> This is true, but the person filling your order does have a responsibility to ensure that your order is filled at the lit exchange price or better. If you fin

> This is true, but the person filling your order does have a responsibility to ensure that your order is filled at the lit exchange price or better. If you find contrary evidence,the regulators would possibly be willing to pay you a lot of money for it. I'm still struggling with your definition of a lit exchange price. Are you referring to the NBBO? The price you get largely depends on the order size, so the NBBO only applies up to a certain order size. Also the NBBO might not even be up-to-date. Regarding regulation: "In deciding how to execute orders, your broker has a duty to seek the best execution that is reasonably available for its customers' orders" - usually this means you should have a better or same price as the NBBO - up to a certain order size. If you are happy with the NBBO then you are right and I wouldn't worry too much - however if I recall correctly the NBBO is usually pretty wide and has plenty of other caveats (eg: http://www.nanex.net/Research/IsNBBOIgnored.html http://www.nanex.net/Research/IsNBBOIgnored.html). > According to your Schwab link, if there is no fill improvement on Robinhood then you are better off using Robinhood for orders under 500 shares because commissions are $4.95 and the fill improvement is less than that. Is that your interpretation as well? Do you mean price improvement? I seen no mentioning of fill improvement on the Schwab link. But yep, seems about right. > Do you have a link showing that Robinhood customers do not get any fill improvement? > I don't think the KCG link is relevant as they do not have retail customers. Robinhood lists KCG, Citadel and Two Sigmas as their market centers - so that's the best information I could find regarding price improvement for Robinhood customers.