Head to head · data verified August 2026
Pepperstone vs Interactive Brokers
A close call — 0.1 points apart. The winner depends on what you trade.
Pillar scores
Side by side
| Criterion | Pepperstone | Interactive Brokers |
|---|---|---|
| Overall score | 8.9 | 9.0 |
| Founded | 2010 | 1978 |
| Regulation | ASIC (AU), FCA (UK), CySEC (EU), DFSA (AE), BaFin (DE) | SEC/FINRA (US), FCA (UK), CBI (IE), ASIC (AU), MAS (SG) |
| Min. deposit | $0 (recommended $200+) | $0 |
| Fees | Razor account: spreads from 0.0 pips + ~$3.50/lot commission; Standard: from 1.0 pip, no commission | Stocks from $0.0005/share (Pro) or 0 commission (Lite, US); tiny FX conversion costs |
| Platforms | MetaTrader 4, MetaTrader 5, cTrader, TradingView | Trader Workstation, IBKR Desktop, IBKR Mobile, Client Portal |
| Markets | 1,200+ instruments: forex, indices, shares, commodities, crypto CFDs | 150 markets in 34 countries: stocks, options, futures, forex, bonds, funds |
| Demo account | Yes | Yes |
| Best for | Active forex traders, Scalpers & algo traders | Advanced investors, Global market access, Low margin rates |
Our verdict
Choose Pepperstone if you want active forex traders · scalpers & algo traders.
Choose Interactive Brokers if you want advanced investors · global market access · low margin rates — its standout pillar in our scoring is market range.
Frequently asked questions
Which is better, Pepperstone or Interactive Brokers?
It's close: Pepperstone scores 8.9/10 and Interactive Brokers 9.0/10 in our methodology. The right choice depends on your profile — Pepperstone is strongest for active forex traders, while Interactive Brokers leads for advanced investors.
Is Pepperstone safe?
Pepperstone is overseen by ASIC (AU), FCA (UK), CySEC (EU), DFSA (AE), BaFin (DE). Our trust score for it is 8.9/10 — see the full Pepperstone review for the reasoning.
Is Interactive Brokers safe?
Interactive Brokers is overseen by SEC/FINRA (US), FCA (UK), CBI (IE), ASIC (AU), MAS (SG). Our trust score for it is 9.6/10 — see the full Interactive Brokers review for the reasoning.

