How Binary Option Company Make Money

Table of Contents

1. Introduction: The Binary Options Market Landscape

Binary options represent a distinct category of financial derivatives, characterized by their simplified structure compared to traditional options.¹ At its core, a binary option is a contract based on a simple “yes or no” proposition regarding the future price movement of an underlying asset—such as a stock, currency pair, commodity, or index—within a strictly defined timeframe.³ These instruments are termed “binary” because they offer only two possible outcomes at expiration: either a predetermined fixed payout if the trader’s prediction is correct (“in-the-money”), or the loss of the entire amount invested if the prediction is incorrect (“out-of-the-money”).³ Unlike conventional options, binary options do not confer the right to buy or sell the underlying asset; they are purely speculative wagers on price direction.³

The binary options market experienced a surge in popularity, largely facilitated by the proliferation of online trading platforms.³ However, the landscape is sharply divided. A significant portion of this trading activity occurs on platforms operating outside the United States and other heavily regulated jurisdictions, often domiciled in regions with less stringent oversight.³ This contrasts markedly with the situation in the U.S., where binary options trading is legal only when conducted on exchanges designated and regulated by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) or the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), such as the North American Derivatives Exchange (Nadex).¹⁰

This report aims to dissect the mechanisms through which companies providing binary options services generate revenue. Understanding these mechanisms requires examining the different business models employed, the role of the inherent payout structure, the impact of regulation, and the significant risks associated with the industry, particularly in its less regulated segments.

A critical aspect of this market is the dichotomy between how binary options are often presented and the underlying financial reality. Marketing materials frequently emphasize simplicity, accessibility, and low initial investment requirements, positioning them as an easy entry point into financial trading for retail or novice investors.² This perceived simplicity, however, masks a high-risk, speculative nature.² Many observers and regulators compare trading on unregulated platforms to gambling, citing the all-or-nothing payout and the statistical odds often favoring the platform.¹ Furthermore, the unregulated sphere is plagued by widespread fraudulent activities, including platform manipulation, refusal to process withdrawals, and misleading advertising.² This gap between the marketed ease-of-use and the inherent structural risks and potential for abuse is a primary driver of regulatory concern and intervention ²⁶, and a key factor influencing how different types of binary options companies operate and profit.

related posts : Best Binary Options Brokers (in 2025)

2. The Payout Structure: An Inherent Advantage?

The fundamental mechanics of the binary option payout are central to understanding how many providers generate revenue. When a binary option contract expires, the outcome is binary: if the trader’s prediction about the underlying asset’s price relative to the strike price is correct, the option expires “in-the-money,” and the trader receives a predetermined, fixed payout.³ Conversely, if the prediction is incorrect, the option expires “out-of-the-money,” and the trader typically loses the entire amount invested in that contract (the premium paid).²

A crucial element is the asymmetry embedded in this structure. The payout percentage for a winning trade is typically less than 100% of the amount risked. For example, a successful $100 trade might yield a profit of $70 to $95 (meaning the trader receives back their $100 plus $70-$95 profit), while an unsuccessful trade results in a $100 loss.² While some brokers may offer a small refund (e.g., 5-15%) on losing trades, this is not standard practice and does not fundamentally alter the imbalance where the potential loss on a single trade (often 100% of the premium) significantly outweighs the potential profit (typically 70-95% of the premium).⁸

This inherent asymmetry creates a statistical edge for the provider, particularly those acting as the counterparty to the trade. Even if a trader were to achieve a 50% win rate over a large number of trades, the payout structure ensures a negative expected return for the trader over the long term.⁸ Regulatory bodies like the CFTC and SEC have explicitly highlighted this characteristic. For instance, an example provided in regulatory alerts shows a contract costing $50 promising a 50% return ($25 profit) on a win, but resulting in a $50 loss on a loss. Assuming a 50/50 chance, the expected return is negative because the 100% loss outweighs the 50% gain.¹⁵ Similarly, if a broker offers an 80% payout on wins and collects 100% on losses, even with an equal number of winning and losing trades across its client base, the broker retains a 20% margin derived purely from the payout structure.⁷ This structure functions much like the “house edge” in a casino, ensuring that, statistically, the platform retains a portion of the total funds wagered over time.⁸

Therefore, the payout structure itself serves as a foundational profit engine for many binary options companies. It is designed such that the sum paid out to winning traders is structurally less than the sum collected from losing traders over a sufficient volume of activity. This mathematical advantage is a key reason why regulators express concerns about the fairness of these products for retail investors and why long-term profitability for traders can be exceptionally challenging.⁷

3. The Counterparty Model: Betting Against the Client

The dominant business model employed by a large number of binary options providers, particularly those operating in unregulated or lightly regulated environments, is the counterparty model.⁷ In this setup, the broker does not simply facilitate trades between different market participants. Instead, the broker acts as the direct counterparty to its clients’ trades, effectively taking the opposite side of every position.¹⁷ When a client buys a binary option predicting a price increase, the broker is implicitly selling it, betting the price will not increase as predicted. Conversely, when a client sells (bets on a price decrease), the broker is the buyer.

Under this model, the broker’s primary source of revenue stems directly from the net losses incurred by its clients.⁷ If a trader’s prediction is incorrect and the option expires out-of-the-money, the premium paid by the trader becomes direct revenue for the broker. If the trader’s prediction is correct and the option expires in-the-money, the broker must pay the agreed-upon profit to the trader out of its own capital. Consequently, the broker profits whenever the aggregate losses of its clients exceed the aggregate payouts to winning clients.⁷

This operational structure creates a fundamental and significant conflict of interest.⁷ The broker’s financial success is directly tied to the failure of its clients. This inherent conflict provides a strong incentive for unscrupulous brokers operating outside of robust regulatory frameworks to engage in practices detrimental to their clients. These can include manipulating the trading platform’s price feeds to ensure trades expire out-of-the-money, designing overly complex withdrawal processes, imposing hidden fees, refusing to pay out legitimate winnings, or using aggressive and misleading marketing tactics to attract deposits.² The case of Banc De Binary, charged by both the SEC and CFTC for unregistered solicitation and operations in the U.S., exemplifies the risks associated with brokers operating under this model without proper oversight.²¹

Regulatory authorities globally view the counterparty model in binary options with deep suspicion precisely because of this conflict of interest and the documented history of associated fraud and investor harm.⁸ The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA), for instance, explicitly cited the “structural expected negative return and embedded conflict of interest between providers and their clients” as key justifications for its prohibition of binary options marketing, distribution, and sale to retail investors.²⁶

The profitability of the counterparty model is significantly amplified by the asymmetric payout structure discussed previously. Because the payout on a winning trade is less than the amount lost on a losing trade, the counterparty broker does not necessarily need its clients to lose more often than they win to be profitable.¹⁵ The structural edge provided by the payout ensures profitability even if clients achieve a 50% success rate, as the broker collects more on the losses than it pays out on the wins over time. This powerful synergy makes the model highly lucrative for the provider but inherently disadvantageous for the client, further exacerbating the conflict of interest and contributing to the high loss rates (often cited as 74-89%) reported among retail CFD and binary options traders by national competent authorities in the EU.²⁶

4. The Exchange Model: A Different Approach (e.g., Nadex)

In stark contrast to the counterparty model, a fundamentally different approach is employed by regulated binary options exchanges. Prominent examples include the North American Derivatives Exchange (Nadex), Cantor Exchange, LP, and the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, Inc. (CME) in the United States, which operate under the oversight of the CFTC.¹⁰ These exchanges function as intermediaries, providing a marketplace where buyers and sellers of binary option contracts can interact directly, rather than trading against the platform itself.¹⁰

The revenue model for these exchanges is primarily based on transparent transaction fees, not on client trading losses. Exchanges like Nadex charge fees for executing trades, typically on a per-contract basis. For instance, Nadex charges a $1.00 trading fee per contract to open a position and another $1.00 fee per contract to close the position before expiration.²⁴ If a contract is held until expiration and settles in-the-money, a $1.00 settlement fee per contract is charged instead of the exit trading fee. Crucially, if a contract expires out-of-the-money (worthless), no settlement fee is charged.³⁵ These fees are capped per order (e.g., $50 at Nadex).²⁴

This exchange-based model inherently eliminates the conflict of interest prevalent in the counterparty system. The exchange’s revenue is driven by trading activity (volume), not by the net outcome of its clients’ trades.²⁴ Whether a trader wins or loses, the exchange collects its transaction fees (except for the OTM settlement fee). Furthermore, regulated exchanges operate with mechanisms designed to protect participants. Contracts are fully collateralized, meaning both the buyer and seller must put up the capital required for their side of the trade, ensuring funds are available for settlement and mitigating counterparty risk.²³ Client funds are typically held in segregated accounts, offering an additional layer of security.¹⁰

Operating under strict regulatory supervision (like the CFTC or SEC) mandates adherence to rules concerning market integrity, fair dealing, standardized contracts, and transparency.¹⁰ On a regulated exchange, the price of a binary option contract (ranging between $0 and $100) is determined by the market participants themselves through the dynamics of supply and demand. This price reflects the collective market perception of the probability that the option’s condition will be met at expiration.³ The bid-ask spread observed on the platform is a result of the orders placed by traders, not artificially set by the exchange acting as a market maker.²⁴

The core driver of profitability for a binary options exchange is trading volume. Since revenue is generated from per-transaction fees, a higher number of contracts traded translates directly into increased income for the exchange.²⁴ This aligns the exchange’s interests with fostering an active and liquid market that attracts both buyers and sellers, rather than relying on client losses. Metrics like trading volume reports become key indicators of the exchange’s business performance.⁴¹ This fundamental difference in how revenue is generated and the alignment of interests explains why regulatory bodies in major markets permit the exchange model while prohibiting or severely restricting the counterparty model for retail clients.¹⁰

The following table summarizes the key distinctions between the two primary business models:

Feature	Counterparty Model	Exchange Model (e.g., Nadex)
Revenue Source	Net client losses; amplified by asymmetric payout structure ⁷	Transaction fees (trading & settlement fees) per contract ²⁴
Primary Profit Driver	Client trading losses exceeding client winnings ⁷	Trading volume (number of contracts executed) ²⁴
Conflict of Interest	High and inherent; broker profits when clients lose ⁷	Minimal/None; exchange profits from activity, not client outcomes ²³
Counterparty Risk	Broker is the counterparty; risk of default or manipulation ¹¹	Mitigated; exchange matches buyers/sellers; trades collateralized ²³
Regulation	Often operates in unregulated/offshore jurisdictions ³	Operates under strict regulatory oversight (e.g., CFTC, SEC) ¹⁰
Pricing Mechanism	Platform often sets prices; potential for manipulation ²	Market-driven prices ($0-$100) based on supply/demand; reflects probability ²⁴
Typical Environment	Associated with high retail losses, fraud, and regulatory bans ⁸	Legal and regulated in major markets like the U.S. ¹⁰

5. Ancillary Revenue: Fees and Charges

Beyond the core revenue generated through the payout structure/counterparty losses or exchange transaction fees, binary options companies may derive income from a variety of ancillary charges. The nature and transparency of these fees often differ significantly between regulated exchanges and unregulated brokers.

Spreads: While the asymmetric payout is the primary edge in many counterparty models ⁷, some platforms might also incorporate costs into the bid-ask spread – the difference between the buying and selling price of a contract.²⁴ Wider spreads increase the effective cost of trading.⁴² Unregulated brokers might artificially widen spreads to increase their margins, especially during volatile periods.¹¹ On regulated exchanges like Nadex, spreads are typically determined by market participants’ orders.²⁴
Commissions: Regulated exchanges clearly charge commissions or trading fees per transaction, as detailed previously.²⁴ Some counterparty brokers might also levy commissions, although many advertise “commission-free” trading.⁴² In such cases, costs are usually embedded elsewhere, such as in less favorable payout ratios or wider spreads.¹¹
Withdrawal and Deposit Fees: Fees associated with funding accounts and withdrawing profits are common.⁴² These can vary based on the payment method (e.g., wire transfers often incur fees, while ACH or debit card withdrawals might be free on regulated platforms like Nadex).³⁵ Unregulated brokers have been known to impose exorbitant withdrawal fees or create deliberate delays and hurdles as a tactic to retain client funds.²
Account Fees: Some platforms may charge fees unrelated to trading activity. Inactivity fees can be levied if an account remains dormant for a specified period (e.g., 12 months at Nadex, though waived if the balance is low).²⁴ Account maintenance fees, charged monthly or annually simply for holding an account, may also apply, particularly with offshore brokers.²⁴ Fees might also be charged for accessing premium data feeds or advanced analytical tools.²⁴
Other Potential Fees: Less common charges can include rollover fees for extending an option’s expiry time (if permitted), currency conversion fees if trading in a currency different from the account’s base currency, and fees or restrictive conditions associated with withdrawing bonus funds offered as incentives.⁴² Some platforms, like Dukascopy, state they charge no additional fees beyond the option premium.⁴⁴

In the context of unregulated brokers operating the counterparty model, these ancillary fees can serve purposes beyond covering operational costs. They can act as less transparent profit centers, padding the revenue generated from client losses. Furthermore, high or opaque fees, especially for withdrawals, can function as barriers, discouraging or preventing clients from accessing their funds, which indirectly benefits brokers holding that capital. This contrasts with the generally transparent and itemized fee schedules published by regulated exchanges.²⁴ Therefore, a comprehensive assessment of how a binary options company makes money must consider the full spectrum of potential charges, as these can significantly impact both the company’s bottom line and the net profitability for traders.

6. Impact of Regulation, Risk, and Fraud on Profitability

The regulatory environment and the pervasive issue of fraud exert a profound influence on the business models, profitability, and long-term viability of binary options companies. The global regulatory landscape is highly fragmented. The United States permits binary options trading only on CFTC or SEC-regulated exchanges.¹⁰ In contrast, major jurisdictions like the European Union (under ESMA directives) and Australia (under ASIC) have implemented outright bans on the marketing, distribution, and sale of binary options to retail investors, citing significant investor protection concerns.⁸ Canada features complex provincial-level regulations, with some provinces banning them.²⁰ Many binary options platforms continue to operate from offshore locations with minimal or ineffective regulatory oversight.³

Regulatory actions, particularly bans like ESMA’s, directly impact profitability by eliminating legitimate access to large retail markets.²⁰ Companies wishing to operate legally in these regions were forced to cease offering binary options to retail clients or pivot to other products or business models. These bans were specifically driven by concerns about the product’s characteristics, including the negative expected return, complexity, and the inherent conflict of interest in the counterparty model, which led to substantial retail investor losses.²⁶

The link between the unregulated binary options space, the counterparty model, and fraudulent activities is well-documented.² The FBI has estimated annual losses to binary options scams in the billions of dollars globally.⁸ Common fraudulent tactics include manipulating trading software to generate losing trades, denying withdrawal requests, stealing personal and financial information, and making false claims about potential returns.²

This reality creates a stark contrast in potential profitability models. Fraudulent, unregulated brokers operating as counterparties can achieve high (albeit illicit) profits by directly appropriating client deposits through rigged platforms and withheld funds. Their business model is predicated on client loss and retention of funds. Conversely, regulated exchanges derive profit from transparent fees on legitimate trading volume. While potentially less aggressively profitable on a per-client basis compared to fraudulent operations, this model is sustainable and legally compliant in major markets.

The prevalence of fraud has severely damaged the reputation of the binary options industry as a whole, leading to increased regulatory scrutiny and public warnings.⁸ Major online platforms like Facebook and Google have banned advertisements for binary options, further hindering marketing efforts even for legitimate operators.⁸

Ultimately, regulation acts as a critical determinant of viable business models in the binary options sector. By banning or heavily restricting the counterparty model for retail clients due to its inherent risks and association with fraud, regulators in key economic zones effectively filter out the most problematic profit mechanism.⁸ Simultaneously, they provide a framework for the regulated exchange model, which mitigates the core conflict of interest and operates with greater transparency.¹⁰ Consequently, the long-term profitability and survival of binary options companies in regulated markets are increasingly tied to adopting compliant, transparent models like the exchange system. Profitability in these markets hinges on attracting trading volume and earning fees, whereas profitability in unregulated spaces often remains linked to practices deemed harmful, unethical, or illegal elsewhere, carrying significant legal and reputational risks.²¹

7. Conclusion: Synthesizing the Profit Mechanisms

Binary options companies employ distinct business models to generate revenue, largely determined by their operational structure and regulatory status. The analysis reveals two primary pathways to profitability:

The Counterparty Model with Asymmetric Payouts: Prevalent among unregulated or offshore brokers, this model relies on the company taking the opposite side of client trades. Profit is derived primarily from the net losses of clients, a process significantly amplified by the inherent structure of binary options payouts, where the potential gain on a winning trade (e.g., 70-95%) is less than the potential loss on a losing trade (typically 100%). This creates a statistical edge for the broker, ensuring profitability even without clients losing more often than they win over the long term.⁷ However, this model carries a significant conflict of interest and is strongly associated with fraudulent practices and regulatory prohibitions in major markets.⁸
The Regulated Exchange Model: Utilized by platforms operating under strict regulatory oversight (e.g., Nadex in the U.S.), this model positions the company as an intermediary matching buyers and sellers. Revenue is generated through transparent, volume-based transaction fees (trading and settlement fees) charged per contract traded.²⁴ This model eliminates the direct conflict of interest, mitigates counterparty risk through collateralization, and aligns the company’s profitability with market activity and liquidity rather than client failure.

Ancillary fees—such as those for withdrawals, account inactivity, spreads, or currency conversions—can provide supplementary revenue streams.⁴² In the unregulated sector, these fees can sometimes be opaque or punitive, potentially serving as hidden profit centers or barriers to fund retrieval.¹⁰

The fundamental divergence between these models is clear. The counterparty model, particularly when unregulated, thrives on client losses and a structural payout disadvantage, leading to significant investor protection concerns and widespread regulatory action. The exchange model offers a transparent, fee-based alternative that operates within legal frameworks in regulated jurisdictions.

For traders, the high-risk nature of binary options is undeniable.² This risk is significantly magnified when dealing with unregulated platforms employing the counterparty model, where the provider’s profit motive is diametrically opposed to the client’s financial success.⁷ The method by which a binary options company generates its revenue is thus inextricably linked to its regulatory standing, ethical approach, and the potential outcomes for its customers. The prevailing trend in regulated financial markets is decisively moving away from business models that profit directly from client losses towards structures emphasizing transparency and alignment of interests.

Download PDF

Works cited

dfi.wa.gov, accessed April 24, 2025, https://dfi.wa.gov/financial-education/information/basics-investing-binary-options#:~:text=A%20binary%20option%20is%20a,value%20at%20a%20predetermined%20date.
The Basics of Investing In Binary Options – Washington State Department of Financial Institutions, accessed April 24, 2025, https://dfi.wa.gov/financial-education/information/basics-investing-binary-options
Binary Option: Definition, How They Trade, and Example – Investopedia, accessed April 24, 2025, https://www.investopedia.com/terms/b/binary-option.asp
Binary Options Strategies You Should Know – Investopedia, accessed April 24, 2025, https://www.investopedia.com/articles/active-trading/052014/binary-options-strategies.asp
What is Binary Options? Definition of Binary Options, Binary Options Meaning – The Economic Times, accessed April 24, 2025, https://m.economictimes.com/definition/binary-options
Futures Glossary | CFTC, accessed April 24, 2025, https://www.cftc.gov/LearnAndProtect/AdvisoriesAndArticles/CFTCGlossary/index.htm
What Are Binary Options: Definition, How Do They Work, and …, accessed April 24, 2025, https://www.litefinance.org/blog/for-beginners/what-are-binary-options/
Binary option – Wikipedia, accessed April 24, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_option
What are Binary Options and How Do They Work? – Nadex, accessed April 24, 2025, https://www.nadex.com/learning/what-are-binary-options-and-how-do-they-work/
Beware of Off-Exchange Binary Options Trades | CFTC, accessed April 24, 2025, https://www.cftc.gov/LearnAndProtect/AdvisoriesAndArticles/beware_of_off_exchange_binary_options.htm
The use of Contracts for difference (‘CFD’) Spread Bets and Binary Options (‘forbin’) to Trade Foreign Exchange (‘forex’) Commodities and Stocks and Shares in Volatile Financial Markets – Herald Scholarly Open Access, accessed April 24, 2025, https://www.heraldopenaccess.us/openaccess/the-use-of-contracts-for-difference-cfd-spread-bets-and-binary-options-forbin-to-trade-foreign-exchange-forex-commodities-and-stocks-and-shares-in-volatile-financial-markets
Top Binary Options Trading Strategies | Dukascopy Bank SA, accessed April 24, 2025, https://www.dukascopy.com/swiss/french/marketwatch/articles/binary-options-trading-strategy/
Understanding Binary Options: A Simple Guide to Trading – Liquidity Provider, accessed April 24, 2025, https://liquidity-provider.com/articles/what-are-binary-options-a-simple-guide-to-trading/
Binary Options Trading Strategy – Groww, accessed April 24, 2025, https://groww.in/p/binary-options-trading-strategy
Binary Options Fraud | Investor.gov, accessed April 24, 2025, https://www.investor.gov/protect-your-investments/fraud/types-fraud/binary-options-fraud
CFTC/SEC Investor Alert: Binary Options and Fraud | CFTC, accessed April 24, 2025, https://www.cftc.gov/LearnAndProtect/AdvisoriesAndArticles/fraudadv_binaryoptions.html
Investor Alert: Binary options and Fraud – SEC.gov, accessed April 24, 2025, https://www.sec.gov/investor/alerts/ia_binary.pdf
Introduction to Binary Options Trading – NerdWallet, accessed April 24, 2025, https://www.nerdwallet.com/article/investing/binary-options-trading
Binary Options Experiences – In case of losses, trade immediately. – Law Firm Herfurtner, accessed April 24, 2025, https://kanzlei-herfurtner.com/binary-options/
Understanding The Legality Of Binary Options Trading: Global Perspectives, accessed April 24, 2025, https://www.ajs.org/understanding-the-legality-of-binary-options-trading/
U.S. regulators charge Banc de Binary – Investment Executive, accessed April 24, 2025, https://www.investmentexecutive.com/news/from-the-regulators/u-s-regulators-charge-banc-de-binary/
Avoid Unregistered Binary Options Trading Platforms | CFTC, accessed April 24, 2025, https://www.cftc.gov/LearnAndProtect/AdvisoriesAndArticles/avoid_unregistered_binary_options_platforms.htm
Trading Forex With Binary Options – Investopedia, accessed April 24, 2025, https://www.investopedia.com/articles/forex/022415/trading-forex-binary-options.asp
Best US Binary Options Brokers: What to Know Before You Start Trading, accessed April 24, 2025, https://accountinginsights.org/best-us-binary-options-brokers-what-to-know-before-you-start-trading/
A Beginner’s Guide to Binary Options Trading – TIOmarkets, accessed April 24, 2025, https://tiomarkets.com/es/article/a-beginner-s-guide-to-binary-options-trading
ESMA agrees to prohibit binary options and restrict CFDs to protect …, accessed April 24, 2025, https://www.esma.europa.eu/press-news/esma-news/esma-agrees-prohibit-binary-options-and-restrict-cfds-protect-retail-investors
EUROPEAN SECURITIES AND MARKETS AUTHORITY DECISION (EU) 2018/ 795 – of 22 May 2018 – to temporarily prohibit th – EUR-Lex.europa.eu., accessed April 24, 2025, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32018X0601(01)
Top Binary Options Trading Strategies | Dukascopy Bank SA, accessed April 24, 2025, https://www.dukascopy.com/swiss/english/marketwatch/articles/binary-options-trading-strategy/
Binary Options Broker Market Size, Share, Trends & Forecast – Verified Market Research, accessed April 24, 2025, https://www.verifiedmarketresearch.com/product/binary-options-broker-market/
ESMA adopts final product intervention measures on CFDs and binary options, accessed April 24, 2025, https://www.esma.europa.eu/press-news/esma-news/esma-adopts-final-product-intervention-measures-cfds-and-binary-options
www.nadex.com, accessed April 24, 2025, https://www.nadex.com/learning/what-are-binary-options-and-how-do-they-work/#:~:text=How%20do%20binary%20traders%20make,priced%20between%20%240%20and%20%24100.
A Guide to Trading Binary Options in the US – Investopedia, accessed April 24, 2025, https://www.investopedia.com/articles/active-trading/061114/guide-trading-binary-options-us.asp
Binaries Payout Concept :: Dukascopy Bank SA, accessed April 24, 2025, https://www.dukascopy.com/swiss/english/binary-options/binaries-payout-concept/
How do Brokers and Liquidity Providers Work Together? – Soft-FX, accessed April 24, 2025, https://www.soft-fx.com/blog/how-do-brokers-and-liquidity-providers-work-together/
Our Trading Fees | Nadex, accessed April 24, 2025, https://www.nadex.com/pricing/
Nadex Fee Schedule, accessed April 24, 2025, https://assets.ctfassets.net/8c2uto3zas3h/50I5G1oW2RaJacbVgYNGES/493366532249aeb36a5276b2f04cf7ad/200501_Nadex_Fee_Schedule.pdf
Trade Binary Options Safely with Nadex, accessed April 24, 2025, https://www.nadex.com/blog/why-trade-binary-options-with-nadex/
Tax Treatment For Nadex Binary Options, accessed April 24, 2025, https://greentradertax.com/tax-treatment-for-nadex-binary-options/
Nadex 5-minute binary options explained, accessed April 24, 2025, https://www.nadex.com/learning/nadex-5-minute-binary-options-explained/
Binary Options: Portfolio Destruction Theory or Market Wizardry?, accessed April 24, 2025, https://www.gfmi.com/articles/binary-options-portfolio-destruction-theory-or-market-wizardry/
Binary Options Trading Volume in Japan Jumps 42.77% YoY – Finance Magnates, accessed April 24, 2025, https://www.financemagnates.com/forex/brokers/binary-options-trading-volume-in-japan-jumps-42-77-yoy/
Understanding Fees and Costs Associated with Binary Options Brokers – GCC Exchange, accessed April 24, 2025, https://gccexchange.com/blog/understanding-fees-and-costs-associated-with-binary-options-brokers/
5 Best Binary Options Brokers (☑️Updated 2025*) – FXLeaders, accessed April 24, 2025, https://www.fxleaders.com/forex-brokers/binary-options-brokers/
Fee Schedule :: Dukascopy Bank SA, accessed April 24, 2025, https://www.dukascopy.com/swiss/english/about/fee-schedule/
ESMA Extends Restrictions for Binary Options | Finance Magnates, accessed April 24, 2025, https://www.financemagnates.com/binary-options/regulation/esma-extends-restrictions-for-binary-options/