Broker execution scoreboard
Broker execution scoreboard
Broker execution comparison
Both brokers are measured from real fills on connected accounts — never from reviews or marketing. Every displayed metric has at least 30 observations from one account on each side, and the execution scores normalize per symbol, so neither broker gains from trading easier symbols. Spread uses the closest pre-fill tick. Unsupported cells remain N/A. No winner is declared: the honest answer depends on the symbols and sessions you trade.
Lower value in bold — a fact per metric, not a verdict. Slippage and spread are in symbol points; latency in milliseconds.
| Symbol | Mega Fusion Group slippage | TMGM (TradeMax Global) slippage | Mega Fusion Group latency | TMGM (TradeMax Global) latency | Mega Fusion Group spread | TMGM (TradeMax Global) spread | Fills (A/B) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| XAUUSD | 8.0791 obs · 4 accts | 30.084 obs · 1 acct | 104 ms1,054 obs · 4 accts | 37 ms721 obs · 3 accts | 9.4589 obs · 2 accts | 13.4635 obs · 3 accts | 1,269 / 794 |
Median across all symbols — latency is the one metric that compares across symbols.
Across 1 shared symbol, median slippage: Mega Fusion Group measured lower on 1.
Across 1 shared symbol, median fill latency: TMGM (TradeMax Global) on 1.
From real fills on connected accounts at both brokers. Every metric needs at least 30 observations from one account on each side; unsupported cells stay N/A (1 shared symbol with usable evidence today). No reviews, broker marketing or affiliate links.
Full reviews: Mega Fusion Group · TMGM (TradeMax Global) — or connect an account read-only and put your own fills in these numbers.