Pricing as Arithmetic, Not Preference · FxPro UAE — FxPro United Arab Emirates 2026
Count your round-turn lots for a month, multiply by the difference in all-in cost, and the account chooses itself.
Open FxPro Account →The FxPro Raw+ account is a raw-spread account aimed at active traders who want the tightest possible spreads. According to FxPro, it shows spreads from 0.0 pips on major pairs and charges a commission of $3.50 per lot per side instead of building the cost into a wider spread. This pricing suits frequent traders and scalpers, where small per-trade spread savings add up. Raw+ runs on MetaTrader 4, and a similar raw-pricing model is available on cTrader. It contrasts with the Standard account, which has no separate commission but wider all-in spreads — so the better choice depends on how often you trade.
What Raw+ actually delivers (measured)
What the Raw+ account actually delivered when we measured it on FxPro’s own MT5 feed:
- EUR/USD measured at a 0.2-pip median spread and about $9.00 all-in per standard lot.
- That breaks even in 0.9 pips, and the spread measured perfectly stable (stability ratio 1) — tight and steady enough to scalp.
- Across the majors the measured spread sat at or below an independent interbank reference feed (EUR/USD −0.09, AUD/USD −0.16, USD/CAD −0.54 pips).
- Market orders in our test filled in about 78 to 99 milliseconds with near-zero slippage and no rejects.
- Raw+ commission is tiered by order size, with a minimum on the smallest size:
| Order size | Commission (Raw+) |
|---|---|
| 0.01 lot | $4.00 per side |
| 0.1 lot | $3.50 per side |
| 1.0 lot | $3.50 per side |
First-hand from the live feed — full detail on our measured spreads and execution pages.
FxPro Raw+ at a glance
- Raw spreads from 0.0 pips on major pairs
- Commission of $3.50 per lot per side
- Built for frequent traders and scalpers
- Runs on MetaTrader 4 (cTrader offers a similar raw model)
- Contrasts with the Standard all-in-spread account
Commission is charged per side, just like the quote
Raw pricing splits the cost into two lines: a narrow distance between the two sides of the quote, and a commission billed per side of the trade. Opening pays one side and closing pays the other, which is why the round-turn figure is twice the per-side number.
Both lines appear in the account history as separate entries, so the split can be checked against your own statement rather than taken on description.
What “from 0.0” actually describes
A raw quote can show the two sides almost touching on a major at a quiet moment. That describes the narrowest state the book reaches, not the state it spends the day in.
The distance between the sides is the part that varies; the commission is the part that does not. That single sentence is the whole difference between the two pricing models.
Pricing as arithmetic, not preference
A commission account is not better; it is a different split between two lines. Which split wins depends on one countable quantity — how many round turns you actually trade — so the choice is testable rather than a matter of taste.
Count the lots, multiply by the difference in all-in cost, and the account chooses itself. No opinion is required at any step of that.
Where in the catalogue the raw quote is genuinely tight
The narrow sides raw pricing is known for live on the most heavily traded part of the symbol list. Further down the catalogue — thinner shares, minor crosses, the long tail — the two sides sit further apart whatever the account model says.
Judging an account type from one headline symbol therefore misleads in both directions. The honest test runs on the handful of instruments you will actually trade.
Building the watchlist the test runs on
Before comparing pricing models, decide which symbols you trade often enough to matter. Most trading weeks concentrate on a short list, and the rest of the catalogue contributes nothing to the arithmetic at all.
With that list in Market Watch and the spread column switched on, the comparison stops being theoretical: the distance between the two sides is a number on screen for exactly the instruments in question.
Testing the two pricing models on your own numbers
- Export a month of account history from the terminal.
- Count round turns per symbol rather than trades — the commission is billed on each side.
- Read the distance between the two sides for those symbols from the spread column, not from a headline figure.
- Convert that distance into money per lot using the contract size from the specification.
- Add the per-side commission twice for every round turn.
- Compare the totals under both pricing models for the same list of trades.
- Repeat with the watchlist you intend to trade next month, not only the one you traded last month.
Both cost lines are listed separately in the account history, so every step above can be checked against your own statement.
The two cost lines, side by side
| Cost line | When it is paid | What moves it |
|---|---|---|
| Distance between the quote sides | Once on entry, once on exit | Liquidity, hour of the day, the instrument itself |
| Commission, per side | Once on entry, once on exit | Volume traded; the rate itself does not vary |
| Overnight financing | Only if the position passes a rollover | The instrument and the side you are on |
The all-in figure for a trade is the first two lines added together, plus the third only when the position is held overnight.
Frequently asked questions
Why is the commission counted twice on one trade?
Does a narrow quote mean the cost is narrow?
Which part of the symbol list actually shows tight sides?
How do I test which model is cheaper for me?
Where can I see the two cost lines separately?
Is the difference material for occasional trading?
Does the commission depend on which side I opened on?
Should I compare account types on one instrument?
Where do I read the contract size for the conversion?
Is overnight financing part of the spread-versus-commission split?
What is the commission on the raw account?
What traders report
Read together, these three are comparing routes rather than passing a verdict on Raw+: one long-standing client describes no commission on the MT4 and MT5 accounts and a small commission with a lower spread on cTrader, and another who tested platforms before choosing puts EUR/USD at 0.4 on that same cTrader side. The third is at an earlier stage — account opened, identity verified with help from support — and has no cost figures to offer yet. What they compare is priced per platform and per pair, which is also the only level at which the arithmetic on this page resolves.
I opened my first raw account a while ago and still excited about new opportunities! *_* . Verified my account identity with the help of courteous support:) looking forward to making first profits!
I am satisfied with FxPro almost in everything. Good spreads, tools and support. No commission on MT4 or MT5 account and small commission with lower spread on cTrader. Also fixed spread account is really profitable under certain conditions.
It took me a while to test apps and accounts. So, the Ctrader app and account seemed to work perfectly for the eur/usd transactions. Spreads start with 0.4 creating some opportunities for profit