“Zero commission” removes one possible charge, not every trading cost. Compare the bid–ask spread and any commission for the same instrument, size and holding period. The amount you pay cannot be inferred from an account name or the absence of a separate fee line. This article converts the two components into money and shows when a minimum charge changes the comparison.

The two ways a broker earns from your order

The spread is the simultaneous ask minus bid. A buy uses ask and a sale uses bid; marking a new long position to bid exposes that difference immediately. A short position uses the opposite sides. The client’s spread is not automatically the broker’s profit: liquidity pricing, any markup and hedging costs must be distinguished. Actual entry and exit prices already contain the spread.

A commission is a separate tariff charge. “Per side” means opening or closing; “round turn” covers both. Another distinct practice is PFOF (payment for order flow). EU MiFIR Article 39a prohibits specified third-party execution/routing benefits for retail and opt-in professional client orders. Its temporary domestic exemption ended on 30 June 2026; qualifying venue-fee discounts benefiting only the client are excluded. This is not a worldwide rule or a description of every OTC broker’s revenue.

Compare a spread-only tariff with a spread-plus-commission tariff on their actual terms. A Raw or ECN account name does not establish a zero spread, low total cost or the legal counterparty. Providers may also apply different prices by platform, instrument, account currency or trading volume.

How to compute the true cost of one trade

For a simplified round-trip model with the same spread at entry and exit and no slippage, calculate:

spread cost plus commission = (spread in pips × pip value of the position) + round-turn commission. With different entry and exit spreads, the cost relative to their midpoints uses half of each spread. Financing and other fees remain separate. Do not deduct spread again from profit already computed with actual ask/bid fills.

Assume a standard EUR/USD lot of EUR 100,000 and pip size 0.0001. A pip is USD 10 at one lot, USD 1 at 0.1 lot and USD 0.10 at 0.01 lot. These are exact values in the quote currency under this specification; an account in another currency requires conversion. Use the actual position’s pip value when comparing money charges.

A concrete example: a Standard account versus a Raw account

Let me use a hypothetical but realistic comparison (the numbers are illustrative, meant to show the mechanism — check your own rates with your broker). Assume two accounts on the same EUR/USD pair and one lot.

Cost of one EUR/USD trade, 1 lot (hypothetical example)
Standard accountspread 1.2 pips × 10 USD = 12 USD, commission 0 USD → 12 USD
Raw/ECN accountspread 0.1 pips × 10 USD = 1 USD, commission 7 USD → 8 USD
Difference4 USD in favour of the Raw account

For the same hypothetical rates, 100 completed one-lot trades cost USD 1,200 on Standard and USD 800 on Raw, a USD 400 difference. Repeating that identical monthly activity for twelve months gives USD 4,800. This is a cost scenario, not a forecast or an argument for increasing turnover; additional trades still incur costs and market exposure.

Partial exits and a minimum fee

Splitting an exit does not increase total volume, but this hypothetical schedule applies its minimum separately to each execution.

Scroll sideways to see the full diagram

Partial exits and a minimum feeOpening 1 lot costs 3 USD. Closing once costs 3 USD; five exits of 0.2 lot each, charged a 1 USD minimum each, cost 5 USD. Total commission: 6 or 8 USD.One entry: 1 lot → 3 USDOne exit1 lot × 3 = 3 USDTotal: 6 USDFive exits0.2 lot → min. 1 USD5 × 1 = 5 USDTotal: 8 USDThe same total exit volume.The minimum applies five times.
Hypothetical schedule: 3 USD per lot per side, with a 1 USD minimum applied separately to each execution described. Each of the five exits closes 0.2 lot. Commission is isolated: spread, slippage and financing are unchanged. An actual schedule may define its minimum differently.
A minimum commission can raise the cost of closing a position in several parts.

Record how you split orders as well as the number of lots. Check whether the minimum applies per order, per execution or on another basis. Do not charge the spread on the full lot for every partial exit: each part has its own volume.

Where the break-even point between the models sits

With proportional rates and no minimum, changing size scales both costs by the same factor. Raw wins in this example when the spread saving exceeds its round-turn commission. A tariff minimum, rounding or a price tier can alter that relation. Compare those rules explicitly instead of assuming Raw becomes worthwhile only at high activity.

For the same hypothetical EUR/USD contract, 0.01 lot has a pip value of USD 0.10. The 1.2-pip Standard spread costs USD 0.12, and the 0.1-pip Raw spread costs USD 0.01. Raw remains cheaper when total round-turn commission is below USD 0.11; at USD 0.11 the costs are equal. A commission above USD 0.07 alone therefore does not make Raw more expensive. Check any minimum charge and its per-side or round-turn basis in the actual schedule.

Frequency changes the total amount of a constant cost difference, not its sign. At one-tenth the volume, the example costs USD 1.20 versus USD 0.80; at one-hundredth, USD 0.12 versus USD 0.08, with proportional commission and no minimum. The cheaper model is the same. Decide whether a switch is useful only after comparing the other terms and execution.

Scalper or occasional trader — who is each model for

A scalper and active day-trader should compare full costs in the intended trading window, including missed fills and slippage. A low advertised spread can be outweighed by commission or execution differences. Neither activity nor a small target proves that Raw is cheapest, and a cheaper tariff does not establish a profitable strategy.

For positions held longer, funding and conversion may outweigh the initial spread difference. Small positions need the actual minimum and rounding rules. For example, Pepperstone EU’s account comparison documents the same funding minimum for Standard and Razor and platform-specific commission rounding. It does not support a general claim that Standard requires less capital or always scales better.

Whatever the profile, spread and commission are not the only costs. The real bill also includes overnight swap points for holding a position, currency-conversion fees on deposits and withdrawals, and a possible inactivity fee. A fuller picture comes from the separate breakdown of all real trading costs, and I develop the spread-versus-commission logic itself in the piece on spread versus commission as real trading costs.

What to do before you choose a broker account

  1. Record the same transactions for both tariffs. Sum each trade’s size and cost. Total lots estimate the scale of charges, but do not alone decide which account is cheaper.
  2. Compute the cost of both models with the formula. For your main pair, plug spread and commission into the formula from this article and compare the total round-turn cost. While you are at it, check the minimum commission per order, because that is what breaks the maths on micro-positions.
  3. Read the entity’s cost disclosure and tariff. For services within MiFID II, the disclosure framework covers service and instrument costs and their aggregate effect. Use the relevant client/product scope and current schedule rather than a headline spread.
  4. Match the tariff to your actual use. Compare the same instrument, size, time and holding period. Keep pricing separate from the ECN and market maker distinction. For the bid–ask mechanism, see the ForexMechanics glossary entry on spread.