XM vs FP Markets: FX Trust Score Breakdown & Key Differences (2025)
This in-depth comparison looks at XM vs FP Markets using the FX Trust Score Index, our independent, data-driven scoring model that evaluates every broker across the same five key pillars: regulatory compliance, security and fund protection, trading conditions, customer support and online reputation.
Our aim is to give traders a clear, unbiased view of how these two brokers stack up beyond marketing claims and headline spreads. Whether you are drawn to XM’s long-standing global presence or FP Markets’ reputation for low-cost ECN-style trading, this guide will help you understand where each broker genuinely excels.
Below, you’ll find a side-by-side breakdown showing how both brokers perform across all FX Trust Score pillars, followed by a winners summary, deeper analysis and our overall verdict.
| Criterion | XM Review | FP Markets Review |
|---|---|---|
| Overall FX Trust Score | 78.9% | 64% |
| Regulatory Compliance | 80% | 75% |
| Security & Fund Protection | 80% | 60% |
| Trading Conditions | 75% | 60% |
| Customer Support | 78% | 70% |
| Online Reputation | 80% | 55% |
Comparison Summary: XM vs FP Markets
Here’s how both brokers typically compare across the main FX Trust Score categories:
Regulation
Both brokers are regulated, but XM holds a stronger overall regulatory profile in our scoring, with licences in multiple major jurisdictions and a long operating history. FP Markets is also regulated in respected regions, but its regulatory reach and brand maturity are more limited compared with XM.
For traders who place a premium on regulatory depth and longevity, XM comes out ahead.
Security & Fund Protection
Security and client-fund protection are key components of the FX Trust Score Index. Both brokers segregate client funds from company money and follow industry-standard protections, but XM scores higher overall in this pillar.
XM benefits from its combination of regulation, internal controls and operational resilience. FP Markets is considered safe, but its overall security score is lower, reflecting a narrower regulatory footprint and more concentrated market presence.
Trading Conditions
Trading conditions are where FP Markets is most competitive and where the comparison is closest.
FP Markets is known for tight raw spreads and ECN-style trading, particularly on its commission-based accounts. XM, meanwhile, offers a wide range of account types, competitive spreads, extensive instruments and strong execution quality.
In our FX Trust Score, XM still edges ahead overall because it balances pricing, execution, product range and accessibility across more regions and account types. However:
If you care most about raw spreads on specific ECN-style accounts, FP Markets can be attractive.
If you want broader account choice and balanced conditions across forex, indices and other CFDs, XM is the safer all-rounder.
Customer Support
XM scores higher than FP Markets on customer support. It offers responsive live chat, multilingual coverage and a long history of dealing with large, diverse client bases. Response quality and availability tested well in our review.
FP Markets provides decent support, but overall feedback is more mixed and its support footprint is smaller. If fast, multilingual support is important, XM has the advantage.
Online Reputation
In terms of online reputation, XM again comes out ahead. It has been operating for many years, has a large global client base and maintains relatively stable long-term sentiment across forums, independent review platforms and trader communities.
FP Markets’ reputation is generally positive among traders who focus on spreads and ECN conditions, but feedback is more volatile and its overall trust profile is weaker than XM’s in our dataset.
Overall Winner: XM
Based on the FX Trust Score Index, XM clearly outperforms FP Markets overall. XM scores higher for regulation, security, customer support and online reputation, while trading conditions are more closely matched but still lean in XM’s favour in our dataset.
FP Markets remains interesting for traders who specifically value raw-spread style pricing and a strong focus on ECN accounts. However, from a pure “trust plus overall trading experience” perspective, XM is the stronger all-round choice.
Comparison: Winners Summary
Regulation
- Winner: XM
Broader regulatory coverage and longer track record across multiple regions.
Security & Fund Protection
- Winner: XM
Stronger security and fund-protection profile overall, with higher FX Trust Score in this pillar.
Trading Conditions
- Winner: XM (Narrow) / FP Markets for pure raw-spread focus
XM delivers more balanced trading conditions when spreads, products and execution are considered together. FP Markets is competitive on raw spreads for certain account types.
Customer Support
- Winner: XM
Higher support score with better overall responsiveness and language coverage.
Online Reputation
- Winner: XM
More consistent long-term sentiment and fewer recurring concerns in trader feedback.
Conclusion: Which Broker is Better Overall?
Choosing between XM and FP Markets ultimately depends on your priorities.
If you are looking for a well-established global broker with stronger regulation, better overall security, broader support and a more robust long-term reputation, XM is the better choice for most traders.
If your primary focus is raw-spread ECN-style pricing and you are comfortable with a narrower regulatory and reputation profile, FP Markets is still worth considering.
From a pure FX Trust Score Index perspective, XM is the clear overall winner. We recommend reading both full reviews to understand the nuances of account types, platforms and regulation before making a final decision.
FAQs
According to our FX Trust Score Index, XM scores higher overall than FP Markets, particularly for regulation, security, customer support and online reputation. FP Markets is competitive on raw-spread trading, but XM is the stronger all-round broker.
FP Markets is often very competitive on raw spreads for its ECN-style accounts. XM offers solid, balanced spreads across multiple account types. In our scoring, XM’s overall trading conditions are stronger once pricing, execution and product range are all considered.
XM is generally more beginner-friendly thanks to its education, promotions, account options and wider support coverage. FP Markets can also work for beginners but is often more appealing to traders who already understand ECN-style pricing.
Both brokers are regulated and segregate client funds, but XM has a higher security and regulation score in our Index, reflecting its longer track record and broader regulatory footprint.
Both brokers support MetaTrader platforms (MT4 and MT5). XM also offers additional account variants and regional features, while FP Markets focuses strongly on ECN-style trading environments.
Publication date:
24/11/2025
Author: FX Trust Score
Last updated on November 24, 2025
