Interactive Brokers vs Trading 212: licences compared
Side-by-side view of each broker's licences, regulator tiers and key facts. Remember that protection depends on which entity holds your account.
| Attribute | Interactive Brokers | Trading 212 |
|---|---|---|
| Licence Score | 83Very strong | 72Strong |
| Strongest licence | 1 Tier 1 | 1 Tier 1 |
| Licences on record | 8 | 4 |
| 1 FCA United Kingdom | Licensed | Licensed |
| 1 ASIC Australia | Licensed | Licensed |
| 1 JFSA Japan | Licensed | — |
| 1 CFTC / NFA United States | Licensed | — |
| 1 MAS Singapore | Licensed | — |
| 1 CIRO Canada | Licensed | — |
| 1 SFC Hong Kong | Licensed | — |
| 1 CBI Ireland | Licensed | — |
| 2 CySEC Cyprus | — | Licensed |
| 2 FSC (BG) Bulgaria | — | Licensed |
| Founded | 1978 | 2004 |
| Headquarters | United States | United Kingdom |
| Type | Multi-asset broker | Multi-asset broker |
| Publicly listed | NASDAQ:IBKR | No |
| Platforms | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Minimum deposit | No minimum | US$1 |
| Visit | Visit site | Visit site |
Frequently asked questions
Is Interactive Brokers or Trading 212 better regulated?
Interactive Brokers has the higher Licence Score (83 vs 72), based on the number and tier of licences, operating history and public listing.
Which regulators license both Interactive Brokers and Trading 212?
Both are matched to licences from ASIC and FCA.