Raw spread plus commission versus standard accounts: run the real numbers

[Amanhasnoname]

Raw spread accounts look cheaper because the quoted spread is tiny. Standard accounts look simpler because everything is baked in. Neither claim holds without maths.

Take a day of trading and sum two things: total commission paid on the raw account, and total spread paid on the standard account. Spread cost per trade is the average spread multiplied by pip value and lot size. Commission is usually a fixed amount per lot, per side.

On EURUSD during liquid hours, raw accounts usually win by a clear margin. On pairs like GBPJPY or in quiet sessions, the standard account can sometimes win, since raw spreads widen too while the commission stays fixed.

There's also a hidden element: some brokers mark up the raw spread slightly, so the quoted 0.0 pips isn't truly zero.

The test is to run both account types for a week with the same lot size on the same instrument, then compare total costs. Has anyone done a side-by-side like that, and what did it show?