Broker comparison · updated 2026-07-09
FP Markets vs easyMarkets
FP Markets and easyMarkets both offer multi-platform CFD access, but their fees, entity structures, and account terms differ by region.
Our verdict
FP Markets has the edge overall.
FP Markets has the edge if you want more platform choice and a broader documented regulatory footprint, with current public references to ASIC and CySEC plus additional entity coverage on its site. easyMarkets is more compact and easier to describe on the platform side, and its current account pages show low entry deposits on some setups and fixed-spread pricing on web/app accounts, but terms vary by entity and country. For traders who want the widest platform mix, FP Markets is stronger; for those who prefer a simpler brand and easy-to-read account pages, easyMarkets can be the cleaner fit. In both cases, verify the exact legal entity before funding.
FP MarketsFP Markets vs easyMarkets at a glance
| FP Markets |
 easyMarkets |
|
|---|---|---|
| Our comparison score | 67 / 100 | 62.5 / 100 |
| Founded | 1992 | 2001 |
| Published regulators | ASIC, CySEC, FSCA, FSA | CySEC, ASIC |
| Platforms | MT4, MT5, cTrader, TV | Web/App, TV, MT4, MT5 |
| Minimum deposit | $100 USD on some accounts | $25 standard; $10k VIP |
| EUR/USD from | Not published on checked page | 0.7 pips / 1.7 pips |
marks the stronger side on that row. Key numbers were re-checked on 2026-07-09. Terms differ by legal entity and country — confirm on the broker's own legal pages before funding.
Score breakdown
How FP Markets and easyMarkets earn their comparison scores, component by component — same methodology as every review on this site.
FP Markets vs easyMarkets on fees and entry costs
FP Markets publishes a clear $100 USD minimum deposit for Standard and Raw MT4/MT5 accounts on its Australian FAQ, while easyMarkets’ current account page shows a $25 minimum deposit for its standard web/app and MT4 setup and $10,000 for VIP, with MT5 also listed at $25 on that page. easyMarkets also publishes EUR/USD pricing by account type, including 0.7 pips on some fixed-spread accounts and 1.7 pips on another standard tier, while FP Markets’ public pages we checked were stronger on account access than on a single universal spread quote. Because both brokers use multiple entities, the headline number is only part of the picture: the live trading cost depends on the legal entity, account type, and region. On currently published evidence, easyMarkets has the clearer low-deposit entry, while FP Markets is better documented overall.
FP Markets vs easyMarkets on platforms and trading tools
FP Markets shows a broader platform stack on its public materials: MT4, MT5, cTrader, and TradingView. easyMarkets is narrower but still practical, with its own web/app platform, TradingView, MT4, and MT5. That makes FP Markets the better fit for traders who want to compare execution styles across cTrader, MetaTrader, and TradingView without leaving one broker group. easyMarkets is more self-contained; its web/app platform is the main differentiator, and the firm uses it to package fixed-spread pricing and broker-specific tools. In plain terms, FP Markets offers more platform variety, while easyMarkets offers a simpler menu. If you already know you want MT4 or MT5 only, both are workable. If you want the widest platform selection, FP Markets has the edge.
FP Markets vs easyMarkets on regulation and legal entities
FP Markets’ official pages and CySEC register entry point to Cyprus authorization under licence 371/18, and its site also states ASIC oversight for Australia. Its own materials further reference FSCA and Seychelles-related entities, which makes the group look more layered and more dependent on the exact onboarding entity. easyMarkets’ current site materials point to CySEC and ASIC as well, with current pages naming Easy Forex Trading Ltd under CySEC and easyMarkets Pty Ltd under ASIC. Both brokers therefore have real regulatory footprints, but the comparison is not one-to-one: FP Markets advertises a wider spread of entities, while easyMarkets presents a somewhat simpler regulatory picture. For traders, the practical takeaway is the same: confirm the legal entity, not just the brand name, because protections and availability can differ by country.
FP Markets vs easyMarkets on deposits, withdrawals, and funding
FP Markets says it supports cards, bank transfer, Skrill, and Neteller, and one regional FAQ also mentions Bitcoin wallet language. easyMarkets lists card funding, e-wallets, and bank transfer, and its TradingView page says clients are never charged funding fees when depositing or withdrawing. easyMarkets’ account page also makes the minimum funding requirement easier to see than FP Markets’ headline pages, which helps if you are comparing a small first deposit. FP Markets is still competitive on funding breadth, especially for traders who use standard card or transfer rails and want a broker with familiar wallet options. The key caveat is that funding menus are entity-specific. A method shown on one regional page may not be available for your country or legal entity, so it is worth checking the client portal before sending money.
FP Markets vs easyMarkets on research, education, and market content
Both brokers publish research and education, but easyMarkets is more visibly organized around its own content hub, platform explainers, and market commentary. Its public pages also emphasize fixed spreads, platform tools, and training-style content tied to the brand. FP Markets has a solid educational footprint too, including FAQs and legal-document access, and its group pages are reasonably transparent about platform and compliance information. The difference is presentation: easyMarkets makes its research and learning materials easier to find in a single branded ecosystem, while FP Markets looks more like a multi-entity brokerage with useful but more dispersed documentation. For traders who value a cleaner content flow, easyMarkets has a slight edge. For traders who care more about documentation breadth and entity visibility than about polish, FP Markets is at least as useful.
Which broker fits you
- You want more platform choice, including cTrader
- You prefer a broker with broader current regulator references
- You are comfortable verifying a multi-entity onboarding setup
- You want a lower published minimum deposit
- You prefer a simpler platform lineup with a branded web/app
- You value fixed-spread account pages and clear entry pricing
Common questions
Is FP Markets better than easyMarkets for platform choice?
FP Markets is stronger on platform variety because it publicly lists MT4, MT5, cTrader, and TradingView. easyMarkets offers its own web/app platform plus TradingView, MT4, and MT5, so it is simpler but less broad. If platform flexibility matters most, FP Markets has the edge.
Is easyMarkets cheaper to start with than FP Markets?
On the current pages checked, easyMarkets shows a $25 minimum deposit for its standard setup, while FP Markets shows $100 USD for Standard and Raw MT4/MT5 accounts. That makes easyMarkets easier to enter with a smaller first deposit, though total trading cost still depends on entity, account type, and spreads.
Are FP Markets and easyMarkets equally regulated?
Both have current public references to ASIC and CySEC, but FP Markets also shows additional entity references such as FSCA and Seychelles on official pages. That does not automatically make one safer; it mainly means the group structures are different. Always verify the exact legal entity and jurisdiction before funding.
Can U.S. residents open FP Markets or easyMarkets accounts?
No, not based on the current public regional restrictions we checked. easyMarkets’ site explicitly excludes the United States, and FP Markets’ public materials also indicate country restrictions. Because availability can vary by entity, U.S. residents should assume these brokers are not available unless the broker states otherwise in writing.