Updated September 29, 2026 · BrokerCue Editorial Team

Interactive Brokers vs Trading 212

Interactive Brokers scores 9.6 and Trading 212 9.3 out of 10. Compare their differences and shared features below.

Interactive Brokers

9.6/10

Facts checked September 26, 2026.

Trading 212

9.3/10

Facts checked September 26, 2026.

What sets them apart

Interactive Brokers vs Trading 212
Compare
Interactive BrokersInteractive Brokers
ReviewSee alternativesSee alternatives
Trading 212
ReviewSee alternativesSee alternatives
Minimum deposit$0£1
Stock trade fee$0£0
MarketsBonds, ETFs, Forex, Funds, Futures, Options, StocksStocks, ETFs, Forex, CFDs
RegulatorsSEC, FCA, SIPCFinancial Conduct Authority, Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission, Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission (CySEC)
Investor protectionSIPC up to USD 500,000FSCS up to GBP 85,000
PlatformsClient Portal, IBKR Desktop, IBKR Mobile, Trader WorkstationTrading 212 App, Web Platform
Account typesISA, SIPP, IRA, Joint, CorporateCovers moreISA, SIPP, Joint
Account feeNot confirmed£0
Inactivity feeNot confirmed£0
Margin rate4.38%Not confirmed
Options contract fee$0.65Not confirmed
Interest on cash3.38%Not confirmed

We earn a commission when you sign up through links on this site. Partner status can affect where a brand appears in our rankings.

Key differences

  • Interactive Brokers scores higher overall: 9.6 vs 9.3.
  • Regulators: only Interactive Brokers offers SEC, FCA, SIPC.
  • Regulators: only Trading 212 offers Financial Conduct Authority, Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission, Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission (CySEC).
  • Founded is lower at Interactive Brokers: 1978 vs 2006.
  • Markets: only Interactive Brokers offers Bonds, Funds, Futures.
  • Markets: only Trading 212 offers CFDs.
  • Platforms: only Interactive Brokers offers Client Portal, IBKR Desktop, IBKR Mobile.
  • Platforms: only Trading 212 offers Trading 212 App, Web Platform.
  • Account types: only Interactive Brokers offers IRA, Corporate.
  • Features: only Trading 212 offers Demo account.

Our verdict on each

Interactive Brokers

Interactive Brokers suits investors who want a single account across ISA, SIPP, IRA, joint and corporate holdings, with stocks, bonds, funds, forex, options and futures behind it. It ranks 1 of 213 brands on minimum deposit at $0, and stock trades are charged at $0.

Read the full Interactive Brokers review

Trading 212

Trading 212 suits UK and European beginners who want flat costs: a stock trade fee of £0, an account fee of £0 and an ISA, SIPP and joint account. Forex and CFDs share the same menu, so the easy entry is the reason to look closer, not to trade heavily.

Read the full Trading 212 review

Score breakdown

Interactive Brokers vs Trading 212
AreaInteractive BrokersTrading 212
Cost9.3Stock trades cost $0, the minimum deposit is $0 and an options contract costs $0.65.9.3Charges sit at the floor: £0 on a trade, £0 on the account, £0 when idle.
Offer9.6HigherAccount types cover isa, sipp and ira, and the market list spans bonds, etfs and forex.9.2
Trust9.8Higher9.5

Positions in our rankings

Interactive Brokers vs Trading 212
RankingInteractive BrokersTrading 212
Stock and ETF brokers44 of 47183 of 471
Forex brokers16 of 14735 of 147
Low-spread forex brokers14 of 14533 of 145

Where each is licensed and available

Interactive Brokers vs Trading 212
CountryInteractive BrokersTrading 212
United Kingdom
FCA 208159
CyprusNot confirmed
United States
SIPC SIPC member 53615
Not confirmed

What each covers

Interactive Brokers vs Trading 212
MarketsInteractive BrokersTrading 212
StocksYesYes
ETFsYesYes
ForexYesYes
CFDsNoYes
OptionsYesNo
FuturesYesNo
BondsYesNo
FundsYesNo
Interactive Brokers vs Trading 212
Account typesInteractive BrokersTrading 212
ISAYesYes
SIPPYesYes
IRAYesNo
JointYesYes
CorporateYesNo

What we checked

Interactive Brokers

  • interactivebrokers.com: 9 facts, checked September 26, 2026
  • brokersway.com: 2 facts, checked September 26, 2026
  • toponlineforexbrokers.com: 2 facts, checked September 26, 2026
  • euinvestinghub.com: 1 fact, checked September 26, 2026
  • eupersonalfinance.eu: 1 fact, checked September 26, 2026

Trading 212

  • en.wikipedia.org: 13 facts, checked September 26, 2026
  • esma.europa.eu: 2 facts, checked September 26, 2026

Every fact side by side

Interactive Brokers vs Trading 212
FactInteractive BrokersTrading 212
FeaturesFractional shares, Mobile appFractional shares, Demo account, Mobile appCovers more
Pricing modelCommission free, Low feesCovers moreCommission free
AudienceNot confirmedBeginners
Legal entityINTERACTIVE BROKERS LLCTrading 212 Markets Ltd
HeadquartersUnited StatesCyprus
Founded1978Lower2006
Support channelsHelp centre, CommunityNot confirmed

Robo-advisors

Interactive Brokers vs Trading 212
FactInteractive BrokersTrading 212
Portfolio typesETFNot confirmed

Where each stands against the rest

Interactive Brokers vs Trading 212
FactInteractive BrokersTrading 212Median
Account feeNot confirmed£0at the median£0
Margin rate4.38%below the medianNot confirmed8.75%
Options contract fee$0.65above the medianNot confirmed$0.625
Interest on cash3.38%above the medianNot confirmed3%

Median across 43 listed brokers.

Pros and cons

Interactive Brokers

Pros

  • A stock trade costs $0 and the minimum deposit is $0, the pairing behind rank 1 of 161 on stock trade fees among the brokers tracked here.
  • The account types listed cover isa, sipp and ira, so an ISA, SIPP, IRA, joint or corporate account all sit under a single provider.
  • bonds, etfs and forex puts stocks, ETFs, bonds, funds, forex, options and futures on the same account, with a margin rate of 4.38% for geared positions.

Cons

  • Support runs on help centre and community, so a phone line and live chat sit outside the offer.
  • bonds, etfs and forex covers shares, ETFs, bonds, funds, forex, options and futures but leaves out crypto and CFDs, which eToro lists in stocks, etfs and forex.
  • An options contract costs $0.65 against a stock trade at $0, so options strategies pay a visible premium per contract.

Trading 212

Pros

  • Nothing to pay for holding or for going quiet: the account fee reads £0 and the inactivity fee reads £0.
  • Trading shares costs £0, the same stock trade fee eToro lists at $0, so the trade price is not the reason to move.
  • The entry of £1 sits under the $5 Vantage asks for, which matters for a first transfer.

Cons

  • The market list pairs shares and ETFs with forex and CFDs in stocks, etfs and forex, so a platform aimed at beginners, beginners, also carries leveraged products.
  • The fee sheet is the easy part: retail accounts lose money at 70.15% across the brokers compared, and a £0 trade cost does not remove that risk.
  • The money side runs through Trading 212 Markets Ltd in Cyprus, registered with the Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission as MiCA CASP 21380045KC28948FNE32, so a UK saver is dealing with a Cyprus entity alongside the UK one.

Who each suits

Interactive Brokers

Who it suits

  • Investors holding money across several wrappers, since the account types listed cover isa, sipp and ira.
  • Traders who want options, futures, forex and bonds alongside shares on a single account, per bonds, etfs and forex.
  • Anyone starting with a small balance: the minimum deposit is $0 and fractional shares appear in the feature list (fractional shares and mobile app).

Who should look elsewhere

  • Anyone who trades crypto or CFDs, since bonds, etfs and forex leaves both out while eToro lists them in stocks, etfs and forex.
  • Readers who want a stated entry figure as a signal of the provider's target size, since Vantage publishes $5 where this broker's minimum is $0.

Trading 212

Who it suits

  • Beginners and small regular investors who want a low bar to entry, since the minimum deposit is £1 and the app and demo account in fractional shares, demo account and mobile app support a cautious start.
  • UK and European savers who care about holding cost, because the account fee of £0 and the inactivity fee of £0 leave the account free to sit and free to open.
  • Savers who want a tax-wrapped and shared holding together, since isa, sipp and joint covers an ISA, a SIPP and a joint account under one provider.

Who should look elsewhere

  • Not for forex and CFD traders who want a deeper market list: Trading 212 stops at stocks, etfs and forex, while eToro and Vantage cover more of the leveraged side.
  • Not for anyone who needs a no-cost opening: CFI takes a minimum deposit of $0 against the £1 asked here.
  • Not for savers who want a bigger spread of wrappers: the account range is listed as isa, sipp and joint, which does not stretch to every tax-sheltered account type.

Questions about each

Interactive Brokers

What does it cost to trade shares?+

A stock trade is charged at $0 and the minimum deposit is $0, so opening an account and dealing in shares carry no charge. The money sits in derivatives and leverage instead, where an options contract costs $0.65 and the margin rate is listed at 4.38%.

Is my money protected?+

The regulatory list runs to SEC, FCA and SIPC, and investor protection is stated as SIPC up to USD 500,000. The UK entry is the FCA under licence 208159, while the US side names the SEC and the SIPC membership SIPC member 53615. The protection figure describes the scheme stated for the account and says nothing about how a trade performs.

Trading 212

What is the minimum deposit to open a Trading 212 account?+

The published minimum deposit is £1, low enough to open and fund in one step. That entry sits under the €4.64 level seen across the brokers compared here, and under the $5 Vantage asks for, so a small first transfer is enough to get going.

Does Trading 212 charge for keeping an account open or leaving it idle?+

The account fee reads £0 and the inactivity fee reads £0, so neither holding the account nor letting it sit dormant is billed on the published sheet. The €10 inactivity level across the brokers compared sits well above that floor, which is where dormant-account charges usually show up.

Interactive Brokers

Interactive Brokers

Higher score in this comparison

9.6/10See alternatives