I want to get serious about understanding my true trading costs. I’ve been using GlobeGain rebates on both axi and pepperstone, but I’m not actually sure if I’m calculating things correctly or if rebates are moving the needle.
Let me lay out what I think I understand: spreads vary, commissions are fixed on some accounts, rebates come back monthly. But when I try to add all that up, I get confused about what the actual cost per lot really is.
For example, on axi I’m seeing 0.7 pip spreads on EUR/USD, no commission, plus a rebate that comes out to about 0.3 pips. So my net cost is 0.4 pips per lot, right? But then Pepperstone shows 1.2 pip spreads with rebates cutting it to 0.7 pips.
On the surface, axi is cheaper. But I’ve heard slippage and execution quality affect the real cost too, which I’m not even factoring in.
How are you all actually calculating this? Is there a simple way to compare both brokers fairly, including everything that costs money or saves it?
Track actual filled price vs market price. Compare after one month.
Slippage kills spread savings. Paper math rarely matches reality.
Your math is incomplete. You’re missing slippage and swap costs.
True cost per lot = spread + commission + average slippage - rebate + swap costs (if holding overnight).
On axi: 0.7 spread + 0 commission + 0.5 average slippage - 0.3 rebate = 0.9 pips true cost.
On Pepperstone: 1.2 spread + 0 commission + 0.3 average slippage - 0.5 rebate = 1.0 pips true cost.
See? Pepperstone’s slightly worse despite lower spreads because slippage hits harder. Now run this for 50 of your actual trades. Your personal slippage data is what matters, not averages.
I started tracking this a few months ago. The easiest way is to record your entry price, exit price, and the actual fill price for 30 trades on each broker.
Then you see the slippage pattern. Some brokers consistently slip you a bit, others are tighter. That alone changes which broker is actually cheaper.
After that, the rebate math becomes clear. You’ll see exactly how much GlobeGain is saving you per trade.
Need to include slippage in calculations. Most people forget that part.
I created a spreadsheet to track this. Here’s what I measure:
- Quoted spread when I enter
- Actual fill price vs market price (that’s slippage)
- Rebate received
After 3 months of data, axi was costing me 0.85 pips true cost per lot. Pepperstone was 1.1 pips.
Looks like axi wins, right? But here’s the catch: my win rate was higher on Pepperstone because trades exited cleaner. The psychological impact matters. I was chasing loses more on axi due to slippage frustration.
Eventually I chose Pepperstone despite the higher per-trade cost. Sometimes real cost includes your mental game too.