Fusion Markets vs Phillip Nova: Which Broker Wins in 2026?

Based on our independent research, Fusion Markets edges out Phillip Nova with an overall rating of 3.6/5 compared to 3.4/5. Fusion Markets performs better across spreads, leverage flexibility, and platform variety, while Phillip Nova remains competitive for traders who value its proprietary ecosystem and long operating history. The right choice ultimately depends on individual trading priorities, which we break down in detail throughout this review.

Fusion Markets is the more cost-effective option for active traders, offering spreads from 0.0 pips plus a $2.25 per lot commission. Phillip Nova, by contrast, charges no commission but starts spreads at 0.6 pips, which can add up quickly for frequent traders. Scalpers and high-volume traders generally benefit more from Fusion Markets' raw spread model.

Both Fusion Markets and Phillip Nova allow account opening with a $0 minimum deposit, removing capital barriers for new traders. This makes either broker accessible to beginners testing strategies with smaller amounts. Actual trading costs, however, will still depend on spreads, commissions, and leverage used.

Fusion Markets is regulated by ASIC in Australia, while Phillip Nova operates under MAS oversight in Singapore. Both are recognized as tier-1 regulatory bodies, meaning client funds and trading practices are subject to strict compliance standards at either broker. Your choice may come down to regional preference and where you feel most comfortable being regulated.

Fusion Markets supports MT4, MT5, and TradingView, giving traders flexibility across some of the industry's most widely used platforms. Phillip Nova instead offers a Proprietary Web platform, a Proprietary Mobile app, and the established POEMS system. Traders who rely on custom indicators or automated strategies built for MT4/MT5 will likely find Fusion Markets more suitable.

Yes, there is nothing preventing traders from opening accounts with both brokers simultaneously. Many experienced traders diversify across multiple brokers to access different markets, platforms, or regulatory jurisdictions. This strategy can also help spread counterparty risk across separate regulated entities.

Fusion Markets offers substantially higher leverage, up to 1:500, compared to Phillip Nova's maximum of 1:20. While higher leverage can amplify potential gains, it equally increases potential losses, so traders should size positions carefully regardless of which broker they choose. Phillip Nova's lower leverage cap may actually suit more conservative or risk-averse traders.

Phillip Nova has the longer track record, having been founded in 2005 in Singapore, compared to Fusion Markets' founding in 2017 in Melbourne, Australia. Phillip Nova's extended history within the Phillip Capital group may appeal to traders who prioritize institutional longevity. However, a longer history alone doesn't guarantee better trading conditions, as reflected in the overall ratings.

Fusion Markets offers a slightly broader market selection, covering forex, CFDs, stocks, indices, commodities, and crypto—six asset classes in total. Phillip Nova covers five categories, omitting direct stock trading but still offering forex, CFDs, indices, commodities, and crypto. Traders specifically seeking stock CFD exposure alongside other assets may lean toward Fusion Markets.

Neither Fusion Markets nor Phillip Nova charges deposit or withdrawal fees on their standard funding methods. This makes both brokers relatively cost-transparent when it comes to moving funds in and out of trading accounts. Traders should still verify any third-party payment provider charges that may apply outside the brokers' direct fee structures.