Best Site for Buying Stocks
Summary
The best site for buying stocks is Fidelity for most investors — zero commission, no minimums, zero-fee mutual funds, and excellent fractional shares. Interactive Brokers is the best for active traders and international investors — lowest commissions in the industry and broad market access. Charles Schwab is the third strong full-service alternative. Robinhood has matured but its gamification design and earlier order-flow controversies remain part of its identity. We deliberately exclude commission-heavy traditional brokers — the era of $7 trades is over.
Top 5 at a glance
| # | Site | Best for | Price |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Fidelity | Full-service brokerage with zero commissions and no minimums | Zero commission stocks and ETFs |
| 2 | Interactive Brokers | Active traders and international market access | Lowest commission tier in the industry |
| 3 | Charles Schwab | Full-service brokerage with excellent customer service | Zero commission stocks and ETFs |
| 4 | Robinhood | Mobile-first investing with IRA matching | Zero commission |
| 5 | Trading 212 / EU brokers | European investors with similar zero-commission model | Zero commission with currency conversion fees |
Detailed rankings
Fidelity
Full-service brokerage with zero commissions and no minimums
The default for most US investors. The combination of zero commissions, zero-fee funds, and no minimums removes every meaningful barrier to entry.
Pros
- Zero commission on stocks and ETFs
- Zero-expense-ratio index funds (FZROX, FNILX) — unique benefit
- No account minimum
- Strong fractional shares on individual stocks
Cons
- Web interface dated
- Some advanced features harder to find
- Customer service quality varies by call time
Price: Zero commission stocks and ETFs
Sources: www.fidelity.com
Interactive Brokers
Active traders and international market access
The right pick for active traders, international investors, and anyone wanting access to non-US markets. IBKR Lite makes it more accessible to casual investors.
Pros
- Lowest commission tier of any major broker
- Broadest international market access — trade exchanges in 30+ countries
- Strong margin rates compared to retail brokers
- Professional-grade trading tools
Cons
- Interface steeper learning curve than retail-focused brokers
- Customer service less polished than Fidelity or Schwab
- Inactivity fees historically (mostly eliminated for IBKR Lite)
Price: Lowest commission tier in the industry
Sources: www.interactivebrokers.com
Charles Schwab
Full-service brokerage with excellent customer service
Strong alternative to Fidelity. The banking integration is the differentiator.
Pros
- Strong customer service reputation
- Schwab Stock Slices fractional shares
- Banking integration via Schwab Bank
- Acquired TD Ameritrade — broad capability set
Cons
- Schwab index fund expense ratios slightly above Fidelity zero-fee options
- Web interface less modern than newer brokers
- Some features still being unified post-TD merger
Price: Zero commission stocks and ETFs
Sources: www.schwab.com
Robinhood
Mobile-first investing with IRA matching
Worth considering specifically for the IRA matching. Stay focused on long-term investing and the gamification matters less.
Pros
- Polished mobile-first interface
- Robinhood IRA matching contribution — unique benefit
- Fractional shares supported
- Newer features like 24/5 trading and equities options
Cons
- Earlier history of order-flow controversies including the 2021 GameStop trading halts
- Gamification mechanics that critics argue encourage speculative behavior
- Customer service has improved but lags traditional brokers
Price: Zero commission
Sources: robinhood.com
Trading 212 / EU brokers
European investors with similar zero-commission model
The right pick for UK and EU retail investors who want zero commission. US-based investors should pick from the top three.
Pros
- Zero commission for European investors
- Fractional shares on US stocks
- FCA regulated
- Strong app for active users
Cons
- Currency conversion fees apply on US-stock purchases
- Account opening can be slow during high-demand periods
- Customer service quality variable
Price: Zero commission with currency conversion fees
Sources: www.trading212.com
How we chose
- Commission and per-trade cost.
- Fractional share support — critical for diversification with small accounts.
- Index fund and ETF expense ratios offered.
- International market access if you want non-US stocks.
- Account safety — SIPC insurance and broker stability.
- Lack of gamification that encourages speculative trading.
Frequently asked questions
Should I pick stocks myself?
For most investors, index funds beat picking individual stocks on a risk-adjusted basis over long periods. The evidence is overwhelming. If you enjoy the research, allocate a small percentage to individual stocks and put the bulk in low-cost index funds.
What's payment for order flow?
PFOF is the practice of brokers routing customer orders to market makers in exchange for payment. Robinhood and Schwab use it; Fidelity and Interactive Brokers handle it differently. PFOF subsidizes commission-free trading but creates questions about execution quality. Studies have shown small but measurable differences in execution prices across brokers.
Is fractional shares safe?
Yes. Fractional shares are a legitimate, regulated product. Your broker holds the share and credits you proportional rights including dividends. For small accounts wanting diversification, fractional shares are the structural answer.
How does SIPC insurance work?
SIPC insures your brokerage account up to $500,000 ($250,000 for cash) against broker failure. It does not protect against investment losses — only against the broker losing custody of your securities. Major brokers typically carry additional private insurance above SIPC limits.
Should I trade on mobile?
Mobile apps are functional for buy-and-hold purchases. For active trading, desktop tools generally provide better order-entry and analytical tools. The gamification of mobile-first brokers like Robinhood specifically encourages frequent trading which most evidence suggests hurts long-term returns.