FundingPips 'Zero' vs 'Standard': Which Has Tighter Spreads?

The spread question is one of the most common when traders compare FundingPips' Zero (instant funding) to the 2-Step Standard (evaluation-based). Since both use the same liquidity providers and platform infrastructure, are spreads actually different—or is this a marketing illusion?

The short answer: spreads are very similar across both models. The real cost difference comes from commissions, not spreads.

Tested firsthand: I've traded multiple FundingPips accounts—passed evaluations on 2-Step Standard and Pro, dealt with the funded-stage rule switches, and withdrawn real money through Tuesday Payday. What you're reading comes from live funded trading, not from reading their marketing page.

For the complete breakdown of every FundingPips account type—including how 2-Step Standard, Pro, 1-Step, and Zero differ in drawdown rules, profit splits, and pricing, plus which account size actually makes sense for your trading style—read my full FundingPips accounts overview. It covers all five sizes from $5K to $100K with real cost analysis. For the absolute latest, check FundingPips' website or their FAQ section.

Commission Structure Comparison

The key difference: Zero accounts pay $7 per standard lot round turn on forex and metals, while Standard accounts pay $5. That's a 40% higher commission on the instruments most FundingPips traders focus on.

Total Cost Per Trade Analysis

The true "spread" cost is the raw spread plus commission, expressed as total pips per trade:

For indices, crypto, and energies: Costs are identical between models because these instruments are commission-free on both. The spread difference is negligible—both models use the same liquidity.

For forex and metals: Zero costs approximately 0.2 pips more per trade due to the higher commission. On a 1-lot EUR/USD trade, that's roughly $2 extra per round turn.

Impact on Monthly Trading Costs

The $2/lot difference adds up based on trading frequency:

For active scalpers taking 80+ trades monthly, the Zero commission structure costs an additional $160+/month in forex commissions alone. Over a year, that's nearly $2,000—almost four times the original account fee.

Spread Behavior During Market Events

Both models experience similar spread widening during:

Rollover (5:00 PM ET): Spreads on EUR/USD can widen to 2–5 pips on both models. Avoid trading during the 4:45–5:15 PM ET window.

High-impact news: CPI, NFP, and central bank decisions cause spreads to blow out to 5–15 pips temporarily. This affects both models equally—though the Zero's 10-minute news window means you shouldn't be trading during these periods anyway.

Asian session low liquidity: GBP/USD and EUR/USD spreads widen to 1–3 pips during 8 PM – 3 AM ET on both models.

Monday open: The first 30–60 minutes after Sunday 5 PM ET open typically shows wider spreads as liquidity builds.

The Real Differences That Matter More Than Spreads

The spread difference between Zero and Standard is 0.2 pips on forex. Here's what actually impacts your P&L:

A 0.2-pip spread difference on EUR/USD costs you $2 per lot. One unnecessary trade that breaches the floating loss cap costs you $499 (the entire account). Focus on the structural rule differences, not the marginal spread cost.

Real Trading Scenario: Same Trade, Different Models

The Monday morning trade: You enter EUR/USD long at London open. The position drops 35 pips before reversing and hitting your 60-pip target.

This single trade—a perfectly valid setup with a normal drawdown before profit—survives easily on the Standard but potentially kills the Zero account through the floating loss cap. This is the reality of trading a Zero account: good trades can terminate your account if they dip before they run.

Which Model Wins on Spreads?

For forex/metals traders: The 2-Step Standard is cheaper by $2/lot. If forex is your primary market, the Standard wins on total trading cost.

For indices/crypto traders: Costs are identical. If you primarily trade NAS100, US30, or crypto, the commission difference is irrelevant.

For low-frequency traders (1–2 trades/day): The $40–$80/month cost difference is negligible relative to profit potential. Spreads shouldn't be your deciding factor between models.

For high-frequency scalpers: The $2/lot adds up significantly. Standard's lower commission directly protects your edge on tight-margin strategies.

Execution Quality: Is There a Difference?

Both models use the same backend infrastructure—same liquidity providers, same platform connections, same server locations. In theory, execution quality should be identical.

In practice, some traders report subjective differences. Reports of slippage appear equally for both models. Fill speeds should be identical for the same platform and market conditions. Neither model should experience more requotes than the other—any differences are due to market conditions, not account model.

My experience: I haven't noticed meaningful execution differences between FundingPips account models. The spread and commission differences are quantifiable; execution quality differences are not—suggesting they're either nonexistent or too small to measure reliably.

Frequently Asked Questions

Do RAW spreads vary between evaluation and funded stages?

Spreads should be consistent because both stages use the same platform infrastructure and liquidity. However, some traders report slightly different execution quality on funded (Master) accounts. This is difficult to verify independently.

Can I reduce trading costs by choosing Match-Trader over MT5?

Platform choice doesn't affect spreads or commissions—these are set by FundingPips' backend, not the platform interface. The $20 cTrader surcharge is a one-time account fee, not a per-trade cost.

Are the RAW spreads on FundingPips competitive with other prop firms?

Yes. FundingPips' RAW spreads (0.1–0.3 pips on EUR/USD during London/NY) are competitive with FTMO, The5ers, and other major firms. The $5/lot commission on Standard is also in line with industry norms.

Does the commission structure change on the funded (Master) account?

Commissions remain the same from evaluation through funded stages within the same account model. A 2-Step Standard account pays $5/lot during both evaluation phases and on the funded account.

Choosing Based on Your Instrument Mix

The commission difference only affects forex and metals. If your primary instruments are commission-free, the spread comparison becomes irrelevant:

Forex/metals traders (EUR/USD, GBP/USD, XAU/USD): Standard saves $2/lot on every trade. At 50+ trades/month, this is $100+/month in savings. Clear Standard advantage.

Indices traders (NAS100, US30, DAX40): Commission-free on both models. Zero spread cost difference. Choose based on other rule differences, not spreads.

Crypto traders: Commission-free on both models. Same as indices—spreads are identical, so your model choice should be based on drawdown, leverage, and funded-stage rules.

Mixed instrument traders: Calculate your weighted average commission based on your instrument mix. If 70%+ of your trades are forex/metals, the Standard's $2/lot savings adds up significantly. If 70%+ are indices/crypto, commission costs are identical.

The Bottom Line on Spreads

Spreads are not a meaningful differentiator between Zero and Standard. Both use RAW spreads from the same liquidity providers. The only cost difference is the $2/lot commission markup on forex and metals for Zero accounts.

If you're choosing between Zero and Standard based on spreads, you're optimizing the wrong variable. The drawdown structure (10% static vs 5% trailing), daily loss limits (5% vs 3%), floating loss cap (none vs 1%), and leverage (1:100 vs 1:50) have 100x more impact on your trading outcome than 0.2 pips per trade.

Choose your model based on risk parameters first. Then note that the Standard also happens to have lower commissions—a bonus on top of already superior trading conditions.

‍