Commission versus spread markup at one-pip targets
Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2026 7:36 am
Raw spread accounts with a commission look cheaper than standard accounts with a wider spread, and often they are. But the comparison depends on the trade size and target, and the math gets less obvious at tiny profit goals.
Say a raw account charges 0.1 pips of spread plus 7 dollars per lot round trip, which equals roughly 0.7 pips on a dollar-quoted major. Total cost sits near 0.8 pips. A standard account with a 1.2 pip spread and no commission costs 1.2 pips. The raw account wins by 0.4 pips per trade. On a 1.5 pip target, that gap is nearly a quarter of the gross profit.
Now look at the quirks. During news or rollover, raw spreads can balloon far beyond the standard account's fixed-ish markup. And some pairs carry commission schedules that differ from the majors, which changes the break-even point.
The only reliable method is to calculate the all-in cost in pips for each pair at the actual trading hours, then compare.
Which account type came out cheaper after doing the all-in math at real trading hours?
Say a raw account charges 0.1 pips of spread plus 7 dollars per lot round trip, which equals roughly 0.7 pips on a dollar-quoted major. Total cost sits near 0.8 pips. A standard account with a 1.2 pip spread and no commission costs 1.2 pips. The raw account wins by 0.4 pips per trade. On a 1.5 pip target, that gap is nearly a quarter of the gross profit.
Now look at the quirks. During news or rollover, raw spreads can balloon far beyond the standard account's fixed-ish markup. And some pairs carry commission schedules that differ from the majors, which changes the break-even point.
The only reliable method is to calculate the all-in cost in pips for each pair at the actual trading hours, then compare.
Which account type came out cheaper after doing the all-in math at real trading hours?