IC Markets Asia vs London server: which for Tokyo session scalps?

[LondonScalper]

Tokyo session on a London VPS used to feel like a clever shortcut until I measured it.

I run IC Markets. For a while I assumed one London server was "fine" for everything, including the quiet AUD and JPY pairs I sometimes scalp before Europe wakes. The fills were acceptable on paper, but the spread-at-click vs fill gap on Tokyo morning was noisier than the same pairs after 07:00 London. Latency is not just ping — it is how often the quote you clicked is already gone.

What I compare now

• Median round-trip from click to ack on Tokyo hours vs London cash open
• Reject / requote count on USDJPY and AUDUSD before 05:00 London
• Whether Asia server actually tightens the live spread or only the ping number

I am not chasing microseconds. I am asking whether the desk I use for London should also host the overnight book. If the Asia server wins on rejects but loses on swap or symbol mapping quirks, that goes in the broker scorecard too.

Has anyone here kept both an Asia and London IC (or similar) path and actually logged which one earns its keep for Tokyo scalps?

I also watch whether symbol mapping and swap show any oddities on the Asia path — a faster ping is worthless if the contract I think I am trading is not the one in the ticket. Once a month I re-run the same three-check sample so summer liquidity shifts do not silently rewrite the conclusion.