Most retail traders think in terms of charts, setups and execution speed. The broker behind the trade rarely gets a second thought. Yet some of the most active names in global markets are themselves listed businesses, and what makes them unusual is that their revenue is not built on long-term loans or steady fee schedules. It is built on whether people are clicking buy and sell.
That single fact explains everything else about this sector. These companies can look spectacular in a volatile year and go quiet almost overnight when markets calm down. The difference between the businesses below is not really geography. It is how directly they are exposed to that participation risk, and what they have done to manage it.
The participation-driven names
IG Group↗︎ (LON: IGG) is the most established player in UK listed trading. In its financial year to May 2025, it posted revenue of £1.08 billion, with adjusted profit before tax up 17% to £536 million and earnings per share climbing 26% to 114p.
Those are not the numbers of a business in structural decline, but they are heavily dependent on what markets do next. Net interest income already fell 6% as benchmark rates dropped, compressing the yield on client cash balances. That is a preview of what softer conditions look like for IG, even in an otherwise strong year.
The shares trade on a trailing P/E of around 13x, with a dividend yield of roughly 2.6% at current prices and a payout ratio of approximately 56%. For a business of this quality, that looks undemanding, but the market has never been willing to rate CFD brokers like compounders, and probably never will.
CMC Markets↗︎ (LON: CMCX) targets a similar audience but has had a harder time convincing investors it is more than a cyclical trade. Full-year net operating income to March 2025 came in at a record for the group, with EBITDA up 12% to £103 million.
The Australian stockbroking arm is the genuinely interesting part of the business. It delivered record revenue and double-digit growth in assets under administration, but it remains small relative to the CFD core. CMC’s ambition to build a multi-asset “Super App” combining traditional finance and DeFi products is either a serious long-term platform play or a distraction from its core competence, and the market has not yet decided which.
Plus500↗︎ (LON: PLUS) is the most operationally disciplined of the three, and arguably the most interesting from a capital return perspective. Full-year 2025 revenue came in at $792 million, up 3% and ahead of expectations, with EBITDA of $348 million and operating cash conversion averaging roughly 98% since its 2013 IPO.
The balance sheet carries over $800 million in cash and no debt. Since going public, Plus500 has bought back approximately 38% of its own shares, and in 2025 alone it returned $365 million to shareholders through buybacks and dividends. Its non-OTC revenue from futures, equities and prediction markets exceeded $100 million for the first time, now representing 14% of total sales, which matters because it begins to diversify the earnings base away from pure CFD cycle exposure.
The weakness is visibility as Plus500 operates a B-book model, meaning it takes the other side of client trades rather than hedging, which produces exceptional margins in benign conditions but makes revenue harder to read from the outside.
The asset-driven names
AJ Bell↗︎ (LSE: AJB) operates on entirely different economics. Revenue of £318 million in its year to September 2025 was generated from platform fees tied to assets under administration, not from trading frequency. That shifts the risk profile towards equity market levels and long-term investor behaviour in pensions, ISAs and SIPPs, rather than short-term speculation. AJ Bell is a steadier business, but it does not have the earnings torque of the CFD names when markets are moving.
Hargreaves Lansdown↗︎ (LON: HLL) was the dominant UK retail investment platform until CVC, Nordic Capital and ADIA completed its take-private at a valuation of £5.4 billion in March 2025, delisting it from the London Stock Exchange.
It is now no longer publicly listed, but its performance before the deal still tells you something, with growth already slowing, competitive pressure from lower cost platforms building, and brand loyalty proving limited when a rival is meaningfully cheaper.
IntegraFin↗︎ (LON: IHP) sits further up the chain, operating through financial advisers via its Transact platform. Revenue is closely tied to adviser-held assets, giving it a more stable fee base than any of the trading names. Growth here depends on adviser flows and the broader wealth management cycle rather than retail participation, making it a different proposition again.
The US names
Interactive Brokers↗︎ (BKR) is the most compelling business model in global listed brokerage. In Q3 2025 alone it posted net revenues of $1.66 billion, with commission revenue up 23% and net interest income up 21%. Daily average revenue trades hit 3.62 million, customer margin loans grew 39% to $77 billion, and customer credit balances rose 33% to $155 billion. These are the numbers of a business with genuine structural scale, not just participation sensitivity, but the ability to profit from the assets and leverage that active clients bring onto the platform over time.
Charles Schwab↗︎ (SCHW) operates closer to a financial ecosystem than a pure trading platform. Its income base is anchored in long-term wealth through interest income, advisory fees and client assets, which makes it materially more stable than the CFD names. It benefits from rising markets and rising rates but does not require constant client activity to sustain revenue.
Robinhood↗︎ (HOOD) is the highest-beta name in this list. Its revenue is closely tied to retail participation cycles and interest rate conditions, and its model of zero commissions funded by order flow and idle cash remains structurally dependent on whether younger investors stay engaged. When they do, the earnings torque is significant. When they step back, there is little recurring fee base to cushion the fall.
eToro↗︎ (ETOR) went public in 2025 and occupies a different category. Its differentiation is not execution quality but behaviour, allowing users to follow and copy other traders and creating a network effect that conventional brokers do not have. Full-year 2025 results showed the business continuing to scale. The question is whether that social layer sustains engagement through a prolonged down market, when copying other traders looks less attractive.
European and Asian names
XTB↗︎ (XTB) has been among the stronger performers in European retail trading in terms of client growth and geographic expansion, though it remains CFD-heavy and therefore cycle-sensitive. Swissquote sits at the premium end, combining banking services with brokerage to produce a more diversified income base than pure trading platforms.
Futu Holdings↗︎ and UP Fintech Holding↗︎ reflect the rapid growth of digital-first brokerage in Asia, driven by mobile adoption and cross-border investment appetite. Both remain higher-growth names but carry meaningful sensitivity to regulatory conditions, particularly in China, and to the health of retail sentiment in their core markets.
Monex Group↗︎ provides exposure to both Japanese retail investors and international platforms including TradeStation, though it functions more as a holding structure than a pure broker.
The split that matters
The CFD names of IG, CMC and Plus500 offer the most direct exposure to retail trading activity, which naturally brings higher earnings volatility.
Platform operators such as AJ Bell, Schwab and IntegraFin are more closely tied to assets and longer term investor behaviour, resulting in steadier revenue streams but less upside torque when markets become more active.
Interactive Brokers sits in a category of its own, operating a volume and lending driven model with scale advantages that most peers cannot easily replicate.
The common thread is that none of them make money from products or long-term capital projects. They make money from participation, and the degree to which you want exposure to that variable is the decision that matters most when investing in any of them.
