MT5 vs cTrader vs TradingView 2026: Best Forex Platform (Desk-Tested)
Most platform reviews are written by people who have never had a 50-lot fill slip on news. We have. This guide is the desk’s working answer to a question we get every week: which of the three platforms that actually matter, MT5, cTrader and TradingView, is the right rail for your forex stack in 2026, and which broker pairs cleanly with each.
By Ken Chigbo · Founder, KenMacro · 18+ years in markets, London trading floor and institutional FX
Quick Answer: best forex trading platforms 2026
- ☐ MT5 wins on automation, EA ecosystem and broker coverage, the default rail for algorithmic forex.
- ☐ cTrader wins on execution transparency, depth of market, level-2 pricing and cleaner commission ECN routing.
- ☐ TradingView wins on charting, community scripts and PineConnector bridging into MT5 for hybrid discretionary stacks.
- ☐ Lowest all-in cost across the three platforms sits with Fusion Markets at 0.1 pips + $4.50 round turn.
- ☐ Best all-round Tier-1 home for the three platforms is Blueberry Markets under ASIC.
- ☐ Best multi-asset cover with FCA option is Vantage Markets, MT5 + TradingView native.
- Why the platform matters more than the broker logo
- MT5 in 2026: still the institutional default
- cTrader in 2026: the transparency play
- TradingView in 2026: charting plus PineConnector
- Head to head: MT5 vs cTrader vs TradingView
- Broker pairings for each platform
- Cost stack and execution quality
- Automation: EAs, cBots, Pine and the bridge
- Regulation, leverage and the offshore question
- Three desk-tested stacks
- Final picks by trader type
Why the platform matters more than the broker logo
Most retail traders pick a broker first and then accept whatever platform comes attached. The desk works the other way round. The platform is the cockpit, it dictates how fast you can react, what you can automate, what you can see on the tape and how cleanly an order goes from your hand to the liquidity provider. The broker is the route to market, important, but downstream of the cockpit choice.
In 2026, the platform conversation has narrowed to three names worth taking seriously for forex. MetaTrader 5 is the entrenched institutional default, cTrader is the cleanest ECN-style platform on the retail side, and TradingView has gone from charting tool to full execution venue at the brokers who matter. Everything else, proprietary web platforms, niche desktop builds, the long tail of broker-skinned clones, sits in the second tier and is not what this page is about.
Consequently, the question is not “what’s the best platform” in the abstract. The question is which platform fits your strategy, your latency tolerance, your automation needs and your broker’s actual execution. We have run all three live, on multiple brokers, for years. The best forex trading platforms argument resolves the moment you put strategy and broker on the same table.
| Broker | Best for | Min | All-in cost | Max leverage | Platforms | Regulation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blueberry Markets | Best all-round, copy trading, clean withdrawals | $100 | 0.1 pips + $7 round turn | 30:1 ASIC, up to 500:1 offshore | MT4, MT5, TradingView | ASIC (Australia), Tier-1 |
| Fusion Markets | Lowest all-in cost, algo and scalping | $0 | Raw 0.1 pips + $4.50 round turn | 30:1 ASIC, up to 500:1 offshore | MT4, MT5, cTrader, TradingView | ASIC (Australia), Tier-1 |
| Vantage Markets | Multi-asset, FCA entity for UK, high leverage | $50 | 0.0 + $6 round turn | 30:1 FCA/ASIC, up to 1000:1 offshore | MT4, MT5, TradingView | ASIC; FCA (UK); offshore intl |
| Star Trader | Highest published leverage (offshore) | $50 | ECN raw, commission varies | up to 1000:1 | MT4, MT5, Proprietary | FSC Mauritius + FSA Seychelles (offshore); verify warnings |
MT5 in 2026: still the institutional default
MetaTrader 5 is the platform you cannot avoid. Every serious forex broker offers it, every algorithm vendor builds for it first, and the MQL5 marketplace is the largest third-party ecosystem in retail trading. The desk treats MT5 as the default rail for anything algorithmic, and as the fallback rail when a niche broker only offers MT4 and MT5.
What MT5 does well in 2026 is execution depth. Hedging mode is standard, partial closes are clean, the Strategy Tester is mature enough to backtest multi-symbol portfolios on tick data, and the EA ecosystem covers every flavour of automated forex strategy from grid martingales the desk will not touch, to news-trade automation, to delta-neutral hedging blocks worth respecting.
What MT5 does badly is charting, and any honest review has to admit it. The native chart engine feels dated, indicator customisation is fiddly, and anything beyond standard technicals usually requires a paid MQL5 indicator. The workaround most discretionary traders run is to chart in TradingView and execute in MT5, either via PineConnector for automated bridging or via dual monitors for manual order entry.
Furthermore, MT5 latency is broker-dependent. A well-configured ECN broker with a colocated server in Equinix LD4 or NY4 will give you sub-50ms fills on MT5 that match anything cTrader delivers. The myth that “cTrader is faster” is mostly a function of which brokers chose to put their best infrastructure behind which platform. With Fusion Markets, Blueberry and Vantage, MT5 execution is institutional grade.
The desk’s read on MT5: if you are running anything systematic, building or buying EAs, or simply need the broadest broker compatibility, MT5 is the answer. The full live read on which broker’s MT5 server is actually colocated and which is not is the kind of thing that drops daily inside the MACRO MASTERY desk.
cTrader in 2026: the transparency play for the best forex trading platforms shortlist
cTrader is the platform you choose when you want to see what is actually happening on the tape. Level-2 depth of market comes standard, every order shows the actual liquidity provider that filled it on better cTrader brokers, and the commission-plus-raw-spread model is built into the platform rather than bolted on. For traders who care about execution forensics, cTrader is the cleaner choice.
The charting in cTrader is meaningfully better than MT5. The indicator library is smaller but more polished, the chart engine is responsive, and ChartShots and ChartObjects make sharing setups within a desk straightforward. The cBots automation environment uses C-sharp rather than MQL5, which is a plus for any trader who has done real software work and a minus for anyone who only knows MQL.
By contrast, cTrader’s weakness is broker coverage. The platform is offered by a serious but narrower group of brokers, and inside the desk’s broker fact base only Fusion Markets carries cTrader as a first-class option. That is not a small thing. If you build your stack around cTrader and then want to switch brokers in twelve months, your options are limited compared with MT5.
The other consideration is the cBots ecosystem. It is smaller than MQL5, which means fewer plug-and-play EAs and fewer indicators, but the average quality is higher. The C-sharp barrier filters out the worst of the MQL5 marketplace’s grid-martingale junk. Anyone building their own automation tends to prefer cBots once they have done both.
The desk’s read on cTrader: if execution transparency and DOM matter to your edge, and you are comfortable with a narrower broker pool, cTrader is the cleaner platform. For scalpers and order-flow traders specifically, it is the more honest cockpit.
The desk’s route-checked picks
These are accounts the desk actually uses: raw spreads, fast execution, and fills that hold when it matters. Get set up on the one that fits your account.
Also vetted by the desk:
Broker partnerships disclosed; the picks are the desk’s own. Education, not advice. Most retail CFD accounts lose money.
TradingView in 2026: charting plus the PineConnector bridge
TradingView has stopped being “the charting platform” and become a credible execution venue. The native broker integration list has grown, and the brokers that matter for forex, including Blueberry, Fusion and Vantage, all support TradingView execution directly. You can chart, draw, alert and fire orders from the same window, and the chart is genuinely the best in the consumer market.
Where TradingView pulls ahead is the community and the script layer. Pine Script v6 is mature enough for serious strategy development, the public indicator library on TradingView is enormous, and the cross-asset breadth means you can chart forex, indices, commodities and crypto from the same workspace. For any discretionary macro trader running a multi-asset book, this is hard to give up.
However, TradingView execution still has limits. Direct broker integration handles single orders and basic bracket orders well, but anything algorithmic at scale routes through PineConnector or a similar bridge into MT5 or MT4 in the background. The desk runs Pine signals into MT5 via PineConnector for the live discretionary stack, the chart drives, the EA fills, and we keep the MT5 risk manager as the final gate.
The other consideration is cost. TradingView is a subscription on top of broker costs, and the Premium tier is needed for serious work, multi-chart layouts, second-by-second data, more alerts. Build it into your operating cost rather than pretending the free tier will hold up at size.
Additionally, TradingView’s order ticket is friendlier than either MT5 or cTrader for traders who came up on broker web platforms. The risk-reward visualiser, the long/short order tool, and the chart-anchored stop and target lines are best-in-class. The MACRO MASTERY desk caught a clean read on EURUSD around CPI last month using exactly this hybrid TradingView-chart-into-MT5-execution stack, the framework is in the desk archive.
Head to head: MT5 vs cTrader vs TradingView for forex in 2026
Putting the three platforms next to each other, here is how the desk grades them across the categories that actually move the P&L.
| Category | MT5 | cTrader | TradingView |
|---|---|---|---|
| Charting quality | Average | Good | Best in class |
| Execution transparency | Broker dependent | Best in class, native DOM | Broker dependent |
| Automation depth | Best in class, MQL5 | Good, C-sharp cBots | Via PineConnector bridge |
| Broker coverage | All four fact-base brokers | Fusion Markets only (of our five) | All four fact-base brokers |
| Order ticket usability | Functional | Good | Best in class |
| Cross-asset breadth | Broker symbol list only | Broker symbol list only | Best in class, global feeds |
| Cost of platform | Free | Free | Subscription Premium tier needed |
| Mobile experience | Mature | Mature | Best in class |
The pattern is clear once you look at it row by row. MT5 wins automation and coverage, cTrader wins transparency, TradingView wins everything that touches charting, the order ticket and cross-asset work. No single platform sweeps the table, and the desk’s actual rig blends two of them.
Broker pairings for each of the best forex trading platforms
The platform decision is half the question, the broker pairing is the other half. A great platform routed through a poor broker is a poor stack. Here is how the desk pairs the three platforms against the four brokers in our route-checked fact base. For deeper specs, the full forex broker comparison 2026 page carries the detail.
MT5 best pairings
MT5 is universal across the five, but quality varies. For lowest all-in cost on MT5, Fusion Markets at 0.1 pips raw plus $4.50 round turn is the cheapest in the fact base, with a $0 minimum and ASIC regulation up to 30:1 onshore or up to 500:1 offshore. For a Tier-1 all-rounder on MT5, Blueberry Markets at 0.1 pips plus $7 round turn under ASIC is the cleanest balance of cost, withdrawal speed and regulation. For high-leverage multi-asset access on MT5 with an FCA option for UK traders, Vantage Markets pairs ASIC and FCA onshore at 30:1 with offshore leverage up to 1000:1, raw plus $6 round turn.
cTrader best pairings
Inside the route-checked fact base, Fusion Markets is the cTrader option. The execution model and the platform philosophy line up cleanly, raw spreads from 0.0, $4.50 round turn commission, the cBots environment, and ASIC oversight. If cTrader is your platform of choice and you want one broker that does it well rather than three that do it reluctantly, Fusion is the desk’s read. The wider broker comparison on the best forex broker for macro trading 2026 page goes into the macro-aware execution detail.
TradingView best pairings
TradingView is now native at all four fact-base brokers, which is a notable shift from two years ago. For pure cost optimisation on TradingView, Fusion Markets again leads. For Tier-1 regulation plus copy trading on TradingView, Blueberry Markets is the desk pick. For multi-asset cover with an FCA entity, Vantage Markets pairs TradingView with the broadest symbol list. For highest published offshore leverage on TradingView, Star Trader sits at up to 1000:1 under FSC Mauritius and FSA Seychelles, offshore retail, and we flag the offshore-only regulation status clearly.
Cost stack and execution quality across the three platforms
Costs in forex break into three components: the spread, the commission, and the slippage. The platform itself does not set the spread or commission, the broker does. However, the platform absolutely affects slippage through how orders are routed and how the platform’s order types are implemented. This is where the head-to-head gets concrete.
On the raw cost line, the fact base is unambiguous. Fusion Markets at 0.1 pips plus $4.50 round turn is the cheapest. Vantage sits at 0.0 plus $6 round turn. Blueberry sits at 0.1 plus $7 round turn. Star Trader is ECN raw with commission varying by account. These are the costs you pay regardless of whether you chart in MT5, cTrader or TradingView, because they are broker-side, not platform-side.
On the slippage line, the picture is more nuanced. cTrader’s native DOM and time-priority matching tend to give the most transparent fills, you can literally see why your order filled where it did. MT5’s slippage profile is excellent at well-configured brokers and uneven at poorly-configured ones. TradingView routes via the broker’s API, which means the broker’s slippage profile, not TradingView’s, is what matters.
The desk’s working rule: pick the cheapest broker that hits your regulation requirement, then choose the platform that best fits your strategy. Do not pay more in spread or commission to get a particular platform unless the platform feature genuinely changes your edge, for example, cTrader’s DOM for a true order-flow trader. Same stack a hedge-fund analyst runs every morning, distilled into the daily macro pulse inside MACRO MASTERY.
Automation: EAs, cBots, Pine and the bridge layer
Automation is where the platform choice locks in the longest. Code you write in MQL5 will not run in cTrader. cBots in C-sharp will not run in MT5. Pine Script lives inside TradingView and crosses out only via PineConnector or a custom webhook bridge. Choose your automation language with eyes open, because switching costs are real.
MQL5 has the largest community, the most published EAs, the most tutorials, and the deepest backtesting environment. The Strategy Tester in MT5 handles tick-by-tick multi-symbol portfolios well enough for most retail systematic work. The downside is the noise floor in the MQL5 marketplace, you have to sort through a lot of grid martingales to find quality. For anyone serious about building rather than buying, MQL5 is still the largest sandbox.
cBots in cTrader use C-sharp, which is a real programming language used widely in software engineering. This means the developer pool is technically deeper but smaller within retail trading. The cTrader platform exposes more execution-level controls to the cBot directly, which gives serious developers more precision but a steeper initial learning curve. For order-flow and execution-quality strategies specifically, the desk has watched cBots outperform comparable MT5 EAs on identical broker feeds.
Pine Script in TradingView is the easiest entry point for new automation builders. The language is purpose-built for charting and strategy logic, the documentation is excellent, and the community publishes thousands of free scripts daily. The catch is that Pine executes inside TradingView, so for real-money order routing you need PineConnector or a webhook bridge into MT5, MT4 or a broker API. This is the rig the desk runs, chart and signal in TradingView, route through PineConnector, fill in MT5, risk-manage on the MT5 side.
Furthermore, the bridge layer matters as much as the chart layer. PineConnector has matured to the point where institutional-style risk controls, max daily loss, per-trade percentage risk, kill switches, are all configurable. For deeper technical detail on the bridge, the MetaQuotes official MT5 platform documentation is the canonical reference. The five-lens framework, including how to layer Pine alerts onto a macro read, is unpacked in detail inside the MACRO MASTERY desk.
Regulation, leverage and the offshore question
Regulation is platform-agnostic, but it shapes the broker pairing in ways that matter. Tier-1 regulation comes with the 30:1 retail leverage cap, offshore entities offer 500:1 and up.
The right answer here is jurisdiction-driven, not platform-driven. UK traders who want FCA protection should use Vantage’s FCA entity on whichever of MT5 or TradingView fits the strategy. Australian and APAC traders have the cleanest path through ASIC entities at Fusion, Blueberry or Vantage. Traders outside Tier-1 jurisdictions who need higher leverage and accept the trade-off route through offshore entities, and Star Trader’s published 1000:1 is the highest in the fact base, with the standard offshore warnings applying. The FCA’s official guidance on CFD providers and retail clients is worth reading before opting out of Tier-1 protection. The ESMA notice on the 30:1 retail leverage limit is set out on the ESMA official site.
By contrast, leverage is a sizing tool, not an edge. A trader who runs 5:1 effective leverage on a 1000:1 account is taking the same risk as a trader who runs 5:1 on a 30:1 account. The leverage cap matters at the margin only, for traders running aggressive position sizing relative to account equity, and that is rarely where the desk lives.
The platform is the route, the desk’s read is the edge
MT5, cTrader and TradingView are cockpits. They do not tell you whether the dollar is bid into FOMC, whether EUR is positioned long into ECB, or whether the carry trade is unwinding. The macro read is the edge that makes any of these platforms worth running.
Three desk-tested stacks across the best forex trading platforms
Talking about platforms in the abstract gets you so far. Here are three concrete stacks the desk has actually run, for three different trader profiles. Pick the one that maps closest to how you work.
Stack one: the systematic forex trader
Platform: MT5. Broker: Fusion Markets or Blueberry Markets, ASIC. Cost optimisation drives broker choice, Fusion at $4.50 round turn for pure cost or Blueberry at $7 round turn for the cleaner Tier-1 brand and copy-trade infrastructure. Automation language: MQL5. Backtesting: MT5 Strategy Tester on tick data. Risk management: per-trade percentage risk coded into the EA, max daily loss kill switch, no manual override during live hours.
This stack works because MT5’s automation depth and broker coverage mean you can develop once and deploy across multiple brokers. If a broker degrades execution or changes commission, you migrate the EA to another MT5 broker over a weekend.
Stack two: the discretionary macro trader
Platform combination: TradingView for charting and signal generation, MT5 for execution. Bridge: PineConnector or webhook into broker API. Broker: Blueberry Markets under ASIC for clean withdrawals, or Vantage Markets under FCA for UK traders. Workflow: macro thesis is built in TradingView with multi-chart layouts across DXY, EURUSD, gold and rates, signals fire via Pine alerts, PineConnector routes the order into MT5, MT5 handles position management and risk.
This is the rig the desk runs day to day. TradingView’s chart quality and cross-asset feed handle the macro overlay, MT5 handles the execution and risk side, and the bridge keeps the workflow seamless. The MACRO MASTERY desk covers FOMC, NFP and CPI live as the prints land, with the chart and the order ticket sharing the same screen real estate.
Stack three: the order-flow scalper
Platform: cTrader. Broker: Fusion Markets, the only cTrader option in the fact base. Cost: 0.0 raw plus $4.50 round turn, the cheapest in the comparison set. Workflow: level-2 DOM up, time and sales running, cBot for kill-switch logic only, manual entries. Charting via TradingView on a second monitor for context, cTrader for execution.
This stack only makes sense for traders with a genuine order-flow edge. For everyone else, the DOM is theatre. But for the traders who can read it, cTrader’s transparency on fills, time priority and liquidity provider attribution is irreplaceable on the retail side.
Final picks by trader type for the best forex trading platforms 2026
| Trader type | Platform | Broker pairing |
|---|---|---|
| Systematic / algorithmic | MT5 | Fusion Markets (cost) or Blueberry (Tier-1) |
| Discretionary macro | TradingView + MT5 bridge | Blueberry Markets or Vantage (FCA) |
| Order-flow scalper | cTrader | Fusion Markets |
| UK trader needing FCA | TradingView or MT5 | Vantage Markets (FCA entity) |
| High-leverage offshore | MT5 or TradingView | Vantage offshore or Star Trader |
Three scenarios for how the 2026 platform landscape moves
Broker integrations widen further, more retail traders move charting and execution onto TradingView, MT5 becomes the systematic-only platform for a growing share of the market. In this scenario, the desk’s hybrid TradingView-into-MT5 stack remains the default, and PineConnector keeps eating bridge-layer share.
cTrader broker coverage widens as more ECN brokers adopt it for transparency-conscious clients. MT5 holds the automation default. TradingView is the chart layer. The three-platform equilibrium persists, and traders run the platform that fits the strategy rather than picking a single rail.
Spotware faces consolidation pressure, broker support narrows further, and cTrader becomes a niche transparency platform for a small group of dedicated order-flow brokers. MT5 and TradingView absorb the rest. In this scenario, traders who built around cTrader migrate to TradingView or MT5 with reluctance.
What would change this view
A meaningful shift away from the current platform equilibrium would require: a broker-side regulatory change that forces consolidation onto one platform, a new entrant with serious capital that displaces TradingView on charting, or a step change in API standardisation that makes the platform layer commodity. None of these are visible in the 2026 setup. If MetaQuotes deprecates MT4 fully and pushes harder on MT5-only, that accelerates Scenario B. If TradingView strikes more exclusive broker deals, Scenario A weights up further. The desk reviews this page quarterly against the live broker fact base.
Final takeaway
The best forex trading platforms in 2026 are not interchangeable, and there is no single right answer. MT5 is the systematic default, cTrader is the transparency play, TradingView is the chart-and-cockpit choice that increasingly drives discretionary stacks via the bridge layer. The right pick is whichever one matches your strategy, your broker’s actual execution and your automation language. Build the cockpit around the strategy, not the other way round.
MT5 for automation and broker breadth. cTrader for execution transparency. TradingView for charting and the hybrid bridge stack. Pair to the broker that fits your jurisdiction and cost line, the route-checked five in our fact base cover almost every realistic need.
Educational analysis only. Past performance does not guarantee future results. Manage risk against your own portfolio.
Join MACRO MASTERY
The institutional macro intelligence desk. The exact stack a hedge-fund analyst runs every morning, delivered into a Discord community of serious traders.
07:00 London daily macro pulse. Live trade ideas with entry, target, stop, invalidation. FOMC, NFP, CPI live coverage as the prints land. BTC whale-flow signals. G7 central-bank rate pricing. Weekly performance scorecard, every win AND loss.
Free for life through our Blueberry Markets partnership (ASIC regulated). Members trade through Blueberry, get the entire desk in return. Funds stay with the broker in your name, withdrawable any time. Pure alignment, not a subscription.
Welcome DM lands instantly. Non-US residents only for now, US partner Q3.
Related Reading
- Forex broker comparison 2026
- Best forex broker for macro trading 2026
- KenMacro route-checked broker methodology
- Full broker fact base and spreads
FAQ
Which is the best forex trading platform overall in 2026?
There is no single answer, the right platform depends on strategy. For systematic and algorithmic forex, MT5 is the institutional default with the largest EA ecosystem and broadest broker coverage. For execution transparency and order-flow trading, cTrader’s native DOM is the cleanest. For discretionary macro and charting, TradingView is best in class. The desk’s working stack blends TradingView for charts with MT5 for execution via the PineConnector bridge, and this hybrid is the most common 2026 setup at the prop and serious retail level.
MT5 vs cTrader, which is better for forex trading?
MT5 wins on automation, EA ecosystem depth and broker coverage. Every major forex broker offers MT5, the MQL5 marketplace is the largest in retail trading, and the Strategy Tester handles multi-symbol tick backtests. cTrader wins on execution transparency, level-2 DOM comes standard, time-priority matching is visible, and the C-sharp cBots environment filters out the lowest-quality automation. If you are systematic, choose MT5. If you are an order-flow trader, choose cTrader. The fact base shows MT5 across all five reviewed brokers, cTrader at Fusion Markets only.
TradingView vs MT5 for execution, which is better?
TradingView has the better order ticket, chart-anchored stops and targets, and visual risk-reward builder. MT5 has the better order types for algorithmic work, hedging mode, partial closes, EA-driven management. For single discretionary orders at the chart, TradingView is friendlier. For systematic execution or anything that requires custom order logic, MT5 is the deeper environment. The hybrid stack, charting in TradingView and routing to MT5 via PineConnector or a broker webhook, gives you both, and is the rig the desk runs daily.
What is the cheapest broker for MT5 in 2026?
Among the route-checked fact base, Fusion Markets is the cheapest MT5 broker at 0.1 pips raw plus $4.50 round turn commission, with a $0 minimum deposit. Regulation is ASIC, leverage is 30:1 onshore or up to 500:1 through the offshore entity. For traders prioritising cost, Fusion is the answer. For traders wanting Tier-1 regulation with cleaner withdrawals and slightly higher cost, Blueberry Markets at 0.1 pips plus $7 round turn is the next step up. Both run mature MT5 servers with strong execution profiles.
Does TradingView execute trades directly with brokers in 2026?
Yes. TradingView’s direct broker integration covers all four fact-base brokers including Blueberry, Fusion, Vantage and others. You can place market orders, limit orders and bracket orders from the chart, and they route into the broker’s actual account in your name. For automation at scale or custom order logic, traders typically bridge from TradingView’s Pine alerts into MT5 via PineConnector. For straightforward discretionary execution, TradingView’s native broker integration handles it cleanly.
Is cTrader better than MT5 for scalping?
For genuine order-flow scalpers, yes. cTrader’s native level-2 DOM, time-priority matching and liquidity provider attribution give the cleanest execution forensics on the retail side. The platform was built for transparency in a way MT5 was not. However, for scalpers using purely technical setups without reading the DOM, MT5 at a well-configured broker delivers comparable fills with broader automation tools. The honest answer: if you read the tape, cTrader. If you do not, the platform matters less than the broker’s execution server.
What is PineConnector and why does the desk use it?
PineConnector is a bridge tool that converts TradingView Pine Script alerts into live orders on MT5 or MT4. It lets discretionary and semi-systematic traders chart and signal in TradingView, the better charting
From the desk, free
Get the macro framework the desk actually trades
The same regime-first framework behind every call on this site. Free. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.
Trading USD pairs?
Platform, spreads and execution decide more than the call does. Check your broker route before opening an account.
Continue reading
From the desk
Part of the Broker Finder hub, the desk’s living guide, kept current as markets move.