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 |
When comparing commissions and fees, both Trading 212 and IFC Markets earn 4 out of 5 stars, but IFC Markets ranks higher (#40 of 63) than Trading 212 (#50 of 63) in ForexBrokers.com’s Commissions and Fees category. Trading 212 promotes zero-commission trading on its CFD account (minimum deposit €10), but your real cost comes from the spread. The broker now publishes average spreads; in April 2025 its EUR/USD average was 2.7 pips—much higher than the industry average—making it less attractive for spread-sensitive forex and CFD traders.
IFC Markets’ typical EUR/USD spread is 1.44 pips, which is above the 1.08-pip industry average but still notably tighter than Trading 212’s 2.7 pips. Active traders can lower costs further with IFC Markets’ ECN account, where the effective spread can reach about 1.1 pips after a 0.005% commission on both sides of the trade. The lack of inactivity fees and the availability of active trader discounts add to IFC Markets’ cost appeal.
Bottom line: both brokers are rated 4/5 for commissions and fees, but IFC Markets’ tighter spreads and ECN pricing give it an edge over Trading 212 for frequent forex and CFD trading, while Trading 212’s low account minimum may appeal to beginners who prioritize ease of entry over the tightest spreads.
| 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 vs IFC Markets: For range of investments, Trading 212 offers far more choice, with 7,868 tradeable symbols and 146 forex pairs, compared with IFC Markets’ 630 symbols and 49 forex pairs. Both brokers let you trade forex (via CFDs or spot) and both support cryptocurrency CFDs, but neither offers delivered crypto. When it comes to exchange-traded securities (not CFDs), Trading 212 lets you buy U.S. shares as well as international stocks, while IFC Markets offers international stocks but not U.S.-listed shares.
Feature-wise, IFC Markets provides copy trading, whereas Trading 212 does not. For Range of Investments, ForexBrokers.com rates Trading 212 at 5 stars (ranked #16 of 63) and IFC Markets at 3.5 stars (ranked #44 of 63). In short, go with Trading 212 if you want the widest selection and access to U.S. shares; choose IFC Markets if copy trading is a must while still having access to forex and crypto CFDs.
| 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 and IFC Markets both make it easy to practice with free demo (paper) accounts and each offers a proprietary, in-house platform. Both brokers provide a web-based trading platform and let you place trades directly from charts. Key differences: Trading 212 does not offer a Windows desktop download, copy trading, or MetaTrader support. IFC Markets, on the other hand, adds a Windows desktop platform, copy trading, and access to MetaTrader 4 and MetaTrader 5 alongside its own platform.
For Trading Platforms and Tools, both brokers earn 4 out of 5 stars. According to ForexBrokers.com, Trading 212 ranks #20 out of 63 brokers in this category, while IFC Markets ranks #37. If you want a simple, browser-focused experience on a proprietary platform, Trading 212 fits well. If you need a Windows desktop app, MetaTrader 4/5, or copy trading, IFC Markets is the better match.
| 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.
Trading 212 and IFC Markets both check the key boxes for mobile trading. Each offers an iPhone and Android app, price alerts for stocks and forex, and watchlist syncing so changes carry over between your phone and your online account. Both apps let you draw trendlines on charts, and your drawings auto-save so you don’t lose your work.
Where they differ is charting depth and industry standing. Trading 212 includes 104 technical studies in its mobile charts versus 30 with IFC Markets. While both apps earn 4 out of 5 stars, ForexBrokers.com ranks Trading 212 at #17 out of 63 brokers, ahead of IFC Markets at #53. If you want more chart tools and a higher-ranked app, Trading 212 has the edge. If you only need core features like alerts, synced watchlists, and basic charting, IFC Markets will cover the essentials.
| 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 and IFC Markets both earn 3.5 out of 5 stars for market research. On ForexBrokers.com, IFC Markets ranks #41 of 63 brokers, edging out Trading 212 at #45. Key differences: IFC Markets publishes daily market commentary, while Trading 212 does not. In contrast, Trading 212 offers forex news from top-tier sources such as Bloomberg, Reuters, or Dow Jones, which IFC Markets does not provide.
Both brokers include an economic calendar and a sentiment tool that shows the long/short ratio across instruments. Neither offers tools from Autochartist, Trading Central, TipRanks, or Acuity Trading. Bottom line: choose IFC Markets if you want day-to-day commentary, or Trading 212 if real-time news from major wires is more important—otherwise, their research toolsets are quite similar.
| 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 beginners comparing Trading 212 and IFC Markets, both brokers provide plenty of video-based learning: each offers at least 10 beginner videos to help you grasp trading basics, plus at least 10 advanced videos for when you’re ready to level up. Neither broker runs monthly client webinars, so live classroom-style sessions aren’t part of the package. In terms of overall quality, both are rated 3.5 out of 5 stars for education; however, ForexBrokers.com ranks Trading 212 higher at #21 out of 63 brokers, while IFC Markets comes in at #30.
Regarding dedicated forex and CFD education libraries (defined as at least 10 articles, videos, or archived webinars focused on forex/CFDs), the provided information doesn’t confirm whether either broker meets that specific threshold. If you want a strong set of on-demand videos to start learning, both Trading 212 and IFC Markets fit the bill; if you need recurring live webinars, you’ll need to consider other options.
| 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 #31, while IFC Markets finished with an overall rank of #45.
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 |
|
|
| Commissions & Fees |
|
|
| Platforms & Tools |
|
|
| 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 |
|
| |
| Commissions & Fees |
|
| |
| Range of Investments |
|
| |
| Platforms & Tools |
|
| |
| 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 (SFC 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 |
|
| |
| Commissions & Fees |
|
| |
| Range of Investments |
|
| |
| Platforms & Tools |
|
| |
| Mobile Trading |
|
| |
| Research |
|
| |
| Education |
|
| |
| Trust Score | 80 | 73 | |
| Winner | check_circle | ||
| Review | Trading 212 Review |
IG
CMC Markets
FOREX.com
XTB
eToro
AvaTrade
Plus500
Pepperstone
FP Markets
Tickmill