Raw vs standard: true cost per 100 London scalps (spreadsheet math)
Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2026 9:26 am
"Raw is always cheaper for scalpers" is usually true — until it isn't. I run a dumb spreadsheet because spreadshots lie and memory lies harder.
**Per round-turn estimate I use:**
- Average spread paid (from my own logs, not the website)
- Commission round-turn
- Average adverse slippage (yes, I include it — otherwise you're doing fan fiction)
- Optional: swap if you somehow hold (I mostly don't)
Then: **cost per 100 round-turns** on EURUSD at my typical size, London hours only.
Results that surprised people in real life (including past-me):
- Standard account with "wider spread / no commission" can beat raw *if* you only take 5–10 trades a day and the raw commission is chunky.
- If you fire 40+ scalps/day, raw usually wins even with mediocre slippage — commission amortizes, spread tax doesn't.
- Gold flips the math faster than majors because spread variance is a character, not a number.
I'm not posting a broker affiliate table. Post your own cost-per-100 if you've measured it. That's the useful fight.
Do you calculate cost per 100 trades, or still go by "feels cheap"?
Raw vs standard — which won on *your* trade frequency last month?
Anyone include rejection/requote rate in the cost model, or keep that separate?
**Per round-turn estimate I use:**
- Average spread paid (from my own logs, not the website)
- Commission round-turn
- Average adverse slippage (yes, I include it — otherwise you're doing fan fiction)
- Optional: swap if you somehow hold (I mostly don't)
Then: **cost per 100 round-turns** on EURUSD at my typical size, London hours only.
Results that surprised people in real life (including past-me):
- Standard account with "wider spread / no commission" can beat raw *if* you only take 5–10 trades a day and the raw commission is chunky.
- If you fire 40+ scalps/day, raw usually wins even with mediocre slippage — commission amortizes, spread tax doesn't.
- Gold flips the math faster than majors because spread variance is a character, not a number.
I'm not posting a broker affiliate table. Post your own cost-per-100 if you've measured it. That's the useful fight.
Do you calculate cost per 100 trades, or still go by "feels cheap"?
Raw vs standard — which won on *your* trade frequency last month?
Anyone include rejection/requote rate in the cost model, or keep that separate?