I work in Singapore. The MAS-licensed retail forex broker count has declined from 11 in 2018 to 4 in 2026. That's not a story of regulatory failure. It's a story of regulatory success — depending on which side of the trade desk you're sitting on.
Let me explain how we got here, because most Singapore retail traders don't actually understand why their broker options have gotten worse and more expensive, and why the offshore migration accelerated even from one of Asia's strictest jurisdictions.
The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) regulates retail forex through the Capital Markets Services License (CMSL) framework under the Securities and Futures Act 2001. To offer retail forex to Singapore residents, a broker needs a CMSL with the specific regulated activity of "dealing in capital markets products" covering OTC derivatives. The minimum base capital requirement: 5 million SGD. Plus risk-based capital adequacy requirements that scale with client positions. Plus operational compliance costs averaging another 2-3 million SGD annually.
For comparison: the same activity in the BVI or Marshall Islands costs about 250,000 USD in setup capital and approximately 50,000 USD annual maintenance. Singapore is 50-100x more expensive to operate from. That's the bar by design.
The 2017-2024 Consolidation
In 2017, Singapore had eleven MAS-licensed retail forex brokers. The list included Oanda Asia Pacific, Saxo Capital Markets, IG Asia, City Index, FXCM, Phillip Capital, Maybank Kim Eng Securities, Plus500SG, AvaTrade Asia, and a few smaller local players. By 2026 that list is down to four meaningful retail-facing operators: IG Asia, Saxo Capital Markets, Phillip Capital, and Oanda Asia Pacific.
What killed the others wasn't enforcement — it was unit economics. The combination of MAS capital requirements, leverage caps (1:50 maximum for major pairs after 2019), and the cost of compliance made the Singapore retail forex market unprofitable at sub-100,000 active accounts. The brokers that survived had either established institutional businesses to subsidize the retail desk (Saxo, Phillip) or could amortize the Singapore cost across regional operations (IG Asia, Oanda).
This matters for you because the four remaining brokers know they have you cornered. Spreads on EUR/USD at IG Asia in 2026 average 0.9-1.3 pips — competitive but not best-in-class. Compare to 0.1-0.4 pips at Pepperstone Australia (ASIC-licensed, accepts Singaporeans). The difference on a 100,000 USD/year trading volume is roughly 800-1,200 USD in pure spread cost.
Why Singapore Retail Goes Offshore Anyway
Here's what MAS doesn't talk about publicly: an estimated 60,000 to 90,000 Singaporeans hold accounts with offshore brokers (predominantly ASIC and CySEC-licensed). MAS's official position is that this is permissible if the offshore broker doesn't actively solicit Singapore residents. Pepperstone, IC Markets, and CMC Markets (Australian operations) all accept Singapore residents who self-onboard without specific solicitation.
The math driving the migration:
A Singaporean trader with 50,000 SGD account at IG Asia faces 1:50 leverage cap, 1.0 pip average spread on majors, and 0.65% overnight financing cost on long USD positions. The same trader at Pepperstone Australia faces 1:500 leverage (with the trader's responsibility to manage it appropriately), 0.2 pip average spread, and 0.42% overnight financing.
For a trader running 4-6 trades per week with 10,000 SGD position size, the annual cost differential is approximately 2,400-3,800 SGD favoring the Australian broker. That's real money. MAS's position is that the lower leverage and stricter execution standards justify the cost. For experienced traders managing their own risk, the math doesn't work.
What MAS Got Right (Honestly)
I'll be blunt because I think it matters: MAS-regulated forex is the safest retail forex environment in Asia. The CMSL framework, the segregated client funds requirements, the FIDReC dispute resolution mechanism, and the general culture of compliance produce outcomes that Vietnamese, Indonesian, Thai, or Filipino traders can only dream about.
The Financial Industry Disputes Resolution Centre (FIDReC) handles broker disputes with binding awards up to 100,000 SGD per claim. Resolution typically takes 4-8 weeks. Of disputes filed against MAS-licensed forex brokers in 2024 (per FIDReC's annual report), 68% were resolved in the client's favor or via mutually-agreed settlement. Compare that to the offshore world where your dispute resolution mechanism is whatever the broker's chosen jurisdiction provides.
If you blow up a Singaporean broker via genuinely bad execution, you have a real path to recovery. If you blow up an offshore broker the same way, you have lawyers in Limassol and a 50% chance of getting half your loss back after 18 months.
What Singapore Traders Should Actually Do
If your account is under 50,000 SGD: stay with MAS-licensed. The cost differential isn't enough to justify giving up FIDReC protection. IG Asia or Phillip for active trading. Saxo if you want broader product range.
If your account is 50,000 SGD to 250,000 SGD: split between MAS-licensed (40-60% of capital) and tier-1 offshore ASIC (40-60%). Use the offshore for higher leverage tactical trades, keep core capital domestic for protection.
If your account exceeds 250,000 SGD: consider a Singapore-licensed prime brokerage relationship through Saxo or DBS Vickers. The cost is higher but you get genuine institutional execution and the regulatory protection scales with the size of what you're protecting.
Singapore traders comparing brokers usually focus on the wrong variable. Spread is real but bounded. Withdrawal reliability and dispute resolution are unbounded — they only matter when something goes wrong, and when it goes wrong they matter more than every basis point of spread you saved over the previous five years.
That's how I'd think about it if I were starting today, and that's how I tell people to think about it when they ask.