Hargreaves Lansdown vs Spreadex

Spreadex takes the overall verdict in this comparison with a score of 4.7, but the honest answer is that the two firms win on different things. Spreadex is the cheaper of the two on headline pricing, from 0.6 pips, while Spreadex lets you start with less at £0.

Hargreaves Lansdown is regulated by FCA and has been trading since 1981; Spreadex is regulated by FCA and dates from 1999. Both hold client money in segregated accounts and both apply negative balance protection to retail accounts, so the decision comes down to cost, platform and how you intend to trade rather than to safety.

If you want one sentence: pick Spreadex if your edge is thin and cost decides everything, and pick Spreadex if you would rather pay a fraction more for the more consistent all-round experience across platform, execution and support.

It is worth being precise about what "wins" means here. Our score is an average across pricing, platform, execution, funding and support, so a firm can take the overall verdict while losing three of the five components outright. If one of those components is the whole reason you are opening an account — say you need MetaTrader for an expert advisor, or you need a sub-£100 entry — then the component result matters far more to you than the average does.

Neither firm is a risk to your money in the ordinary sense. Both are authorised, both segregate client funds and both sit inside the FSCS regime, so the decision is about fit and cost rather than about safety. That is a more comfortable position to choose from than it sounds: the worst outcome of picking the "wrong" one of these two is that you pay slightly more than you needed to while you work out what you actually want.

On a one-lot round trip in a major pair, Hargreaves Lansdown quotes from n/a and Spreadex from 0.6 pips. Those numbers only tell you half the story: a raw-spread account adds commission per side, and a bundled account hides the same money inside a wider quote. Our sampling adds both together, then adds the financing actually charged on our statements.

Session matters as much as the firm. Both brokers price tightest through the London–New York overlap and widen into the Asian session, and both widen sharply for the seconds around scheduled data. Where they differ is how quickly the spread returns to normal afterwards, which is the difference that shows up in an intraday trader's monthly statement.

Financing is the charge most people forget. Held for a month, a position can pay more in overnight interest than it ever paid in spread. Check each firm's published swap table against your own statement in the first few weeks — the gap between the two is a good measure of how straight a broker plays.

Currency conversion is the cost most comparisons omit. If your account is in sterling and the instrument settles in dollars, every realised profit and loss is converted at a rate that carries a margin. Over a year of frequent small trades that margin can exceed the commission line entirely, so match your base currency to what you trade wherever both firms allow it.

Promotional pricing should be stripped out before you compare. Introductory spreads, rebates and cashback are genuine but temporary, and a multi-year relationship should be chosen on the standard schedule. Price Hargreaves Lansdown and Spreadex at their normal rates, treat any offer as a bonus, and month four holds no surprises.

Finally, model your own volume rather than a benchmark. Ten lots a month is our reference case because it is a common retail level, but the ranking between two brokers frequently flips at higher size when a commission tier kicks in, or at lower size when a fixed monthly minimum starts to bite. Two minutes with a spreadsheet beats any generic cost table, including ours.

Hargreaves Lansdown runs HL platform. Spreadex runs Web, mobile. If you rely on expert advisors or third-party signals, the MetaTrader option is the practical one; if you value charting depth and a ticket that restates all-in cost before you confirm, the proprietary platform usually wins.

We time execution from submission to confirmed fill and log slippage in both directions, including through scheduled releases. Both firms fill promptly in calm conditions; the useful test is the two minutes around a rate decision, when order queues build and weaker infrastructure starts rejecting.

Test the mobile app before you depend on it. Alerts should fire on the phone as well as the desktop, charts you build on one should appear on the other, and modifying a stop should take one hand and a couple of seconds.

Look at the statement as closely as the chart. A good platform breaks each trade into spread, commission and financing as separate lines and lets you export the lot to a spreadsheet. A platform that reports one blended number makes it impossible to audit what you were charged, which is a meaningful difference between two otherwise similar firms.

Ask both what happens when the platform is unreachable. A telephone dealing desk that can flatten a position, with published hours and a number you can find in under a minute, is a basic operational safeguard. Every serious broker has an answer; the quality of it says a lot about the operation behind the interface.

Hargreaves Lansdown operates under FCA and Spreadex under FCA. Under FCA rules, client money sits in segregated accounts at a separate bank, retail leverage is capped at 1:30 on major pairs, negative balance protection is contractual, and eligible claims are covered by the FSCS up to £85,000 if the firm itself fails.

Check which entity you are actually onboarded to. Large groups run several entities under different licences and the protections described on the UK page may not apply to an offshore entity. The entity name is on the client agreement, not on the marketing page.

Hargreaves Lansdown is the longer-established of the two, trading since 1981. Longevity is not proof of anything on its own, but a clean register entry, a segregated client account and a withdrawal that lands in a couple of working days is about as much reassurance as this industry offers.

Complaints handling is part of the comparison too. Both firms must run a formal complaints procedure with defined response times, and eligible cases can be escalated to the Financial Ombudsman Service at no cost. It is not a feature anyone markets, but it is the mechanism that matters on the one day you need it.

Read each firm's published risk disclosure before funding. Authorised brokers must state the percentage of retail accounts that lose money, and the figures are high across the industry rather than specific to either of these two. Treat that number as context for the whole product class, not as a mark against a particular name.

Choose Hargreaves Lansdown if uk's largest investment platform describes your priority. Its combination of n/a pricing, a £1 minimum and HL platform suits traders who value that specific mix over anything else on offer.

Choose Spreadex if strong uk service desk matters more to you. It starts from £0, quotes from 0.6 pips and gives you Web, mobile.

Still torn? Open both with small balances and run identical trades for a month. Two statements settle the argument faster than any review, including this one. CFDs are complex instruments and a majority of retail accounts lose money; nothing here is personal advice.

Give the decision a review date. Whatever you pick between Hargreaves Lansdown and Spreadex, set a reminder for six months and re-run the same checks with your own statements in front of you: realised cost per round turn, fills through news, withdrawal timing and how support handled anything that went wrong. By then you are comparing evidence rather than marketing, and switching — or adding the second account — is routine.

And if the two remain genuinely level, weight the tiebreaker towards whichever firm makes its costs easiest to verify. Spreadex scores highest here overall, but transparency compounds: a broker whose statements you can audit line by line will keep earning the benefit of the doubt long after a marginal spread advantage has stopped mattering.