Your broker's real costs: the execution audit and the daily written review

Your edge stated plainly: we hold the broker link

A tool that only reads an imported statement can tell you what happened. Because FxMind holds your account's own broker link, the execution audit can tell you something closer to what it cost you to get there: not just that a trade lost money, but whether the fill itself, not the idea, took part of it.

What the data can actually support

This only works because it is honest about its own limits, checked directly against what the schema stores rather than assumed. FxMind never stores a broker's raw bid and ask anywhere, on any account, so a spread figure is never shown as one, even where a number could be estimated. Slippage on your own desk orders and the stop-fill gap are both built from data that exists only for MT5 and MT4 accounts, and only while the account is still linked: the order commands and the deals a bridge connection records. An account that is not linked, such as a manual or CSV journal, still gets its commission, swap and fee totals, because those live on the trade record itself; the page marks the rest as not measurable for that account instead of guessing.

Slippage, on orders you sent from the desk

For a limit, stop or stop-limit order placed from the FxMind trading desk and matched to the deal it produced, the audit compares the price you asked for against the price that filled: paying more on a buy, or receiving less on a sell, is a cost; the opposite is counted too, as a benefit, never hidden to make the number look worse. Market orders are counted (so you can see how many there were) but never priced, because a market order never carries a requested price to compare against.

How far a stop actually filled past its own level

For any closed trade on a linked MT5 or MT4 account, whichever platform or route opened it, the audit reads the exit deal's own stop-loss value against where it actually filled, on the losing side only: a take-profit exit, or a stop that filled at or better than its own level, is never counted as a gap. This is read from the exit deal, not the entry, because a stop can move (break-even, trailing) between when a trade opens and when it closes.

The stop-fill gap is shown next to the headline, not folded into it, because it is already reflected in the trade's own realised result; folding it in would count it twice. The page also shows the trend over the trailing 12 months, a break-down by symbol and by session, and the ten worst fills of the month by name.

The daily written review

Once a linked account's trading day closes, plus 20 minutes for deals still arriving, FxMind writes a short recap: what you did (trades closed, net result, best and worst trade, time in the market, how many positions you held at once), how close you came to your own limits (a daily loss limit, maximum positions, a news window, any guard level change or lockout), and what the market itself was doing around your trades (releases and how much the instruments you traded usually move on them). It closes with one observation drawn from those numbers. It never gives advice and never forecasts.

The review also carries one line about broker costs, drawn from the same execution-audit numbers, whenever the week just closed had a non-zero total. It is written in your own language, en, pt-BR or es, with the same figures in every one, and reaches you through your notification preferences rather than sitting only on a page you have to remember to open.

Which plan includes this

The execution audit and the daily review are both Pro and above (Elite and Desk included), the same line as guard actions and order entry. Free and Trader see the page with a plain message that it is part of the paid plans, never a form that looks broken.

Use the audit once a month: if the cost headline and the stop-fill gap are large next to your results, that is the number to weigh when you judge a broker. Both are on the 14-day trial (Pro, no card). Trader is the plan below them. See /features and /pricing.