Comparison · Forex & CFD broker

XM vs FP Markets: fees, cashback and which to choose

XM is a globally accessible broker for all levels; FP Markets is an Australian ECN broker with some of the tightest spreads. We compare them on fees, available cashback and which trader profile each suits — plus how to recover part of your fees on both.

Quick comparison

XMFP Markets
Cashback25%26%
Applies toof spreads and commissionsof spreads and commissions
Countries6+5+
Best forbeginners and traders starting with small depositsforex and CFD traders who prioritize low cost and platform variety

Fees

XM. Commission-free accounts with slightly wider spreads; very beginner-friendly on capital.

FP Markets. ECN spreads from 0.0 pips plus per-lot commission; MT4/MT5, cTrader and IRESS support.

Available cashback

FP Markets offers more cashback (26%) than XM (25%), so you recover a larger share of every fee you pay. The gap matters most if you trade with volume.

Work out how much you'd recover for your volume with the cashback calculator.

Pros and cons

XMXM

Pros

  • Low minimum deposit
  • Abundant educational material
  • Millions of accounts and multilingual support
  • 25% cashback via Omanero

Cons

  • Wider spreads on standard accounts
  • Less appealing to professional traders
FP MarketsFP Markets

Pros

  • Among the lowest ECN spreads
  • Wide platform variety (cTrader, IRESS)
  • Long track record and regulation
  • 26% cashback via Omanero

Cons

  • Inactivity fees
  • Less educational material than XM

Best for each profile

Choose XM if you're beginners and traders starting with small deposits. Choose FP Markets if you're forex and CFD traders who prioritize low cost and platform variety.

Verdict

If your priority is recovering the most fees, FP Markets leads with 26% cashback. If you value XM's profile more, you still recover fees at 25%. Best of all: you don't have to choose — use both and earn cashback on each.

Recover fees on XM and FP Markets with verifiable payments.

Frequently asked questions

Other comparisons