Eightcap publishes two headline spread figures. The Standard account is described as having spreads from 1.0 pips with no commission on FX. The Raw account is described as having spreads from 0.0 pips plus $3.50 commission per lot per side. Both are floors, not averages, and the difference between those two words is where every inflated broker review ever written goes wrong.
Before you do any arithmetic with those numbers, there is a prior question with more money riding on it than the spread itself: which of six legal entities is your account actually held with. The licence number, the leverage cap, the complaints route, and what happens to your balance if the company fails all depend on the answer, and none of them is uniform across the group.
Everything on this page comes from Eightcap's own website and ASIC's media releases and register pages. We checked all of it on 2026-09-15. We did not spend time sampling live quotes across sessions, because being honest about that is cheaper than pretending otherwise.
Eightcap's own about page lists six regulated entities. Only the first three appear in most reviews of this broker.
| Entity | Regulator | Reference | Registration and location |
|---|---|---|---|
| Eightcap Pty Ltd | ASIC (Australia) | AFSL 391441 | ABN 73 139 495 944; Melbourne |
| Eightcap Group Ltd | FCA (United Kingdom) | FRN 921296 | England and Wales no. 12448314; London |
| Eightcap EU Ltd | CySEC (Cyprus) | Licence 246/14 | Cyprus company no. HE329922; Limassol |
| Eightcap Global Limited | Securities Commission of The Bahamas | SIA-F220 | Nassau |
| Eightcap International Ltd | Financial Services Authority (Seychelles) | SD100 | Registration no. 8427413-1; Mahe |
| Eightcap International Trading | Financial Services Commission (Mauritius) | GB25204603 | Registration no. 227050; Ebene |
What each licence buys you when the company cannot pay is not the same either.
| Entity you are onboarded to | Retail terms | If the firm cannot meet its obligations |
|---|---|---|
| Eightcap Group Ltd (FCA) | UK retail CFD regime, with FCA leverage limits, margin close-out and negative balance protection | Eligible clients can claim through the Financial Services Compensation Scheme up to £85,000. Complaints can go to the Financial Ombudsman Service |
| Eightcap EU Ltd (CySEC) | EU CFD framework applying ESMA measures: leverage caps, margin close-out, negative balance protection | Cyprus Investor Compensation Fund for covered clients: 90% of a covered claim, capped at €20,000 per eligible claimant |
| Eightcap Pty Ltd (ASIC) | Australian retail CFD regime under ASIC's product intervention order | No scheme paying out the way FSCS or the Cyprus ICF does. The route is a complaint to AFCA, then compensation up to $150,000 from the Compensation Scheme of Last Resort if the firm fails to pay a determination |
| Bahamas, Seychelles and Mauritius entities | Lighter retail framework than the FCA, ASIC or CySEC | No statutory compensation scheme comparable to the three above. Protection rests on licence supervision and the firm's own client money arrangements |
The Compensation Scheme of Last Resort detail usually gets lost. ASIC's own site describes it as an independent, not-for-profit company that commenced operations on 2 April 2024, paying up to $150,000 to eligible consumers who hold an unpaid determination from the Australian Financial Complaints Authority. Three things have to happen first: you complain to AFCA, AFCA determines compensation, and the firm does not pay. That is a different thing from an insurance payout, and not a substitute for checking which entity signed you up.
A licence protects clients who hold accounts with that licensed entity. It does not attach to a brand name.
Eightcap EU carries a notice in its own page footer naming two domains that are not its own. In its words, the official website is https://eightcap.eu, the company is not affiliated with other domains or companies, and the domains 8capltd.com and eight-cap.ltd/login do not belong to the company and are using its license number without authorization.
Read that twice. Cloned broker sites reproduce licence numbers, so treating a licence number printed on a website as proof of anything is backwards. You use the licence number to search the register, then check that the company name and the authorised domain on the register match the site you are looking at.
While you are doing that, note one inconsistency worth resolving. Two official Eightcap domains publish two different registered addresses for Eightcap EU Ltd: Anexartisias 187, 3040 Limassol on one, and Aiolou & Panagioti Diomidous 9, Katholiki, 3020 Limassol on the other. We could not reconcile them from any further official document, so this page reports both and leaves it to the CySEC register to settle.
The comparison below is Eightcap EU's own account-type grid, nothing added.
| Standard | Raw | |
|---|---|---|
| Spreads from | 1.0 pips | 0.0 pips |
| Commission | No commission (shares CFDs include commission) | Per side per standard lot, see below |
| Trade size (min / max) | 0.01 / 100 lots | 0.01 / 100 lots |
| Margin call level | 80% | 80% |
| Stop-out level | 50% | 50% |
| Account base currencies | AUD, CAD, EUR, GBP, NZD, SGD, USD | AUD, CAD, EUR, GBP, NZD, SGD, USD |
| Minimum deposit | $100 | $100 |
| Instruments | 800+ CFDs | 800+ CFDs |
| Scalping | Allowed | Allowed |
Two lines in that grid are worth staring at. "Spreads from" describes a lower bound, so it tells you nothing about what you will be quoted at 3pm on a Wednesday. And the commission cell does not contain a number at all, because there are three.
Eightcap states the Raw commission as: $3.50 for accounts denominated in AUD, USD, NZD, SGD or CAD; GBP 2.25 for GBP accounts; EUR 2.75 for EUR accounts. Each side, per standard lot traded.
| Account base currency | Commission per side, standard lot | Round turn, one lot |
|---|---|---|
| USD, AUD, NZD, SGD, CAD | 3.50 in that currency | 7.00 USD on a USD account |
| GBP | GBP 2.25 | GBP 4.50 |
| EUR | EUR 2.75 | EUR 5.50 |
Those are three fixed nominal amounts, not one figure converted at spot. So a sterling Raw account and a dollar Raw account do not cost the same amount in USD terms, and which one is cheaper moves with exchange rates. Almost every review of this broker quotes "$7 round turn" as though it were universal. It is not.
Take the two published floors and compare them without inventing anything. One pip on a standard lot of EUR/USD is about $10.
That crossover point comes entirely from two published figures, $7 and 1.0 pip. It requires no assumption about typical spreads, which is why it survives contact with a live market and why quotes like "the Raw account saves X per trade" do not.
One caveat attached to it: the comparison assumes Standard deals at its own advertised floor. If Standard quotes wider than 1.0 pip at the moment you trade, the crossover moves higher and Raw looks better than it did here.
Overnight financing sits outside those figures entirely. The account-type grid does not list swap rates, so the only place to get them for your instruments is the contract specifications inside the platform. For anyone holding past the daily rollover, that cost usually dwarfs the spread.
Inactivity fees are another gap. Third-party reviewers cite a monthly charge after three months without trading or depositing, quoted from Eightcap EU's Costs and Charges document. We could not open that document ourselves, so this page does not quote a number. Open it before you assume no trades means no costs.
Since 2018, ESMA has required CFD providers to disclose the percentage of retail client accounts that lose money, recalculated every three months against the preceding twelve months. The UK FCA runs a comparable requirement. Eightcap EU carries this disclosure across its site.
Here is what we found on 2026-09-15. Two pages on the same domain carried two different figures the same day: the English support page showed 65.18% of retail investor accounts losing money trading CFDs with Eightcap EU Ltd, and a language-variant page on the same domain showed 71.28%. Third-party sites have cited 59.57% in May 2026 and 71.90% in September 2026.
The figure legitimately changes each quarter, and two versions of it can be live at once. We are not going to pick one and present it as the answer, so open eightcap.eu yourself and read the number currently displayed. Any cost review of this broker that omits this disclosure has skipped the single most informative line the firm is obliged to publish.
In November 2023, ASIC published the outcome of a supervision exercise with a very large number attached. Under media release 23-298MR, ASIC oversaw more than $17.4 million in combined compensation to nearly 2,000 retail clients affected by possible breaches across eight retail OTC derivative issuers.
The part relevant here is the CFD limb. A combined $4.3 million was paid or agreed to be paid to more than 1,500 retail clients of seven CFD issuers since March 2021, for issuing CFDs that exceeded the maximum leverage ratios permitted by the ASIC Corporations (Product Intervention Order: Contracts for Difference) Instrument 2020/986. The affected clients reportedly suffered losses on more than 150,000 CFD trades across 100 different CFD instruments.
The seven were Capital Com Australia, CMC Markets Asia Pacific, Eightcap Pty Ltd, IG Australia, Pepperstone Group, Saxo Capital Markets (Australia), and StoneX Financial trading as City Index. All seven self-reported the breaches and proposed remediation programs to ASIC.
ASIC also published root causes, and they are not what a spread comparison would have you thinking about. Issuers identified change management weaknesses, including failures to adequately test and review IT systems after trading platform updates, and manual errors when applying leverage limits to CFD instruments and retail client accounts.
ASIC then reviewed the remediation itself. Three issuers had used behavioural assumptions to estimate client losses, producing lower payouts than a calculation treating the over-leveraged CFDs as never issued. Those three plus a fourth had not compensated fees or interest. Those four paid or agreed to pay additional compensation totalling more than $2.8 million. ASIC did not name which four, and we will not guess whether Eightcap was among them.
Three boundary lines belong on that summary. This was remediation supervised by ASIC, not a fine or penalty. It concerns the Australian entity, Eightcap Pty Ltd, and says nothing about Eightcap Group Ltd or Eightcap EU Ltd. And it has nothing to do with spreads, which is precisely the point: the risks that cost Australian retail clients real money came from leverage limits and system change management, none of which appears in a pip comparison.
We searched for enforcement decisions against the other two onshore entities and found none: no CySEC fine or settlement against Eightcap EU Ltd, and no FCA final notice against Eightcap Group Ltd.
That is not a finding of "clean". It means our search came up empty, and this page makes no claim either way. Search it yourself: CySEC publishes administrative decisions and sanctions announcements searchable by firm name, and the FCA publishes final notices and decision notices on its enforcement pages.
One further item we could not pin to a primary source: the date AFSL 391441 was originally granted. It sits in ASIC's AFS licensee dataset rather than in a readable register page, so we leave it out rather than borrow someone else's number.
Eightcap suits traders who want MetaTrader 4, MetaTrader 5 or TradingView access to a single account covering 800+ CFD instruments, accept a $100 minimum and a trade size band of 0.01 to 100 lots, and are willing to check which entity they landed on before depositing. There is no per-instrument spread table on this page because we did not measure one, and anyone deciding between accounts deserves to know that the gap is deliberate rather than accidental.
Pass if you need a per-instrument cost table to make the decision, or if you expect an Australian entity to pay out like FSCS does in the UK. The Australian route runs through AFCA and then possibly the CSLR, and only after a determination goes unpaid. Nothing about that is wrong, but it should be understood before it matters.
Last reviewed 2026-09-15. Nothing here is investment advice. If you find an error above, particularly in the entity tables or the ASIC figures, tell us and we will correct it with attribution.