Skip to content
All case studies

Independent product · Financial tools

CompareStockISA

A financial comparison product that explains costs without pretending a single platform is right for everyone.

Visit project
Period
2025–Now
Role
Product, data model and experience
Platform
Web application
Outcome
Transparent cost comparisons

Problem

Different platform, dealing and FX structures made cost comparison unreliable and easy to oversimplify.

Solution

One set of questions and one consistent calculation method applied to every supported provider.

Impact

Clear annual cost breakdowns, backed by 377 automated tests covering provider rules and unusual cases.
01 / Inputs

One investor profile

Portfolio
£50,000
Trades / year
24
International
20%
02 / Engine

Every fee rule

  • Platform
  • Dealing
  • FX
  • Caps
  • Tiers
  • Allowances

The same behaviour and assumptions are used for every provider.

03 / Output

A comparable annual cost

  1. 1Platform A£84
  2. 2Platform B£120
  3. 3Platform C£186
Estimate, not a recommendation.

The problem

UK investment platforms combine custody fees, dealing charges, foreign-exchange costs, caps, thresholds, free-trade allowances and minimum-activity rules. A headline percentage rarely tells someone what they will pay.

The solution

CompareStockISA asks about investment size, annual trades, shares versus funds and UK versus international exposure. It applies that same behaviour to every provider, then shows the estimated annual cost and where the money goes.

The same maths for every provider

Provider rules are stored separately from the interface, so a pricing change does not require rewriting the calculator. Costs are applied in a fixed order, using whole trades and consistent treatment of dealing, foreign exchange and activity discounts.

The evidence

The calculator handles flat charges, percentages, caps, tiers, thresholds, free trades and market-specific FX. Unsupported combinations are explained instead of forced through the wrong formula. There are 377 automated tests covering provider rules and awkward edge cases.

The calculator compares costs; the investor still decides

The product does not recommend a provider. It compares estimated costs using published fees and shows its assumptions, leaving the investor to weigh service, features and risk.

The impact

CompareStockISA turns a fragmented research task into a consistent, inspectable calculation and gives every provider the same mathematical treatment.

The result

One set of assumptions makes every provider easier to compare.

Start a conversation
Next case studyWonder Tots