WikiFX

Rispondi

As an experienced trader evaluating MUFG for indices trading—specifically something like the US100—I’ve found that pinpointing the total trading costs with this broker isn’t straightforward. My approach always begins with regulatory credentials, and MUFG’s longstanding FCA and LFSA oversight does give me initial confidence in their legitimacy and operational maturity. That said, transparency around fee structures and actual cost breakdowns for indices trading isn’t readily available in their public resources. Historically, a market maker model like MUFG’s typically means trading costs often center around the spread, rather than commissions per trade. However, the exact spread on instruments such as the US100 isn’t disclosed in the available materials, and there’s no mention of extra commission fees or swap rates for holding positions overnight. Because such costs can vary widely between brokers, I’d treat the lack of detailed information as a signal to proceed with caution. I also noticed some user reports raising concerns about withdrawal difficulties, which, in my experience, warrant extra due diligence when assessing the total cost and convenience of trading here. For me, unless I can get explicit confirmation—ideally in writing—of all fees (including spreads, overnight financing, and any account maintenance charges), I wouldn’t assume MUFG’s costs are especially competitive or transparent compared to other brokers more forthright about these details. This caution is vital for anyone considering significant exposure on leveraged products like the US100.