Abstract: Mitrade has added Apple Pay and Google Pay as funding options for its Australian customers.

AI-Powered Trading Among Gen Z Crypto Traders
Younger Australians are not only changing how they pay but also how they invest. A recent report reveals that 67 % of Gen Z crypto traders activated at least one AI-powered trading bot within Q2 2025. Moreover, Gen Z users engage with AI tools an average of 11.4 days per month. This embrace of automation has tangible benefits: during periods of market stress, AI bot users logged 47 % fewer panic‑sell events compared to manual traders.

Mitrades Integration of Apple Pay and Google Pay
Responding to these dual trends, Mitrade has added Apple Pay and Google Pay as funding options for its Australian customers. Announced on July 24, 2025, this move aims to streamline deposits, reduce funding delays, and cater to mobile-first users seeking instant trade execution. Elven Jong, CEO of Mitrade Australia, noted that integrating biometric authentication and tokenisation enhances security—an essential safeguard as card-not-present fraud rises and younger traders demand frictionless, trustworthy platforms.
Gen Zs Shift to US Markets
Mitrades payment upgrade aligns with a broader change in trading preferences: Gen Z and younger millennial investors in Australia are increasingly funneling capital into the volatile US markets, diverging from the traditionally dominant ASX. Industry data from The Australian highlights that traders aged 18–40 are drawn to CFD opportunities on US equities and indices, attracted by geopolitical volatility and the potential for outsized short-term gains. This trend underscores the importance of seamless funding rails, ensuring that traders can swiftly capitalise on cross-border market moves.
Conclusion
Mitrades introduction of Apple Pay and Google Pay for Australian clients not only reflects these shifting preferences but also positions the platform to capture a growing segment of tech-savvy, risk-tolerant traders targeting global markets.


This Trading Pro broker review checks the FCA warning, Indonesia blocklist evidence, licence claims, and what South Asian users should verify before depositing.
The visible fee in an MT4 white label proposal is rarely the real cost of operating it. For an existing broker, the decision is not simply whether an MT4 white label platform is “cheap” or “expensive.” The real question is whether the commercial model remains viable after integration, support, data, client migration, compliance, and exit costs are included. That is why an MT4 white label cost review should be built as a 24- to 36-month operating case. It should compare three credible choices: 1. Keep the present MT4 setup and improve its weakest controls. 2. Replace the MT4 white label provider but retain the client proposition. 3. Migrate selected clients or products to another platform while running MT4 in parallel. This guide explains how to build that case without relying on headline prices or generic vendor claims.

The decision to switch white label providers or migrate to a modern white label trading platform is no longer a luxury for growth-minded brokers—it's a strategic necessity for survival in 2026. The convergence of technological stagnation, regulatory evolution, and shifting client expectations has created a perfect storm.

ABET, a Bulgaria-based brokerage firm, faces severe allegations from users for the reportedly inefficient way it handles their funds. While some alleged illegitimate account blocks by the broker, others reported fund scams and trade manipulations. These ABET reviews have raised question marks over the broker’s legitimacy.