mobile trading apps for iPhone and Android. Each supports stock and forex price alerts, synced watchlists that mirror your online account, and handy charting tools like trendline drawing with auto-saved annotations. For overall user experience, both platforms earn 4 out of 5 stars for their mobile apps.
The biggest difference is charting depth: Trading 212 offers 104 technical studies in its mobile app, while IFC Markets provides 30. This advantage helps Trading 212 achieve a higher placement in ForexBrokers.com’s Mobile Trading Apps ranking, coming in at #17 out of 63 brokers versus IFC Markets at #34. If you value a wider set of indicators on the go, Trading 212 may be the better fit; if you primarily need core tools, alerts, and synced watchlists, IFC Markets still checks the key boxes.
| Feature |
Trading 212
|
IFC Markets
|
|---|---|---|
| Android App | Yes | Yes |
| Apple iOS App | Yes | Yes |
| Mobile Price Alerts | Yes | Yes |
| Mobile Watchlists - Syncing | Yes | Yes |
| Mobile Charting - Indicators / Studies | 104 | 30 |
| Mobile Charting - Draw Trendlines | Yes | Yes |
| Mobile Charting - Trendlines Autosave | Yes | Yes |
Dive deeper: Best Forex Trading Apps.
Trading 212 vs IFC Markets: For market research, IFC Markets posts daily market commentary, while Trading 212 does not. However, if you want forex news from top-tier sources like Bloomberg, Reuters, or Dow Jones, Trading 212 includes this feed and IFC Markets does not. Both brokers lack third-party research suites from Autochartist and Trading Central, and they also don’t offer TipRanks or Acuity Trading tools. Shared features include a sentiment tool that shows the ratio of long vs. short positions and an economic calendar with global events.
Overall ratings are the same at 3.5 out of 5 stars for research. In ForexBrokers.com’s Research rankings, IFC Markets sits at #30 out of 63 brokers, while Trading 212 is close behind at #32. Choose IFC Markets if you want daily commentary; pick Trading 212 if headline-grade wire news matters more. Either way, you get helpful sentiment data and a clear economic calendar.
| Feature |
Trading 212
|
IFC Markets
|
|---|---|---|
| Daily Market Commentary (Articles) | No | Yes |
| Forex News (Top-Tier Sources) | Yes | No |
| Autochartist | No | No |
| Trading Central | No | No |
| Client sentiment data | Yes | Yes |
| TipRanks | No | No |
| Acuity Trading | No | No |
| Economic Calendar | Yes | Yes |
Dive deeper: Best Brokers for Forex Research.
For beginner traders comparing education at Trading 212 and IFC Markets, both brokers deliver plenty of on‑demand learning. Each offers at least 10 beginner videos and at least 10 advanced videos, with content that covers forex and CFDs. Neither broker runs monthly client webinars, so most learning happens through videos and articles you can watch anytime. Both earn the same Education rating of 3.5 out of 5 stars, though Trading 212 places a bit higher in the Education category (#20 of 63) than IFC Markets (#25 of 63).
If you prefer to learn at your own pace through video lessons, either platform works well for getting started. If live, monthly webinars are important to you, you’ll need to consider another broker. Given the similar video libraries and equal star ratings, beginners might pick Trading 212 for its slightly better ranking, while IFC Markets remains a close alternative with comparable beginner-friendly education.
| Feature |
Trading 212
|
IFC Markets
|
|---|---|---|
| Webinars | No | No |
| Videos - Beginner Trading Videos | Yes | Yes |
| Videos - Advanced Trading Videos | Yes | Yes |
Dive deeper: Best Forex Brokers for Beginners.
After testing 63 of the best forex brokers, our research and account testing finds that Trading 212 is better than IFC Markets. Trading 212 finished with an overall rank of #25, while IFC Markets finished with an overall rank of #33.
Best known for its mobile trading app, Trading 212 offers an easy-to-use trading platform suite for CFD and share trading, as well as a large variety of forex pairs. However, despite its well-designed platform and wide range of symbols, its lack of advanced trading tools and flat research offerings hamper Trading 212’s bid to be considered a top broker.
| Feature |
Trading 212
|
IFC Markets
|
|---|---|---|
| Overall Rating |
|
|
| Trust Score | 80 | 73 |
| Range of Investments |
|
|
| Trading Fees |
|
|
| Trading Platforms |
|
|
| Research |
|
|
| Mobile Trading |
|
|
| Education |
|
|
In the Trading 212 vs IFC Markets comparison for crypto, neither broker supports buying actual (delivered) cryptocurrencies with direct ownership, but both provide access to cryptocurrency CFDs for speculative trading.
Trading 212 vs IFC Markets: for deposit and withdrawal methods, Trading 212 offers ACH/SEPA, PayPal, and bank wire transfers, while IFC Markets only offers bank wires; both do not support Skrill, and Visa/Mastercard availability is not specified.
Please note:
We review each broker’s overall global offering – a “Yes” checkmark in our Compare Tool does not guarantee the availability of any specific features in your country of residence. To verify the availability of any features within your country of residence, please contact the broker directly.
Select Brokers
↓×Compare
0 of 5| Overall Rating | Trading 212 | IFC Markets | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Rating |
|
| |
| Trading Fees |
|
| |
| Range of Investments |
|
| |
| Trading Platforms |
|
| |
| Mobile Trading |
|
| |
| Research |
|
| |
| Education |
|
| |
| Trust Score | 80 | 73 | |
| Winner | check_circle | ||
| Review | Trading 212 Review |
| Broker Screenshots | Trading 212 | IFC Markets | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Broker Gallery (click to expand) |
|
| Regulation | Trading 212 | IFC Markets | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Trust Score | 80 | 73 | |
| Year Founded | 2004 | 2006 | |
| Publicly Traded (Listed) | No | No | |
| Bank | No | No | |
| Regulated in one or more EU or EEA countries (MiFID). | Yes | ||
| Tier-1 Licenses | 3 | 0 | |
| Tier-2 Licenses | 0 | 1 | |
| Tier-3 Licenses | 0 | 0 | |
| Tier-4 Licenses | 0 | 1 |
| Tier-1 Licenses (Highly Trusted) | Trading 212 | IFC Markets | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Australia (ASIC Authorised) | No | ||
| Canada (CIRO Authorised) | No | ||
| Hong Kong (SFC Authorised) | No | ||
| Japan (FSA Authorised) | No | ||
| Singapore (MAS Authorised) | No | ||
| Switzerland (FINMA Authorised) | |||
| United Kingdom (U.K.) (FCA Authorised) | Yes | ||
| USA (CFTC Authorized) | No | ||
| New Zealand (FMA Authorised) | No | ||
| Regulated in one or more EU or EEA countries (MiFID). | Yes |
| Tier-2 Licenses (Trusted) | Trading 212 | IFC Markets | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Kenya (CMA Authorised) | |||
| Israel (ISA Authorised) | No | ||
| South Africa (FSCA Authorised) | No | Yes | |
| UAE (DFSA, FSRA, or SCA Authorised) | No | ||
| India (SEBI Authorised) | No | ||
| Jordan (JSC Authorised) |
| Investments | Trading 212 | IFC Markets | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Forex Trading (Spot or CFDs) | Yes | Yes | |
| Tradeable Symbols (Total) | 7868 | 630 | |
| Forex Pairs (Total) | 146 | 49 | |
| U.S. Stocks (Shares) | Yes | No | |
| Global Stocks (Non-U.S. Shares) | Yes | Yes | |
| Copy Trading | No | Yes | |
| Cryptocurrency (Underlying) | No | No | |
| Cryptocurrency (CFDs) | Yes | Yes | |
| Disclaimers | Note: Crypto CFDs are not available to retail traders from any broker's U.K. entity, nor to U.K. residents (except to Professional clients). |
| Cost | Trading 212 | IFC Markets | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Average spread (EUR/USD) - Standard account | 2.7 | 1.44 | |
| All-in Cost EUR/USD - Active | 2.7 | 1.1 | |
| Inactivity Fee | No | No | |
| Order execution: Agency | Yes | Yes | |
| Order execution: Market Maker | Yes | Yes |
| Funding | Trading 212 | IFC Markets | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Minimum Deposit | €1 | $1 | |
| PayPal (Deposit/Withdraw) | Yes | No | |
| Skrill (Deposit/Withdraw) | No | No | |
| Bank Wire (Deposit/Withdraw) | Yes | Yes | |
| Non-wire bank transfer | Yes | No |
| Trading Platforms | Trading 212 | IFC Markets | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Proprietary Desktop Trading Platform | Yes | Yes | |
| Desktop Platform (Windows) | No | Yes | |
| Web Platform | Yes | Yes | |
| Copy Trading | No | Yes | |
| MetaTrader 4 (MT4) | No | Yes | |
| MetaTrader 5 (MT5) | No | Yes | |
| cTrader | No | No |
| Trading Tools | Trading 212 | IFC Markets | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Virtual Trading (Demo) | Yes | Yes | |
| Price Alerts | Yes | Yes | |
| Charting - Indicators / Studies (Total) | 54 | 30 | |
| Charting - Trade From Chart | Yes | Yes | |
| Charts can be saved | Yes | Yes |
| Mobile Trading | Trading 212 | IFC Markets | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Android App | Yes | Yes | |
| Apple iOS App | Yes | Yes | |
| Mobile Price Alerts | Yes | Yes | |
| Mobile Watchlist [DELETED] | |||
| Mobile Watchlists - Syncing | Yes | Yes | |
| Mobile Charting - Indicators / Studies | 104 | 30 | |
| Mobile Charting - Draw Trendlines | Yes | Yes | |
| Mobile Charting - Trendlines Autosave | Yes | Yes | |
| Mobile Research - Economic Calendar | Yes | Yes |
| Research | Trading 212 | IFC Markets | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Daily Market Commentary (Articles) | No | Yes | |
| Forex News (Top-Tier Sources) | Yes | No | |
| Autochartist | No | No | |
| Trading Central | No | No | |
| TipRanks | No | No | |
| Client sentiment data | Yes | Yes | |
| Economic Calendar | Yes | Yes |
| Education | Trading 212 | IFC Markets | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Webinars | No | No | |
| Videos - Beginner Trading Videos | Yes | Yes | |
| Videos - Advanced Trading Videos | Yes | Yes |
| Major Forex Pairs | Trading 212 | IFC Markets | |
|---|---|---|---|
| GBP/USD [DELETED] | |||
| USD/JPY [DELETED] | |||
| EUR/USD | Yes | Yes | |
| USD/CHF [DELETED] | |||
| USD/CAD [DELETED] | |||
| NZD/USD [DELETED] | |||
| AUD/USD [DELETED] | |||
| Review | Trading 212 Review |
| Overall | Trading 212 | IFC Markets | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Rating |
|
| |
| Trading Fees |
|
| |
| Range of Investments |
|
| |
| Trading Platforms |
|
| |
| Mobile Trading |
|
| |
| Research |
|
| |
| Education |
|
| |
| Trust Score | 80 | 73 | |
| Winner | check_circle | ||
| Review | Trading 212 Review |
IG
CMC Markets
FOREX.com
XTB
eToro
AvaTrade
Pepperstone
FP Markets
Tickmill