We found 11 online brokers that are appropriate for Trading Safe CFD Broker.

Financial markets always involve uncertainty, so no trading instrument can guarantee complete safety. CFDs are particularly risky because they use leverage, which magnifies both gains and losses. In this guide titled 'Is CFD Trading Safe?' I look at how CFDs work, their main risks, the protections available to retail traders and practical examples that show how leverage can affect an account.
CFD stands for Contract for Difference. I see a CFD as an agreement that allows me to speculate on up or down price movement only no real asset buy or sell. CFDs can provide convenient exposure to shares, indices, currencies, commodities and other markets, but this flexibility comes with substantial risk.
When I consider whether CFD trading is safe, I first look at 3 things: leverage, market volatility and the amount of capital I am prepared to lose. Understanding the market is important, but understanding leverage is even more important because a relatively small market movement can produce a much larger percentage change in the money committed to a leveraged position.
CFD trading therefore cannot simply be described as safe or unsafe. The level of risk depends on the market being traded, the leverage being used, the size of the position, the trader's experience and the regulatory protections that apply. Even with good risk management, however, CFDs remain high risk financial products.
The possibility of higher returns usually comes with higher risk, but taking additional risk does not guarantee a higher return. This distinction is especially important with CFDs. Leverage increases my exposure, but it does not improve the probability that my prediction will be correct.
For example, if I have £1,000 and open a position with £5,000 of market exposure, a 2% favourable movement represents £100 before spreads, commissions, financing costs and other charges. The same 2% movement against me represents a £100 loss. That is 10% of my original £1,000 account balance even though the underlying market moved by only 2%.
This is one reason retail CFD trading has such a difficult track record. UK regulators have previously found that approximately 80% of customers lose money when investing in CFDs. Current UK rules also require CFD providers to display their own percentage of retail accounts that lose money, so I would always check the provider's current risk warning before opening an account.

When I trade a CFD, I do not normally purchase the underlying asset. Instead, my profit or loss is based on the difference between the opening and closing values of the CFD position. Because CFDs are leveraged, I generally need to provide only part of the total market exposure as margin.
For UK retail clients, leverage is restricted according to the underlying market. The maximum permitted leverage ranges from 30:1 to 2:1. This means the required initial margin can range from approximately 3.33% of the position value at 30:1 leverage to 50% at 2:1 leverage.
For example, at 30:1 leverage, approximately £333.33 of initial margin could provide exposure to a £10,000 position. A 1% movement in that £10,000 position represents approximately £100 before trading costs. Relative to the £333.33 initial margin, that is roughly a 30% change. This example shows why even relatively small price movements matter when leverage is high.
I would therefore never judge the risk of a CFD simply by looking at the amount of margin required to open it. I look at the entire position value and calculate how much I could lose if the market moves against me.
Position sizing is one of the most useful risk controls. Stop loss orders can also help limit losses, although ordinary stop losses may execute at a different price during fast markets or price gaps. Guaranteed stop losses may provide greater certainty where offered, although providers can charge for them and their terms vary.
Retail protections are also important. In the UK, regulated CFD providers must apply a margin close out rule when funds fall to 50% of the margin required to maintain open CFD positions. Retail clients also receive negative balance protection, meaning losses on the CFD account are limited so that the client cannot lose more than the total funds in that account under these protections.
I can reduce CFD risk, but I cannot remove it. I can trade smaller positions, use less leverage, maintain sufficient available funds, set predetermined exit levels and avoid placing too much capital into a single market.
For example, suppose I have a £10,000 trading account. Opening one CFD position with £100,000 of market exposure creates a very different risk profile from opening a £5,000 position. A 1% adverse movement on £100,000 represents £1,000 before costs, while the same percentage movement on £5,000 represents £50. The underlying market has moved by exactly the same percentage, but my position sizing produces a dramatically different financial result.
I also consider concentration risk. Having 5 leveraged positions does not necessarily mean I am diversified. If all 5 positions depend on similar economic conditions, they may move against me at the same time.
Costs are another consideration. Depending on the provider and instrument, CFD trading can involve spreads, commissions and overnight financing charges. These costs can reduce profitable trades and increase the overall effect of losing trades. This makes CFDs particularly important to evaluate carefully when positions are held for extended periods.
CFD rules vary considerably between countries. In the UK, CFDs can legally be offered to retail clients by appropriately authorised firms, subject to strict requirements including leverage limits, margin close out requirements, negative balance protection and mandatory risk warnings.
The European regulatory framework also places significant restrictions on CFDs offered to retail investors. In February 2026, European regulators again reminded firms how certain leveraged derivatives should be clearly marketed.
The position in the United States is different. CFDs are generally not available to US retail investors in the same way they are offered in markets such as the UK. I would therefore check the rules in my own jurisdiction rather than assuming that CFD regulations are internationally consistent.
When I look at whether CFD trading is safe, I find it useful to look at what has actually gone wrong rather than considering only theoretical risks. Regulators have repeatedly intervened in the CFD market because large numbers of retail traders have lost money and because some providers have used practices that increased the risks faced by inexperienced customers.
One of the clearest examples comes from European regulatory research. Before major CFD restrictions were introduced, regulators found that between 74% and 89% of retail CFD accounts typically lost money. The size of the losses was also significant, with average losses in different studies ranging from approximately €1,600 to €29,000.
France provided an especially striking example. Research covering approximately 4 years found that more than 89% of retail investors studied lost money and the average loss was approximately €10,887. In Spain, approximately 82% of retail CFD clients studied lost money during a 21 month period, with an average loss of approximately €4,700.
I also find the Irish figures useful because they demonstrate that losses were not isolated to one market. An Irish regulatory review found that 75% of retail clients trading CFDs during 2013 and 2014 lost money, with an average loss of approximately €6,900 among those clients. A later review covering 2015 and 2016 found that approximately 74% lost money, with an average loss of approximately €2,700.
These figures do not mean that every CFD trader will lose money. They do show why I would not describe CFDs as an ordinary low risk investment. When a substantial majority of retail accounts repeatedly lose money across different countries, it demonstrates the practical consequences of leverage, costs, volatility and poor risk management.

Leverage is one of the easiest CFD risks to demonstrate with numbers. Suppose I deposit £1,000 and use 20:1 leverage to create £20,000 of market exposure. If the underlying market falls by only 2%, my position loses approximately £400 before other costs.
The market has fallen just 2%, but I have lost approximately 40% of my £1,000 starting capital. If the market instead falls 5%, the position loses approximately £1,000 before costs. A relatively ordinary percentage movement in the underlying asset can therefore become an extremely large percentage loss on the money supporting my leveraged position.
This is exactly why leverage limits matter. Without appropriate restrictions, a retail trader can build market exposure that is many times larger than the money available to absorb losses.
A stop loss does not guarantee that I will always exit at the exact price requested. Suppose I have a CFD position and place a stop that should limit my loss to £200. Unexpected political news, an earnings announcement or a major economic event could cause the underlying market to jump directly past my stop price.
If the next available executable price produces a £350 loss, my ordinary stop could be filled around that level rather than at the price corresponding to my planned £200 loss. This is known as slippage and it becomes particularly important during fast markets and price gaps.
This means my risk calculation should not assume that an ordinary stop loss makes the maximum possible loss completely predictable. Where available, a guaranteed stop can address some of this uncertainty, although the provider's conditions and potential charges need to be considered.
Another problem can develop gradually rather than through a dramatic market crash. Suppose I hold a leveraged CFD position for several weeks. Even if the underlying market barely moves, overnight financing charges can accumulate.
For example, if my total financing and other holding costs eventually reach £150 and my trading profit is only £100, I can still finish with a £50 loss before considering any additional charges. The exact financing calculation varies between providers and products, but the principle is important. Being correct about the general direction of a market does not automatically mean the CFD trade will be profitable.
This became an important regulatory issue again in 2025. The UK regulator reviewed CFD providers and found examples where firms applied different levels of overnight funding charges without adequately explaining why. It also found that potentially significant charges were not always disclosed adequately.
Problems have not been limited to traders making bad market predictions. There have also been cases where regulators found serious problems with how CFD products were sold.
In 2024, the UK regulator fined Forex TB Limited £276,100 for unfair customer treatment and for providing investment advice without authorisation. The regulator found that customers were pressured to put money at risk through CFD trading. In some cases, customers were even encouraged to borrow money from friends or family.
This example is particularly concerning to me because inexperienced customers did not always understand the risks they were accepting. The regulator also found that risks were not always fully explained.
The case included another important issue. Customers were encouraged to provide false information so that they could become classified as 'Professional Clients'. This matters because professional classification can mean giving up important protections that apply to ordinary retail CFD customers.
Marketing has also caused regulatory intervention. In 2020, the UK regulator stopped 4 Cypriot investment firms from continuing to offer high risk CFDs to UK investors after concerns involving unauthorised celebrity endorsements.
The firms included Hoch Capital Ltd, Magnum FX Cyprus Ltd, Rodeler Ltd and F1Markets Ltd. Their trading brands included names such as iTrader, tradeATF, ET Finance, 24option, Investous, StrattonMarkets and Europrime.
The regulator required the firms to stop selling CFDs to UK customers, close existing UK customer positions, return customer money and inform affected customers about the regulatory action. UK investors were estimated to have lost hundreds of thousands of pounds.
This is a useful reminder that I should not judge the safety of a CFD provider from an advertisement, social media recommendation or celebrity endorsement. I would independently check the regulatory status of the firm before depositing money.

The scale of retail losses eventually resulted in major regulatory intervention. In 2018, European regulators introduced restrictions on CFDs offered to retail investors.
I find it easier to understand these restrictions when I convert them into actual money. At 30:1 leverage, £1,000 of margin could support approximately £30,000 of market exposure. If that £30,000 position moved 1% against me, the movement would represent approximately £300 before costs. The underlying market would have moved by only 1%, but I would have lost an amount equivalent to 30% of my £1,000 margin.
At 20:1 leverage, the same £1,000 could support approximately £20,000 of exposure. A 1% adverse movement would represent approximately £200 before costs. At 10:1, my £1,000 could support approximately £10,000, where a 1% adverse movement represents approximately £100.
The 5:1 limit on individual equities makes sense to me when I consider how quickly an individual share can move. If I used £1,000 of margin to create £5,000 of share CFD exposure and the underlying share fell 10% after unexpected company news, the movement would represent approximately £500 before costs. I could therefore lose an amount equivalent to half of my £1,000 margin from a 10% movement in the underlying share.
I pay even more attention to the 2:1 restriction applied to cryptocurrency CFDs because it shows how regulators adjusted leverage according to the perceived volatility of the underlying market. With £1,000 at 2:1 leverage, I could create approximately £2,000 of exposure. A 10% adverse movement would represent approximately £200 before costs.
What these restrictions tell me is that I should never confuse a margin requirement with the amount I actually have at risk. When I place a CFD trade, I look at the full value of my market exposure. The fact that I may only need £1,000 to open a £10,000, £20,000 or £30,000 position does not make the remaining exposure disappear.
I also do not treat the regulatory leverage limit as a target. Just because I am permitted to use leverage of up to 30:1 on a particular retail CFD does not mean I need to use all of it. If I can take the exposure I want using 2:1 or 3:1 leverage, I do not see a reason to automatically increase it to 30:1 simply because the maximum is available.
The rules also introduced a margin close out requirement at 50% of the required minimum margin, negative balance protection, restrictions on incentives designed to encourage CFD trading and standardised warnings showing the percentage of a provider's retail accounts that lose money.
These rules tell me something important about the question 'Is CFD Trading Safe?' Regulators did not simply require brokers to provide clearer educational material. They concluded that direct restrictions on leverage and product distribution were necessary to reduce consumer harm.
The UK made similar protections permanent in 2019. The regulator estimated that its CFD restrictions could save retail consumers between approximately £267 million and £451 million each year.
The rules require retail CFD providers to limit leverage between 30:1 and 2:1 depending on the underlying asset. They also require positions to be closed when account funds fall to 50% of the margin required to maintain the open CFD positions.
Negative balance protection is another important intervention. It prevents a protected retail CFD account from losing more than the total funds in that account. Without this protection, an extreme market movement combined with leverage could potentially leave a trader owing additional money.
The regulator also prohibited cash and other incentives intended to encourage retail customers to trade CFDs. I consider this important because bonuses can create an incentive to trade more frequently or take risks that would otherwise be avoided.
Regulatory intervention has continued after the original leverage restrictions. The UK regulator has stated that action taken against problem CFD firms during 2020 and 2021 was estimated to have prevented approximately £100 million of ongoing consumer harm each year.
The problems identified included firms engaging in practices designed to generate excessive customer trading, moving retail customers into professional classifications and directing customers towards related overseas CFD providers where UK retail protections might not apply.
This shows why I would check not only whether a company appears to have a regulated business somewhere in its corporate group, but also which legal entity actually holds my account and which country's regulations apply to my money.
Professional classification remains an important issue. In 2025, the UK regulator again warned CFD investors about firms using pressure to persuade customers to classify themselves as professional clients.
The attraction can be higher leverage, but the tradeoff can be the loss of important retail protections. The regulator estimated that retail CFD protections prevent people each year and provide over £451 million of protection.
For me, higher leverage would therefore not automatically be an advantage. If becoming a professional client means losing protections specifically created after regulators identified widespread retail losses, I would consider the additional risk very carefully.
Another development I consider important is the movement of customers towards offshore providers. A website may be accessible from the UK without giving me the same protections as an account held with a properly authorised UK entity.
In 2025, the UK regulator specifically warned about investors being directed towards unregulated offshore firms. It also highlighted promotions from financial influencers involving unrealistic returns, copy trading, managed accounts and paid trading tips.
For example, an offshore provider might advertise leverage of 500:1. With £1,000, that theoretical leverage could represent exposure of up to £500,000 if fully used. A movement of just 0.2% against a £500,000 position represents £1,000 before costs. This simplified example demonstrates why extremely high leverage can make even tiny market movements financially destructive.
Regulatory problems can also occur behind the scenes. In March 2026, the UK regulator fined Dinosaur Merchant Bank Limited £338,000 after finding failures in systems designed to identify suspicious trading in its CFD business.
The firm introduced a new order system in June 2024 and CFD activity increased sharply. Between June and October 2024, approximately $3.05 billion in corresponding asset value was traded through the platform. According to the regulator, those orders and trades were not captured and reviewed by the firm's automated surveillance system.
The problem here was different from an individual customer losing money through leverage. Effective market surveillance is designed to help detect potentially suspicious behaviour such as insider dealing and market manipulation. A failure of those controls demonstrates that CFD safety also depends on the systems and compliance standards of the firms operating in the market.
Regulatory intervention has not ended simply because leverage restrictions now exist. In 2025, the UK regulator reviewed CFD providers under its Consumer Duty requirements and found that some firms might not be providing fair value.
Problems included insufficient consideration of customer complaints and satisfaction, limited changes to products despite consumer protection requirements and concerns surrounding overnight funding charges.
There has also been continued regulatory attention on financial promotions. In February 2026, 7 social media influencers were sentenced after pleading guilty to issuing unauthorised financial promotions connected with a foreign exchange trading scheme. The case demonstrates the increasing attention regulators are giving to financial products promoted through social media.
For me, the lesson is that CFD regulation is not only about maximum leverage. Regulators are also looking at advertising, customer classification, fees, sales practices, financial influencers, offshore providers, market surveillance and whether customers receive fair value.
I think the history of regulatory intervention provides one of the strongest answers to the question 'Is CFD Trading Safe?'. European studies found retail loss rates ranging from 74% to 89%. Regulators responded by restricting leverage, requiring margin close outs, introducing negative balance protection, banning trading incentives and requiring prominent loss warnings.
The intervention appears to have had practical effects. After the original European measures were introduced in 2018, national regulators reported reductions in automatic close outs and cases where CFD accounts entered negative equity. This suggests that regulation can reduce some of the most damaging consequences of leveraged trading.
However, regulation cannot make a losing trade profitable. It cannot prevent markets from moving unexpectedly and it cannot eliminate spreads, financing charges, slippage or poor trading decisions. Regulation primarily puts limits around how much risk providers can expose retail customers to and how those products can be marketed.

My final verdict is that CFDs are not safe in the same sense as a low risk savings or investment product. They are speculative leveraged instruments where relatively small movements in an underlying market can produce much larger percentage gains or losses on the capital supporting a position.
The historical numbers are difficult to ignore. European regulatory research found that between 74% and 89% of retail CFD accounts typically lost money. Individual national studies found loss rates including approximately 76%, 82% and more than 89%.
Regulators responded because education and risk warnings alone were not considered sufficient. Europe introduced major restrictions in 2018 and the UK made its restrictions permanent in 2019. Those interventions included leverage limits from 30:1 to 2:1, a 50% margin close out requirement, negative balance protection, restrictions on incentives and mandatory retail loss warnings.
More recent interventions show that the risks have not disappeared. A CFD firm was fined £276,100 in 2024 after customers were pressured to put money at risk. Regulators warned again about professional client classification and offshore CFD providers in 2025. A UK firm was fined £338,000 in 2026 over failures in the surveillance of CFD trading activity.
For me, these examples make the answer clear. Regulation can make retail CFD trading better controlled, but it cannot make CFDs inherently safe. I would treat CFDs as high risk products, use modest position sizes, understand the full exposure created by leverage, verify the provider's regulatory status and never risk money that I cannot afford to lose.
When I assess CFD trading safety, I do not start by asking how much money I could make. I start by asking how much I could lose, how quickly that loss could occur and what protections I have if the market moves sharply against me. CFDs are leveraged products, so I consider risk management more important than potential returns.
Before placing a trade, I make sure I understand the basic CFD terminology. Terms such as leverage, margin, spread, stop loss, margin close out and negative balance protection directly affect the risk I am taking. If I do not understand one of these terms, I do not consider myself ready to risk real money.
The first number I check is my total market exposure. Understanding CFD leverage helps me see why the amount required to open a trade can be misleadingly small compared with the position I actually control.
For example, if I deposit £1,000 and take £10,000 of market exposure, I am effectively dealing with exposure 10 times the size of my deposited capital. If the underlying market moves 1% against my £10,000 position, the movement represents £100 before costs. That is equivalent to 10% of my original £1,000.
I also pay close attention to CFD margin. A low margin requirement does not make a trade safer. In fact, a small margin requirement can allow me to create a much larger position, which means I need to be even more careful about position sizing.
I would also investigate the implications of trading a CFD without leverage when evaluating how leverage changes my overall risk profile.
I never consider a potential CFD return without considering the loss required to achieve it. Looking at the average CFD return can provide useful context, but historical returns cannot tell me what my next trade will produce.
For a practical CFD example, suppose I have £5,000 in my account and open a £20,000 CFD position. A 2% adverse movement represents approximately £400 before costs. Although the underlying asset moved only 2%, my £400 loss represents 8% of my original £5,000 account.
This is why I never assume that a small percentage movement in a market means a small financial risk to me. I calculate the monetary effect of the movement against my account balance before entering the position.
Trading risk is not limited to whether a market rises or falls. I also investigate CFD fees because spreads, commissions and overnight financing costs can change the final result of a position.
For example, I could correctly predict that an asset will rise and still make considerably less than expected if I hold a leveraged position for a long period and accumulate financing charges. If my gross trading profit is £250 but my combined trading and financing costs reach £175, I am left with only £75 before considering any other applicable costs.
I do not assume every CFD carries the same level of risk. Trading CFD shares can expose me to company announcements, earnings results and sudden individual share price movements. A profit warning released outside normal trading hours could result in a substantial price gap when the underlying market reopens.
When considering CFD indices, I am dealing with a basket of companies rather than one individual company. I can also examine something specific such as the CFD S&P 500, but diversification within an index does not remove leveraged trading risk.
Commodity CFDs create different considerations. If I trade CFD gold, I consider factors such as interest rates, inflation expectations, currencies and geopolitical events. With CFD oil, unexpected supply decisions, geopolitical developments and changes in global demand can produce rapid price movements.
Part of deciding whether CFDs are appropriate for me is understanding what I could use instead. Comparing CFD vs stock trading helps me understand the difference between speculating on price movements through a contract and owning the underlying shares.
I also compare CFD vs ETF products when I want broad market exposure. If my objective is long term investment rather than short term leveraged speculation, I consider whether direct ownership or an ETF is more consistent with that objective.
When looking at currencies, I compare CFD vs Forex because the products can have similarities but their structure, available markets and costs need to be understood before I trade.
I can also examine CFD vs Futures, CFD vs Options and Spread Betting vs CFD. I do not assume one product is automatically safer simply because it has a different name. I compare leverage, maximum potential losses, costs, liquidity, complexity and regulatory protections.
More broadly, comparing Investing vs CFDs helps me distinguish between building long term ownership of assets and making leveraged speculative trades. They can serve very different financial objectives.
CFD safety also depends on where I live and which regulatory framework protects my account. If I am trading in Britain, I investigate the rules surrounding CFD UK accounts and verify that the firm I am dealing with has the appropriate regulatory authorisation.
I also separate trading risk from taxation. Understanding CFD tax UK considerations can be important because tax treatment depends on individual circumstances and applicable rules can change.
The situation is different in America, so I would investigate CFD USA rules rather than assuming that UK or European CFD regulations apply internationally.
The same principle applies in Australia. If I were comparing a CFD trading platform in Australia, I would check the provider's regulatory status, leverage conditions, client money arrangements and risk disclosures before depositing funds.
I consider the company holding my money to be part of my CFD safety assessment. Before choosing a CFD provider, I independently verify its regulatory status and make sure I understand which legal entity will actually hold my account.
I also compare established CFD brokers rather than selecting a provider because of an advertisement or social media promotion. A broader CFD brokers list can help me compare alternatives, but I still independently check regulation, fees and account protections.
This matters because a company can have multiple legal entities in different countries. I want to know exactly which entity I am contracting with and which regulator is responsible for overseeing it.
Because I do not own the underlying shares when trading a standard share CFD, I also need to understand how corporate events are handled. The treatment of CFD dividends can affect my account when an underlying company goes ex dividend.
This is another reason I do not treat a share CFD as identical to buying a share. The economic exposure may have similarities, but ownership, financing, voting rights, dividends and risk can be handled differently.
I consider education part of risk management. Before committing substantial capital, I study different CFD trading strategies and examine how each approach behaves during both favourable and unfavourable markets.
I can also use educational resources such as the best CFD trading books to improve my understanding of market structure, technical analysis, risk management and trading psychology.
However, I never consider a strategy safe simply because it has worked historically. A strategy can experience losing periods and market conditions can change. I therefore focus on how much a strategy could lose rather than concentrating exclusively on its best historical results.
When researching online CFD trading, I am particularly cautious about claims involving easy income, guaranteed returns or unusually high success rates. No legitimate trading strategy can guarantee that every CFD position will make money.
I apply the same scrutiny when researching a particular platform or service. For example, if I am investigating CFD IQ Option, I check availability, regulation and restrictions applicable to my own country rather than relying exclusively on marketing material.
Safety is not my only consideration. Depending on my personal requirements, I may also investigate questions such as Is CFD Trading Halal?. Religious, ethical, legal and tax considerations are separate from market risk, so I evaluate them independently.
We have conducted extensive research and analysis on over multiple data points on Is Cfd Trading Safe Contract for Difference (CFD) Brokers to present you with a comprehensive guide that can help you find the most suitable Is Cfd Trading Safe Contract for Difference (CFD) Brokers. Below we shortlist what we think are the best Safe CFD Broker after careful consideration and evaluation. We hope this list will assist you in making an informed decision when researching Is Cfd Trading Safe Contract for Difference (CFD) Brokers.
Selecting a reliable and reputable online Safe CFD Broker trading brokerage involves assessing their track record, regulatory status, customer support, processing times, international presence, and language capabilities. Considering these factors, you can make an informed decision and trade Safe CFD Broker more confidently.
Selecting the right online Safe CFD Broker trading brokerage requires careful consideration of several critical factors. Here are some essential points to keep in mind:
Our team have listed brokers that match your criteria for you below. All brokerage data has been summarised into a comparison table. Scroll down.
When choosing a broker for Safe CFD Broker trading, it's essential to compare the different options available to you. Our Safe CFD Broker brokerage comparison table below allows you to compare several important features side by side, making it easier to make an informed choice.
By comparing these essential features, you can choose a Safe CFD Broker broker that best suits your needs and preferences for Safe CFD Broker. Our Safe CFD Broker broker comparison table simplifies the process, allowing you to make a more informed decision.
Here are the top Safe CFD Broker.
Compare Safe CFD Broker brokers for min deposits, funding, used by, benefits, account types, platforms, and support levels. When searching for a Safe CFD Broker broker, it's crucial to compare several factors to choose the right one for your Safe CFD Broker needs. Our comparison tool allows you to compare the essential features side by side.
All brokers below are Safe CFD Broker. Learn more about what they offer below.
You can scroll left and right on the comparison table below to see more Safe CFD Broker that accept Safe CFD Broker clients.
| Broker |
IC Markets
|
Roboforex
|
eToro
|
XTB
|
XM
|
Pepperstone
|
AvaTrade
|
FP Markets
|
SpreadEx
|
EasyMarkets
|
FXPro
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rating | |||||||||||
| Regulation | International Capital Markets Pty Ltd (Australia) (ASIC) Australian Securities & Investments Commission Licence No. 335692, Seychelles Financial Services Authority (FSA) (SD018), IC Markets (EU) Ltd (CySEC) Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission with License No. 362/18, Capital Markets Authority(CMA) Kenya IC Markets (KE) Ltd, Securities Commission of The Bahamas (SCB) IC Markets (Bahamas) Ltd | RoboForex Ltd is authorised and regulated by the Financial Services Commission (FSC) of Belize under licence No. 000138/32, under the Securities Industry Act 2021, RoboForex Ltd is an (A category) member of The Financial Commission, also RoboForex Ltd is a participant of the Financial Commission Compensation Fund | FCA (Financial Conduct Authority) eToro (UK) Ltd (FCA reference 583263), eToro (Europe) Ltd CySEC (Cyprus Securities Exchange Commission), ASIC (Australian Securities and Investments Commission) eToro AUS Capital Limited ASIC license 491139, CySec (Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission under the license 109/10), FSAS (Financial Services Authority Seychelles) eToro (Seychelles) Ltd license SD076, eToro (ME) Limited (ADGM) Abu Dhabi (UAE) number 220073, eToro (Europe) Ltd (AMF) Autorité des marchés financiers as a digital assets provider France | FCA (Financial Conduct Authority reference 522157) XTB Limited, CySEC (Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission reference 169/12), DFSA (Dubai Financial Services Authority XTB MENA Limited licensed 8 July 2021), FSA (Financial Services Authority Seychelles license number SD148), FSCA (Financial Sector Conduct Authority XTB Africa (Pty) Ltd licensed 10 August 2021), KNF (Komisja Nadzoru Finansowego Polish Financial Supervision Authority) | Financial Sector Conduct Authority (FSCA) (49976) XM ZA (Pty) Ltd, Financial Services Commission (FSC) (000261/27) XM Global Limited, Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission (CySEC) (license 120/10) Trading Point of Financial Instruments Ltd, Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) (number 443670) Trading Point of Financial Instruments Pty Ltd | Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC), Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission (CySEC), Federal Financial Supervisory Authority (BaFin), Dubai Financial Services Authority (DFSA), Capital Markets Authority of Kenya (CMA), Pepperstone Markets Limited is incorporated in The Bahamas (number 177174 B), Licensed by the Securities Commission of The Bahamas (SCB) number SIA-F217 | Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) Ava Capital Markets Australia Pty Ltd (406684), South African Financial Sector Conduct Authority (FSCA) Ava Capital Markets Pty Ltd (45984), Financial Services Agency (Japan FSA) Ava Trade Japan K.K. (1662), Financial Futures Association of Japan (FFAJ) Ava Trade Japan K.K. (1574), Abu Dhabi Global Markets (ADGM) / Financial Regulatory Services Authority (FRSA) Ava Trade Middle East Ltd (190018), Central Bank of Ireland (C53877) AVA Trade EU Ltd, Polish Financial Supervision Authority (KNF) AVA Trade EU Ltd (branch authorisation), British Virgin Islands Financial Services Commission (BVI) Ava Trade Markets Ltd (SIBA/L/13/1049), Israel Securities Authority (ISA) ATrade Ltd (514666577), Financial Superintendence of Colombia (SFC 0261 of 2024), Investment Industry Regulatory Organization of Canada through Friedberg Direct (IIROC) | CySEC (Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission) (371/18), ASIC AFS (Australian Securities and Investments Commission) (286354), FSP (Financial Sector Conduct Authority in South Africa) (50926), Financial Services Authority Seychelles (FSA) (SD 130) | FCA (Financial Conduct Authority) (190941), Gambling Commission (Great Britain) (8835), licence in Ireland as remote bookmaker for fixed odds betting licence number 1016176 | Easy Forex Trading Ltd is regulated by CySEC (License 079/07). This is the only entity that onboards EU clients. easyMarkets Pty Ltd is regulated by ASIC (AFS License 246566), EF Worldwide Ltd (Seychelles) is regulated by FSA (License SD056), EF Worldwide Ltd (British Virgin Islands) is regulated by FSC (License SIBA/L/20/1135), EF Worldwide (PTY) Ltd is regulated by FSCA (License 54018) | FCA (Financial Conduct Authority) (509956), CySEC (Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission) (078/07), FSCA (Financial Sector Conduct Authority) (45052), SCB (Securities Commission of The Bahamas) (SIA-F184), FSA (Financial Services Authority of Seychelles) (SD120) |
| Min Deposit | 200 | 10 | 50 | No minimum deposit | 5 | No minimum deposit | 100 | 100 | No minimum deposit | 25 | 100 |
| Funding |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Used By | 200,000+ | 730,000+ | 40,000,000+ | 2,000,000+ | 15,000,000+ | 830,000+ | 400,000+ | 200,000+ | 60,000+ | 250,000+ | 11,200,000+ |
| Benefits |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Accounts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Platforms | MT5, MT4, MetaTrader WebTrader, Mobile Apps, iOS (App Store), Android (Google Play), MetaTrader iPhone/iPad, MetaTrader Android Google Play, MetaTrader Mac, cTrader, cTrader Web, cTrader iPhone/iPad, cTrader iMac, cTrader Android Google Play, cTrader Automate, cTrader Copy Trading, TradingView, Virtual Private Server, Trading Servers, MT4 Advanced Trading Tools, IC Insights, Trading Central | MT4, MT5, R Mobile Trader, R StocksTrader, WebTrader, Mobile Apps, iOS (App Store), Android (Google Play), Windows | eToro Trading App, Mobile Apps, iOS (App Store), Android (Google Play), CopyTrading, Web | MT4, Mirror Trader, Web Trader, Tablet, Mobile Apps, iOS (App Store), Android (Google Play) | MT5, MT5 WebTrader, XM Apple App for iPhone, XM App for Android Google Play, Tablet: MT5 for iPad, MT5 for Android Google Play, XM App for iPad, XM App for iOS (App Store), Android (Google Play), Mobile Apps | MT4, MT5, cTrader,WebTrader, TradingView, Windows, Mobile Apps, iOS (App Store), Android (Google Play) | MT4, MT5, Web Trading, AvaTrade App, AvaOptions, Mac Trading, AvaSocial, Mobile Apps, iOS (App Store), Android (Google Play) | MT4, MT5, TradingView, cTrader, WebTrader, Mobile Trader, Mobile Apps, iOS (App Store), Android (Google Play) | Web, Mobile Apps, iOS (App Store), Android (Google Play), iPad App, iPhone App, TradingView | easyMarkets App, Mobile Apps, iOS (App Store), Android (Google Play), Web Platform, TradingView, MT4, MT5 | MT4, MT5, cTrader, FxPro WebTrader, FxPro Mobile Apps, iOS (App Store), Android (Google Play) |
| Support |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Learn More |
Sign
Up with icmarkets |
Sign
Up with roboforex |
Sign
Up with etoro |
Sign
Up with xtb |
Sign
Up with xm |
Sign
Up with pepperstone |
Sign
Up with avatrade |
Sign
Up with fpmarkets |
Sign
Up with spreadex |
Sign
Up with easymarkets |
Sign
Up with fxpro |
| Risk Warning | Losses can exceed deposits | Losses can exceed deposits | 52% of retail investor accounts lose money when trading CFDs with this provider. | 69% - 80% of retail investor accounts lose money when trading CFDs with this provider. You should consider whether you understand how CFDs work and whether you can afford to take the high risk of losing your money. | CFDs are complex instruments and come with a high risk of losing money rapidly due to leverage. 74.48% of retail investor accounts lose money when trading CFDs with this provider. You should consider whether you understand how CFDs work and whether you can afford to take the high risk of losing your money. | 75-95 % of retail investor accounts lose money when trading CFDs | 57% of retail investor accounts lose money when trading CFDs with this provider | Losses can exceed deposits | 62% of retail CFD accounts lose money | 76% of retail investor accounts lose money when trading CFDs with this provider. | 74% of retail investor accounts lose money when trading CFDs and Spread Betting with this provider |
| Demo |
IC Markets Demo |
Roboforex Demo |
eToro Demo |
XTB Demo |
XM Demo |
Pepperstone Demo |
AvaTrade Demo |
FP Markets Demo |
SpreadEx Demo |
easyMarkets Demo |
FxPro Demo |
| Excluded Countries | US, IR, CA, NZ, JP | AU, BE, BQ, BR, CA, CW, CZ, DE, ES, EE, EU, FM, FR, FI, GW, ID, IR, JP, LR, MP, NL, PF, PL, RU, SE, SJ, SS, SL, SI, TL, TR, DO, US, IT, AT, PT, BG, HR, CY, DK, FL, GR, IE, LV, LT, MT, RO, SK, CH | ZA, ID, IR, KP, BE, CA, JP, SY, TR, IL, BY, AL, MD, MK, RS, GN, CD, SD, SA, ZW, ET, GH, TZ, LY, UG, ZM, BW, RW, TN, SO, NA, TG, SL, LR, GM, DJ, CI, PK, BN, TW, WS, NP, SG, VI, TM, TJ, UZ, LK, TT, HT, MM, BT, MH, MV, MG, MK, KZ, GD, FJ, PT, BB, BM, BS, AG, AI, AW, AX, LB, SV, PY, HN, GT, PR, NI, VG, AN, CN, BZ, DZ, MY, KH, PH, VN, EG, MN, MO, UA, JO, KR, AO, BR, HR, GL, IS, IM, JM, FM, MC, NG, SI, | US, IN, PK, BD, NG , ID, BE, AU | US, CA, IL, IR | AF, AS, AQ, AM, AZ, BY, BE, BZ, BT, BA, BI, CM, CA, CF, TD, CG, CI, ER, GF, PF, GP, GU, GN, GW, GY, HT, VA, IR, IQ, JP, KZ, LB, LR, LY, ML, MQ, YT, MZ, MM, NZ, NI, KP, PS, PR, RE, KN, LC, VC, WS, SO, GS, KR, SS, SD, SR, SY, TJ, TN, TM, TC, US, VU, VG, EH, ES, YE, ZW, ET | BE, BR, KP, NZ, TR, US, CA, SG | US, JP, NZ | US, TR | US, IL, BC, MB, QC, ON, AF, BY, BI, KH, KY, TD, KM, CG, CU, CD, GQ, ER, FJ, GN, GW, HT, IR, IQ, LA, LY, MZ, MM, NI, KP, PW, PA, RU, SO, SS, SD, SY, TT, TM, VU, VE, YE | US, CA, IR |
You can compare Safe CFD Broker ratings, min deposits what the the broker offers, funding methods, platforms, spread types, customer support options, regulation and account types side by side.
We also have an indepth Top Safe CFD Broker for 2026 article further below. You can see it now by clicking here
We have listed top Safe CFD Broker below.
eToro is a multi-asset platform which offers both investing in stocks and cryptoassets, as well as trading CFDs.
Please note that CFDs are complex instruments and come with a high risk of losing money rapidly due to leverage. 52% of retail investor accounts lose money when trading CFDs with this provider. You should consider whether you understand how CFDs work, and whether you can afford to take the high risk of losing your money.
This communication is intended for information and educational purposes only and should not be considered investment advice or investment recommendation. Past performance is not an indication of future results.
Copy Trading does not amount to investment advice. The value of your investments may go up or down. Your capital is at risk.
Crypto investments are risky and may not suit retail investors; you could lose your entire investment. Understand the risks here.
Don't invest unless you're prepared to lose all the money you invest. This is a high-risk investment, and you should not expect to be protected if something goes wrong. Take 2 mins to learn more.
eToro USA LLC does not offer CFDs and makes no representation and assumes no liability as to the accuracy or completeness of the content of this publication, which has been prepared by our partner utilizing publicly available non-entity specific information about eToro.
Losses can exceed deposits