I’m trying to make a real comparison between Tickmill and a couple of other brokers I’ve looked at, and I need to factor in rebates to get the true picture.
On paper, spreads look similar across IC Markets, Pepperstone, and Tickmill. But when I try to add GlobeGain rebates into the equation, I’m not sure I’m doing the math correctly. Some brokers offer higher rebates on certain account types, others are more straightforward but lower overall.
I want to know: are you comparing brokers this way? What does the actual cost breakdown look like for you when you include rebates? Which broker consistently wins out for scalpers in your experience?
Tickmill cheaper than IC Markets after rebates easily.
Pepperstone has higher rebates but spreads are tighter elsewhere.
The comparison is straightforward if you run the math correctly. Take your typical EUR/USD trade. Tickmill: 0.9 pip spread minus 0.35 pip rebate equals 0.55 net cost. IC Markets: 0.7 pip spread minus 0.25 pip rebate equals 0.45 net cost. Pepperstone: 1.0 pip spread minus 0.4 pip rebate equals 0.6 net cost. IC Markets wins on this pair alone, but other pairs may flip the results. Run this for your most-traded pairs and you’ll get your true picture. Rebates matter, but spread consistency during different market conditions matters more.
Most scalpers overlook one thing - rebate cap or account tier requirements. Tickmill’s rebate from GlobeGain is consistent. IC Markets rebates vary by volume tier. If you’re underneath their threshold, you might be paying more than Tickmill even with higher raw rebate rates. Check the fine print: minimum volume, rebate payout frequency, and whether rebates get withheld on losing trades. That’s where the real cost difference shows up.
I’ve tested this comparison myself. For my scalping style, Tickmill with GlobeGain actually costs less than both IC Markets and Pepperstone.
The thing that surprised me was how consistent Tickmill’s rebates are. IC Markets has higher rebate rates on paper, but you hit volume caps pretty quick.
I’d say grab a month of free trial on each and track your actual costs. The math is clear once you see real trades.
After rebates, Tickmill tends to win for my trade style, but it’s close with Pepperstone. Really depends on which pairs you scalp and how many trades you’re doing.
The rebates do make a noticeable difference though. Without them, the brokers would be much closer in cost.
Tickmill seems cheaper overall with rebates included in the math.
All three are pretty close. Rebates help but spreads matter more.
I’ve been comparing these three for about two years, switching between them based on market conditions and my trade volume. Here’s what I found.
Tickmill consistently comes out cheapest for scalping when rebates are factored in, but the margin is small - we’re talking 0.05 to 0.1 pips per trade. IC Markets wins on certain illiquid pairs because their spread is tighter. Pepperstone is somewhere in the middle.
What matters more than the cost difference is execution consistency. I’ve had better fills on Tickmill during the London session, but IC Markets pulls ahead during New York hours.
My strategy now is using Tickmill as my main account and keeping IC Markets active for pair-specific trades. The rebate difference isn’t worth sacrificing execution quality on the pairs where one broker clearly outperforms the other.
The rebate math changes the entire comparison. Tickmill with GlobeGain rebates is cheaper than Pepperstone by about 0.15 pips on majors. But here’s the catch - at high volumes, some brokers tier up their rebates, which flips the advantage.
I found that IC Markets rebates improved after I hit 50 million pips volume. At that point, the cost difference between them and Tickmill narrowed. If you’re planning to scale up trading volume, factoring in future rebate tiers matters.
For now, at moderate volumes, Tickmill + GlobeGain wins. But if you’re planning to become a machine, IC Markets might catch up or beat it.