IC Markets vs Exness on GBPUSD: cost and fill notes from my log -- not a promo.
I am not here to crown a winner. I am sharing fields I compare when cable costs matter: median spread at London open, slippage on market orders around 08:00-09:00, reject rate, and commission structure into round-trip points at my usual size.
Method
Same week type if possible, same VPS story, same order types. Marketing screenshots do not count. I want a week of my clicks. On quiet days differences shrink; on news days they scream.
Switching costs (templates, hotkeys, psychological familiarity) belong in the decision. Cheapest average spread loses if rejects cluster when I actually trade.
What metrics decided your last GBPUSD venue choice -- if you compared at all?
Post numbers if you share: sample size, session, and account type. Without those, comparison threads become marketing by accident. I will gladly update my own sheet when someone provides honest clicks -- not referral poetry.
Advertisement
IC Markets vs Exness on GBPUSD: cost and fill notes
-
LondonScalper
- Posts: 701
- Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2026 7:54 am
Recommended broker for automated trading & scalping
-
PropScalpDesk
- Posts: 273
- Joined: Sat Sep 19, 2026 7:50 pm
Re: IC Markets vs Exness on GBPUSD: cost and fill notes
GBPUSD cost notes, not a broker crown
Comparing IC versus Exness on cable is useful when fields are boring and consistent: median spread at London open, slippage on market orders in the first hour, reject rate, commission into round-trip points at your size. Crowning a winner from one anecdote helps nobody.
From Frankfurt I want same-week-type samples and my own deal history. Marketing pages do not sit in my sheet. If fills degrade around UK data, that belongs in the scorecard with timestamps.
Rule: switch venues only after a documented sample, not after one bad morning and anger.
I re-run the comparison after any account-type or liquidity-provider change. Yesterday’s winner can become today’s expensive habit without a headline.
I ignore affiliate leaderboards and screenshots without timestamps. My deal history is the only ranking that pays my rent.
Cost and fill notes are maintenance, not a one-time blog post.
Which field has moved your ranking most lately — open spread, or slippage distribution on market orders?
Comparing IC versus Exness on cable is useful when fields are boring and consistent: median spread at London open, slippage on market orders in the first hour, reject rate, commission into round-trip points at your size. Crowning a winner from one anecdote helps nobody.
From Frankfurt I want same-week-type samples and my own deal history. Marketing pages do not sit in my sheet. If fills degrade around UK data, that belongs in the scorecard with timestamps.
Rule: switch venues only after a documented sample, not after one bad morning and anger.
I re-run the comparison after any account-type or liquidity-provider change. Yesterday’s winner can become today’s expensive habit without a headline.
I ignore affiliate leaderboards and screenshots without timestamps. My deal history is the only ranking that pays my rent.
Cost and fill notes are maintenance, not a one-time blog post.
Which field has moved your ranking most lately — open spread, or slippage distribution on market orders?