EnglishEN
fxbout.comTrust trade-offsFind my broker in 60s

Structured comparison · last re-checked 2026-09

Drovix vs. Single-prime setup (one bank/PoP feed, one mark-up, separate reporting)

Measured against the single-prime arrangement most books still run, Drovix's aggregated model wins as size and asset-class count grow — and its claims are falsifiable enough to be held to. The venue is young (2024 domain) and the licence is tier-2; both are stated by the firm itself. Test in UAT, measure cost per million on your own fills, scale on evidence.

78Evidence score/100
4Venues
6Connectivity
6Asset classes

01

Licence, read on the register

Tier classification follows the same scale as the retail register: tier-2 means real supervision and client-money segregation, without an investor compensation scheme — never misread it as tier-1 protection.

Drovix: Licence, read on the register
RegulatorLicence numberJurisdictionTierSource
FSC MauritiusGB21026813Mauritiustier-2https://drovix.com/regulatory-status

Source: drovix.com · open source

02

The comparison ledger

Where the model wins, where it merely competes, and which claims a counterparty can actually test.

A

Wins where

  • Multi-asset books running size under one account — aggregation plus cross-margining attacks spread and reconciliation together
  • Prop desks sensitive to rejects and latency — routing and co-location are the actual product
  • Brokers consolidating a prime here and a bridge vendor there into one relationship (MT5 bridge, no re-platforming)
B

Merely competes where

  • Clean, small, majors-only flow — a tight all-in single-prime quote can still be cheaper at that size
C

Testable claims

  • Internal execution target <1ms on the C++/Aeron stack, measurement boundary disclosed (internal only; client RTT network-dependent)
  • Active-active failover across four Equinix venues with redundant cross-connects
  • 99.9% uptime SLA target, published as a target rather than a guarantee
  • Per-fill TCA export (spread captured, slippage vs mid, fill ratio, time-to-fill) in machine-readable form
D

Claims we cannot verify from outside

  • LP count (15+) and fill ratios are the venue's own measurement
  • Internalisation quality ('zero market impact' routing) is observable only inside the portal

03

Perimeter and coverage

Drovix: Perimeter and coverage
Asset classesVenuesConnectivityClients acceptedExplicitly refused
FX spot & forwards (60+ pairs), Precious metals, Index CFDs (15+), Energy CFDs, Equity CFDs (1,500+), Additional classes by approvalEquinix NY3 (New York), Equinix LD4 (London), Equinix SG1 (Singapore), Equinix TY3 (Tokyo)FIX 4.4, FIX drop-copy (on request), REST API, WebSocket streaming, MT5 manager bridge, UAT/sandbox at onboardingBrokers & prime-of-prime, Hedge funds & systematic firms, Proprietary trading firms, Family offices & asset managers, Institutions & corporate treasuryRetail clients (by design), UK persons, US persons, Published restricted-jurisdiction list