B

City Of Investment

5.1/10

Virtual Brokers

6.4/10
5/10RegulationWinner7/10
0/10FeesTied0/10
9/10PlatformsTied9/10
4/10Education & ResearchWinner10/10
4/10Deposits & WithdrawalsTied4/10
10/10SupportTied10/10

BrokerDataNet earns affiliate commission from brokers listed on this site. This does not affect our ratings or editorial independence.

Overview

City Of Investment was founded in 2009 and is headquartered in United Kingdom, while Virtual Brokers was established in 2008 and is based in Canada. City Of Investment holds licences including Financial Markets Authority (FMA), while Virtual Brokers is regulated by The Investment Industry Regulatory Organization of Canada (IIROC) among others. City Of Investment serves 10,000+ clients worldwide; Virtual Brokers has 10,000+. The minimum deposit is $3000 at City Of Investment and $1000 at Virtual Brokers.

Virtual Brokers wins this category
FeatureCity Of InvestmentVirtual Brokers
Min. Deposit$3000$1000
RegulationFinancial Markets Authority (FMA)The Investment Industry Regulatory Organization of Canada (IIROC), Canadian Investor Protection Fund (CIPF)
Founded20092008
CountryUnited KingdomCanada
Clients10,000+10,000+

Fees

Fees are a critical factor when choosing between City Of Investment and Virtual Brokers, directly affecting your bottom line as a trader. Virtual Brokers has a lower barrier to entry with a minimum deposit of $1000 (vs $3000 at City Of Investment). Both brokers charge withdrawal fees. City Of Investment applies inactivity fees on dormant accounts; Virtual Brokers does not. City Of Investment charges deposit fees; Virtual Brokers does not. The two brokers are broadly comparable on fee structure.

Tied
FeatureCity Of InvestmentVirtual Brokers
Min. Deposit$3000$1000
Withdrawal FeesYesYes
Inactivity FeesYesNo
Deposit FeesYesYes
CFD FeesYesNo

Platforms

City Of Investment offers MT4, MT5, cTrader, while Virtual Brokers supports MT4, MT5, cTrader. Both brokers provide mobile trading apps for iOS and Android. Virtual Brokers supports social and copy trading features, which City Of Investment does not offer. The two brokers are closely matched on platform offering.

Tied
FeatureCity Of InvestmentVirtual Brokers
MT4YesYes
MT5YesYes
cTraderYesYes
Windows AppYesYes
iOS AppYesYes
Android AppYesYes
Trading PlatformsAndroid Apps,iPhone/iPad,DesktopMT4,Desktop,iPhone/iOS

Education & Research

Education and research tools help traders at every level make more informed decisions, and here's how City Of Investment and Virtual Brokers compare. Virtual Brokers runs regular live webinars; City Of Investment does not. Both provide video tutorials. Virtual Brokers publishes daily market commentary; City Of Investment does not. Both integrate third-party research tools. Virtual Brokers maintains an archive of past webinars for on-demand viewing. Virtual Brokers scores higher overall in education and research.

Virtual Brokers wins this category
FeatureCity Of InvestmentVirtual Brokers
Forex EducationYesYes
CFD EducationNoYes
Weekly WebinarsNoYes
Daily CommentaryNoYes
Trading CentralNoYes
AutochartistYesYes

Deposits & Withdrawals

Convenient deposit and withdrawal options reduce friction for traders, especially important when managing positions across time zones. City Of Investment accepts 2 of the tracked payment methods (bank transfer, credit/debit card), while Virtual Brokers supports 2 (bank transfer, credit/debit card). Both brokers support the same set of payment methods.

Tied
FeatureCity Of InvestmentVirtual Brokers
Bank TransferYesYes
Credit CardYesYes
PayPalNoNo
SkrillNoNo
NetellerNoNo

Support

Responsive customer support matters most when you're locked out of your account or need urgent help with a trade. Both City Of Investment and Virtual Brokers offer live chat support. Both provide phone support. Email support is available at both brokers. Both brokers offer support in 2 languages. Both brokers are comparable on support quality.

Tied
FeatureCity Of InvestmentVirtual Brokers
Live ChatYesYes
Phone SupportYesYes
Email SupportYesYes
LanguagesEnglish, and ChineseEnglish, and Chinese