F
FBS
3.9 / 5Score: 3 / 3
Ultra-low-cost, high-leverage trading with a $1 entry point for global retail traders.
- Min deposit
- $1
- Max leverage
- 1:3000
- Spread from
- 0 pips
- Regulators
- CySEC, ASIC, FSCA
Reviewed by Experts Updated 8/31/2026
FBS vs Sarwa: Which Broker Wins in 2026?
FBS and Sarwa serve very different types of investors — one built for active, leveraged trading, the other for long-term ETF and stock investing. Here's how they truly stack up on fees, regulation, platforms and overall value in 2026.
S
Sarwa
3.3 / 5Score: 0 / 3
A Dubai-based digital investment platform focused on long-term ETF and stock investing rather than leveraged trading.
- Min deposit
- $500
- Max leverage
- 1:1
- Spread from
- 0 pips
- Regulators
- DFSA, SEC
Overall Winner
FBS
Best for Beginners
FBS
Lowest Fees
FBS
Top Regulation
FBS
Side-by-side comparison
Core features compared head-to-head.
| Feature | F FBS | S Sarwa |
|---|---|---|
| Overview | ||
| Rating | 3.9 / 5 | 3.3 / 5 |
| Founded | 2009 | 2017 |
| Headquarters | Limassol, Cyprus | Dubai, UAE |
| Regulation | CySEC, ASIC, FSCA | DFSA, SEC |
| Fees & Limits | ||
| Min Deposit | $1 | $500 |
| Spreads From | 0 pips | 0 pips |
| Commission | None | None |
| Max Leverage | 1:3000 | 1:1 |
| Platforms & Markets | ||
| Trading Platforms | MT4, MT5, Proprietary Mobile | Proprietary Web, Proprietary Mobile |
| Markets Offered | Forex, Cfd, Stocks, Indices, Commodities, Crypto | Etf, Stocks, Crypto |
Trading & non-trading fees
Min Deposit
FBS
$1
Sarwa
$500
Spreads From
FBS
0 pips
Sarwa
0 pips
Commission
FBS
None
Sarwa
None
Deposit Fees
FBS
None
Sarwa
None
Withdrawal Fees
FBS
None
Sarwa
None
Pros & cons
F
FBS
Pros
- Industry-leading low minimum deposit of just $1 removes the barrier to entry for new traders
- Spreads from 0 pips help reduce trading costs on high-frequency strategies
- Access to extremely high leverage up to 1:3000 for traders who want amplified exposure
- Backed by three separate regulatory licences (CySEC, ASIC, FSCA) for stronger oversight
- Wide market access spanning six asset classes, including crypto and commodities
- No deposit or withdrawal fees, keeping account funding costs at zero
- Supports both MT4 and MT5, the two most widely used third-party trading platforms
Cons
- Extremely high leverage of 1:3000 significantly increases risk for inexperienced traders
- Proprietary platform offering is limited mainly to mobile, with no proprietary desktop terminal
- Regulatory mix includes offshore-style oversight (FSCA) alongside tier-1 regulators
- Newer entrants may find the sheer number of account types and promotions overwhelming
S
Sarwa
Pros
- Regulated by the DFSA, a respected Middle East financial authority
- Additional SEC registration adds a layer of credibility for US-linked oversight
- No commissions charged on trades placed through the platform
- Zero deposit and withdrawal fees on account funding and payouts
- Simple proprietary web and mobile platforms suited to first-time investors
- Clear focus on ETFs and stocks appeals to long-term, buy-and-hold investors
Cons
- Significantly higher minimum deposit of $500 compared to competitors
- Maximum leverage capped at 1:1, ruling out margin-based forex or CFD trading
- No MT4 or MT5 support, limiting appeal for active traders
- Narrower market selection restricted to ETFs, stocks and crypto only
- Lower overall rating of 3.3/5 reflects a more limited all-round offering
Our expert verdict
Editor's verdict
Overall winner FBS
Lowest fees FBS
Best regulation FBS
Better for beginners FBS
FBS is the clear overall winner in this matchup, earning a 3.9/5 rating compared to Sarwa's 3.3/5 on our independent scoring system. FBS combines a $1 minimum deposit, spreads from 0 pips, and access to six asset classes with three layers of regulatory oversight from CySEC, ASIC and FSCA. Sarwa remains a credible option for long-term ETF and stock investors in the UAE region, but its $500 minimum deposit, 1:1 leverage cap, and narrower market selection make it a niche choice rather than an all-round trading platform.
Overall Rating & Reputation
On our independent rating system, FBS scores 3.9 out of 5, comfortably ahead of Sarwa's 3.3 out of 5. This gap reflects differences across fees, regulatory breadth, platform choice and market accessibility rather than a single isolated factor.
FBS was founded in 2009 and has built a long track record as a multi-asset broker serving global retail traders, while Sarwa launched in 2017 as a more focused, UAE-based digital investment platform.
For traders who want an all-round package covering forex, CFDs and multiple asset classes, FBS's higher rating reflects a genuinely broader and more competitive offering.
Fees, Spreads & Minimum Deposit
Both brokers advertise spreads starting from 0 pips with no added commission, so on pure trading cost headlines the two look evenly matched. The real differentiator emerges in accessibility: FBS requires just a $1 minimum deposit, while Sarwa requires $500 to open an account.
Neither broker charges deposit or withdrawal fees, which is a positive for cost-conscious traders on both platforms. However, FBS's dramatically lower entry point makes it far easier for beginners or smaller-capital traders to get started without committing significant funds upfront.
For traders testing strategies or building capital gradually, FBS's minimum deposit advantage is a meaningful practical benefit that Sarwa simply cannot match at this time.
Regulation & Safety
FBS holds licences from CySEC, ASIC and FSCA, giving it three distinct regulatory approvals across European, Australian and South African jurisdictions. Sarwa is regulated by the DFSA in Dubai and is also registered with the SEC, giving it credible but narrower regulatory coverage.
Both brokers carry what we classify as tier-1 or equivalent oversight, meaning client funds and business conduct are subject to meaningful regulatory scrutiny in both cases.
Traders who prioritize a wider spread of licensing across multiple regulatory bodies may lean toward FBS, while those specifically operating within the UAE or US-adjacent regulatory framework may find Sarwa's DFSA and SEC combination reassuring.
Trading Platforms & Tools
FBS supports the industry-standard MT4 and MT5 platforms, plus its own proprietary mobile app, giving active traders access to advanced charting, automated trading via Expert Advisors, and a mature third-party ecosystem of tools and indicators.
Sarwa relies entirely on its own proprietary web and mobile platforms. These are generally simpler and more streamlined, which suits long-term investors but offers far less depth for active traders who want customization, algorithmic trading, or advanced technical analysis.
If platform sophistication and flexibility matter to your strategy, FBS's MetaTrader support gives it a decisive practical edge over Sarwa's proprietary-only approach.
Market Access & Leverage
FBS offers access to Forex, CFDs, Stocks, Indices, Commodities and Crypto, covering six distinct asset classes under one account. Leverage runs up to an aggressive 1:3000, appealing to traders who want maximum capital efficiency, though this also raises the risk profile considerably.
Sarwa's market access is limited to ETFs, Stocks and Crypto, with leverage capped at 1:1. This effectively rules out margin trading and positions Sarwa as a straightforward investment platform rather than a leveraged trading broker.
The choice here really comes down to trading style: active traders wanting forex and leveraged CFD exposure will find FBS far more suitable, while conservative, long-term investors may prefer Sarwa's non-leveraged, buy-and-hold approach.
Our Verdict
FBS is the stronger all-round broker in this comparison, winning on overall rating, minimum deposit accessibility, platform variety and market breadth. Its combination of a $1 entry point, MT4/MT5 support and six tradable asset classes makes it the better fit for the vast majority of retail traders.
Sarwa still holds genuine appeal for a specific type of investor: those based in the UAE region who want simple, non-leveraged exposure to ETFs and stocks through a clean proprietary platform. It is not designed to compete directly with a full-service multi-asset broker like FBS.
For traders prioritizing low costs, flexibility and broad market access, FBS is our recommended pick. Long-term investors who value Sarwa's regional focus and simplicity may still find it a reasonable complementary platform rather than a primary trading account.
Verdict summary
The bottom line — category winners and our final pick based on ratings.
Editor's verdict
FBS wins overall
FBS edges out Sarwa overall based on our expert rating score.
F
Highest Rated
FBS
3.9 / 5 / 5
Category winners
Overall winner
Based on overall expert rating (3.9/5).
FBSBetter for beginners
Stronger onboarding and educational resources.
FBSLower trading costs
More competitive spreads and baseline commissions.
FBSStronger regulation
Higher trust based on tier-1 regulatory oversight.
FBS
Frequently asked questions
Based on our independent rating system, FBS outperforms Sarwa overall, earning a 3.9 out of 5 compared to Sarwa's 3.3 out of 5. FBS wins across categories including beginner accessibility, fee structure and regulatory breadth. That said, Sarwa may still appeal to long-term investors focused specifically on ETFs and stocks rather than leveraged forex or CFD trading.
Both brokers advertise spreads starting from 0 pips and charge no additional commission on trades. However, FBS pairs its competitive spreads with a far lower minimum deposit and broader market access, giving active traders more flexibility to manage overall trading costs across multiple asset classes.
FBS requires just $1 to open an account, making it one of the most accessible brokers for beginners or those testing strategies with minimal capital. Sarwa requires a considerably higher minimum deposit of $500, which may be a barrier for newer or smaller-scale investors.
FBS is regulated by CySEC, ASIC and FSCA, giving it three separate regulatory licences across multiple jurisdictions. Sarwa is regulated by the DFSA and registered with the SEC. Both offer credible oversight, though FBS holds a broader spread of regulatory coverage.
FBS supports the industry-standard MT4 and MT5 platforms alongside its own proprietary mobile app, giving active traders access to advanced charting and automated trading tools. Sarwa offers only a proprietary web platform and mobile app, which suits simple investing but lacks the depth active traders may expect.
FBS offers full forex trading capability with leverage up to 1:3000, making it a strong choice for currency traders. Sarwa does not focus on forex trading and caps leverage at 1:1, meaning it functions more like a straightforward investment platform than a leveraged trading broker.
FBS provides access to Forex, CFDs, Stocks, Indices, Commodities and Crypto, covering six distinct asset classes. Sarwa's market access is limited to ETFs, Stocks and Crypto, making it a narrower offering suited to long-term investors rather than diversified traders.
Yes, there is nothing preventing you from holding accounts with both brokers simultaneously. In fact, many traders use FBS for active forex and CFD trading while using Sarwa for long-term ETF and stock investing, effectively combining the strengths of both platforms.
FBS is generally considered more beginner-friendly due to its $1 minimum deposit, zero commission structure and multiple regulatory licences. Sarwa's higher deposit requirement and narrower market focus make it less suited to beginners who want to start small and experiment with different asset classes.
Neither FBS nor Sarwa charges deposit or withdrawal fees, which means traders on both platforms can fund accounts and withdraw profits without incurring additional transaction costs. This makes cost comparisons come down primarily to spreads, commissions and minimum deposit requirements rather than funding fees.
Risk warning: Trading CFDs and forex involves significant risk of loss and is not suitable for all investors. Please consider whether you understand how CFDs work and whether you can afford to take the high risk of losing your money.