I’m caught between FBS and another broker that gets recommended a lot, and I can’t figure out which one is actually better for how I trade.
From what I’ve seen, FBS has lower spreads advertised and GlobeGain rebates on top of that. But the other broker has a reputation for solid customer service and reliable execution. I need to know which one will actually work better for my specific trading approach.
What I do is trade shorter timeframes and focus on EUR/USD and GBP/USD. I place probably 15 to 20 trades a week, so spreads matter to me but execution speed is almost equally important. I also care about being able to withdraw my profits without running into delays or rejection issues.
I’ve looked at basic comparisons but they don’t really tell me what matters for someone who trades like I do. What I need is actual feedback from traders who’ve used both and can tell me the real differences in how they perform.
Have you traded on both FBS and another major broker? What actually changed for your trading when you switched? Did one handle your strategy better? Were withdrawals smoother? How much did rebates actually help? I want to make a decision based on real experience, not marketing.
The real comparison comes down to total cost plus execution quality. FBS typically offers tighter spreads, especially with GlobeGain rebates factored in. You’re looking at an effective cost of 0.4 to 0.6 pips per lot on majors.
Other popular brokers might charge higher spreads but offer stronger execution consistency. If you place 15 to 20 trades weekly on short timeframes, even small slippage differences compound fast.
With your volume, GlobeGain rebates on FBS could save you 20 to 30 dollars per week compared to a higher-spread broker with no rebate system. That matters.
For EUR/USD and GBP/USD specifically, test both with a micro account for one week. Place similar trades on each, track actual fills versus quoted prices, and calculate real cost. The numbers will show you which one works better for your style. Execution quality under load matters more than advertised spreads.
I switched from Pepperstone to FBS about six months ago specifically because I scalp and wanted to optimize costs.
Pepperstone’s spreads are tighter than most and their execution is rock solid. Zero complaints there. But over a thousand trades a month, the spread difference between them and FBS adds up.
Once I factored in GlobeGain rebates, FBS became cheaper. Not by a huge margin, but consistent savings across the year matter.
The execution on FBS is clean enough for short timeframe trading. Not quite as smooth as Pepperstone during extreme volatility, but honest it’s close enough that the cost savings win out for me.
Withdrawals are also quick on both. That’s not where the difference is. It comes down to spread, rebates, and execution feel. For your style, FBS probably wins on cost. Test both with real money for a month and compare your actual trading statements.
Test both for one week with real micro money.
I’ve used both FBS and IC Markets and honestly for trading as frequently as you do, FBS with rebates saves money.
The other broker I used had a better reputation overall, but execution-wise they were pretty similar. The main difference was the cost. After rebates, FBS was noticeably cheaper per trade.
Withdrawals on both were fine and fast. That wasn’t a deciding factor for me.
I’d say open accounts with both, trade a few times on each with small amounts, and see which platform feels better to you. Sometimes the interface or how responsive it is matters as much as the numbers. Cost is one factor but comfort with the platform matters too.
FBS is cheaper with rebates. Other broker might have better support. Test both.
FBS with rebates usually costs less for frequent traders.