Trading 212 vs AJ Bell 2022

Alongside the cost per trade, most UK online brokers also charge a monthly, quarterly, or annual management fee, which varies based on the account type and balance. Based on our thorough review, Trading 212 offers better pricing than Interactive Brokers for share dealing.

Assuming a £30,000 portfolio size, here are the total annual costs for share dealing with both brokers, given different monthly activity scenarios.

5 trades per year - Trading 212 would cost £196 per year, while AJ Bell would cost £82.5 per year.

12 trades per year - Trading 212 would cost £196 per year, while AJ Bell would cost £161.4 per year.

36 trades per year - Trading 212 would cost £196 per year, while AJ Bell would cost £400.2 per year.

120 trades per year - Trading 212 would cost £196 per year, while AJ Bell would cost £636 per year.

3 fund trades per year - Trading 212 would cost N/A per year, while AJ Bell would cost £79.5 per year.

Trading 212 offers investors access to ISA, Share Trading, CFD Trading and ETFs, while AJ Bell offers investors access to ISA, SIPP, Share Trading, Funds, ETFs, Bonds - Corporate, Bonds - Government (Gilts) and Investment Trusts, neither have Spread Betting, Crypto Trading and Advisor Services. Investing encompasses a wide variety of asset classes, so finding a broker that offers every investment type you are interested in is important.

Our testing concluded that Interactive Brokers is better for research than Trading 212. Interactive Brokers offers more research options, including research reports, articles, and analyst ratings.

To compare the trading platforms of both Trading 212 and AJ Bell, we tested each broker's website, trading platform, trading tools and stock trading app. All features compared, Interactive Brokers offers a better share dealing platform and Interactive Brokers offers a better stock app for mobile trading.