FXBrokers Broker Rating Methodology
1. Purpose
The FXBrokers rating methodology compares forex and CFD brokers through a defined scoring framework.
Each broker receives scores across eight categories. Each category contains weighted sub-factors with published scoring rules.
The methodology follows four steps:
Collect evidence → classify the evidence → assign sub-factor scores → calculate weighted scores
Reviewer opinion does not replace a published scoring rule.
2. Overall Category Weights
| Category | Weight |
|---|---|
| Trust & Safety | 24% |
| Fees & Commissions | 17% |
| Deposits & Withdrawals | 10% |
| Tradable Instruments | 8% |
| Setup | 16% |
| Account Opening | 5% |
| Customer Support | 6% |
| Trading Conditions | 14% |
| Total | 100% |
The final rating is calculated as:
Final Score = (Trust & Safety × 0.24) + (Fees & Commissions × 0.17) + (Deposits & Withdrawals × 0.10) + (Tradable Instruments × 0.08) + (Setup × 0.16) + (Account Opening × 0.05) + (Customer Support × 0.06) + (Trading Conditions × 0.14)
Category calculations use unrounded values.
3. Scoring Scale
| Score | Classification |
|---|---|
| 5 | Excellent |
| 4 | Above Average |
| 3 | Average |
| 2 | Below Average |
| 1 | Poor |
These labels describe the result. They do not determine the score.
The detailed tables in each category determine the numerical score.
4. Evidence Hierarchy
Evidence is ranked in the following order.
| Priority | Source |
|---|---|
| 1 | Official regulator database or government record |
| 2 | Broker legal agreement, execution policy, client agreement, or contractual document |
| 3 | Official fee, funding, account, product, or pricing schedule |
| 4 | Official platform or technical documentation |
| 5 | Direct account, platform, onboarding, funding, or support testing |
| 6 | Independent source with identified publisher, methodology, date, and underlying evidence |
| 7 | Broker informational or marketing page |
| 8 | Other secondary source |
When two sources conflict, the higher-ranking source determines the scoring input unless the higher-ranking source is demonstrably outdated.
A source is treated as outdated when a newer source from the same or a higher evidence tier states different current conditions.
Official regulatory registers receive priority for licensing and authorization checks. The Trust Rating framework also requires verification of the entity, license number, authorization status, permitted activities, warnings, restrictions, and enforcement records through official regulatory sources where available.
5. Information Status
Every scoring input receives one of the following statuses.
| Status | Definition |
|---|---|
| Verified | Supported by evidence that meets the evidence hierarchy |
| Not Offered | Evidence confirms that the broker does not provide the feature |
| Not Applicable | The scoring factor does not apply to the reviewed account, entity, or product |
| Unverified | A claim exists, but the available evidence does not confirm it |
| Not Disclosed | The broker does not publish information required to score the factor |
These statuses produce different scoring outcomes.
Not Offered is not the same as Not Disclosed.
Not Applicable is not used when information is simply unavailable.
6. Missing Information
| Status | Treatment |
|---|---|
| Verified | Apply the published scoring table |
| Not Offered | Apply the score associated with absence of the feature |
| Not Applicable | Remove the factor and redistribute its weight |
| Unverified | Do not award credit for the unverified claim |
| Not Disclosed | Apply the relevant disclosure or transparency rule |
| Conflicting sources | Use the highest-ranking current source |
Missing information never receives the benefit of an assumed favorable condition.
6.1 N/A Weight Redistribution
When a factor is genuinely Not Applicable:
Adjusted Weight = Original Weight ÷ Total Weight of Applicable Factors
Example:
| Factor | Original Weight | Status |
|---|---|---|
| A | 40% | Applicable |
| B | 30% | Applicable |
| C | 20% | N/A |
| D | 10% | Applicable |
Applicable weight:
40 + 30 + 10 = 80
Adjusted weights:
| Factor | Calculation | Adjusted Weight |
|---|---|---|
| A | 40 ÷ 80 | 50.0% |
| B | 30 ÷ 80 | 37.5% |
| D | 10 ÷ 80 | 12.5% |
| Total | 100% |
7. Jurisdiction and Legal-Entity Scope
Each broker score uses one identified legal entity or client profile.
The rating does not combine conditions from different legal entities unless the review displays separate regional scores.
The legal entity that holds or services the reviewed account determines the primary Trust & Safety assessment. The Trust Rating methodology explicitly applies this rule because regulatory protections differ by legal entity, country of residence, account agreement, product, and regulator.
The same entity-consistency rule applies to:
- leverage;
- account types;
- payment methods;
- tradable instruments;
- platforms;
- fees;
- margin requirements;
- product restrictions.
A global broker rating identifies the client profile or legal entity used as the rating basis.
Conditions from another jurisdiction are reported separately and do not increase the primary score.
8. Numerical Benchmark Policy
Numerical scoring bands are editorial comparison benchmarks.
They are not presented as statutory, regulatory, or universal industry standards.
Every numerical benchmark is reviewed at least once every 12 months.
A benchmark is recalibrated when current broker data shows that the existing bands no longer provide useful differentiation.
A change to:
- a numerical threshold;
- a category weight;
- a sub-factor weight;
- a score cap; or
- a scoring formula
requires a methodology-version update.
9. Trust & Safety — 24%
Trust & Safety measures the regulatory and corporate protections applying to the reviewed account.
Regulator classification follows the separate Broker Regulatory Safety Assessment.
That framework evaluates regulatory status, regulatory strength, legal entity, licensing structure, regulatory history, transparency, and operating history.
Components
| Component | Weight |
|---|---|
| Applicable Regulatory Protection | 70% |
| Additional Licensing Strength | 10% |
| Regulatory History | 10% |
| Regulatory & Corporate Transparency | 5% |
| Operating History | 5% |
9.1 Applicable Regulatory Protection — 70%
| Regulatory Classification | Score |
|---|---|
| Dark Green | 5 |
| Green | 4 |
| Light Green | 3 |
| Yellow | 2 |
| Red / no verified financial authorization | 1 |
The classification represents regulatory protection and regulatory risk. It does not measure investment or market risk.
9.2 Additional Licensing Strength — 10%
Only verified financial-services authorizations count.
The following do not count as separate qualifying licenses:
- ordinary company registrations;
- duplicate register entries under one authorization;
- trade-association memberships;
- authorizations unrelated to brokerage activity;
- registrations that do not supervise financial brokerage services.
| Score | Requirement |
|---|---|
| 5 | At least two additional qualifying licenses, including either two Dark Green licenses or one Dark Green plus one Green license |
| 4 | One additional Dark Green license, or at least two additional Green licenses |
| 3 | One additional Green license, or at least two additional Light Green licenses |
| 2 | At least one additional verified Light Green or Yellow license without meeting the Score-3 threshold |
| 1 | No additional qualifying license, or the claimed additional authorization cannot be verified |
License quality takes priority over license count, consistent with the separate Trust Rating framework.
9.3 Regulatory History — 10%
The primary review period covers the previous five years.
An event older than five years remains in the assessment only when:
- a restriction remains active;
- an obligation remains unresolved;
- the same conduct recurs during the five-year period; or
- the regulator continues to identify the event as relevant to the current authorization.
Event Classification
| Level | Definition |
|---|---|
| Severe | License suspension or revocation, client-money misuse, false licensing claim, severe conduct violation affecting clients, or repeated major enforcement |
| Material | Formal enforcement action, significant operational restriction, significant compliance breach, or conduct sanction |
| Minor | Administrative or technical breach without direct client harm and without a repeated pattern |
Score
| Score | Requirement |
|---|---|
| 5 | No unresolved Material or Severe event during the five-year review period and no repeated Minor-event pattern |
| 4 | Only isolated Minor events, or one resolved Material event older than five years with no recurrence |
| 3 | One resolved Material event during the five-year review period, or three or more Minor events |
| 2 | One unresolved Material event, two or more Material events, or one Severe event that has been formally resolved |
| 1 | One unresolved Severe event, current license suspension/restriction affecting brokerage activity, confirmed client-money misuse, confirmed false licensing claim, or repeated Severe events |
Severity takes priority over event count.
9.4 Regulatory & Corporate Transparency — 5%
Six disclosure items are checked.
- Legal entity serving the reviewed client
- Regulator name
- License/reference number
- Authorization status
- Client agreement or legal terms
- Geographic/product/regulatory restrictions
| Score | Requirement |
|---|---|
| 5 | 6 of 6 disclosed and mutually consistent |
| 4 | 5 of 6 |
| 3 | 4 of 6 |
| 2 | 2–3 of 6 |
| 1 | 0–1 of 6 |
A contradiction between the broker's regulatory claim and an official regulator record caps this sub-factor at 2.
A confirmed false regulatory claim produces a score of 1.
9.5 Operating History — 5%
| Verified Brokerage Operating History | Score |
|---|---|
| 20+ years | 5 |
| 10–19 years | 4 |
| 5–9 years | 3 |
| 2–4 years | 2 |
| Under 2 years | 1 |
The operating-history calculation starts from the date the brokerage business began providing regulated brokerage services.
A company-incorporation date does not substitute for brokerage operating history unless the dates are the same.
9.6 Trust & Safety Score Caps
| Applicable Entity Classification | Maximum Trust & Safety Score |
|---|---|
| Red | 1.5 |
| Yellow | 2.5 |
| Light Green | 3.5 |
| Green | 4.3 |
| Dark Green | 5.0 |
Group-level licenses do not override the cap created by the entity that serves the reviewed client.
10. Fees & Commissions — 17%
Components
| Component | Weight |
|---|---|
| Standard Account Trading Costs | 35% |
| Raw / Commission Account Costs | 30% |
| Other Account Costs | 25% |
| Fee Transparency | 10% |
10.1 Standard Account Trading Costs — 35%
Use typical or average EUR/USD spread data.
Use minimum advertised spread only when no typical or average figure exists. When the minimum spread is the only available figure, mark the evidence as lower confidence.
| Typical EUR/USD Spread | Score |
|---|---|
| Below 0.8 pips | 5 |
| 0.8–1.0 pips | 4 |
| 1.1–1.5 pips | 3 |
| 1.6–2.0 pips | 2 |
| Above 2.0 pips | 1 |
When EUR/USD is unavailable, use the following sequence:
- GBP/USD;
- USD/JPY;
- another major forex pair available to the reviewed account.
Record the instrument used.
10.2 Raw / Commission Account Costs — 30%
For one standard EUR/USD lot:
Approx. All-In Cost = (Typical Spread × USD 10) + Round-Turn Commission
If commission is quoted per side:
Round-Turn Commission = Per-Side Commission × 2
| Approx. All-In Cost | Score |
|---|---|
| $7.00 or less | 5 |
| $7.01–$8.50 | 4 |
| $8.51–$10.00 | 3 |
| $10.01–$12.00 | 2 |
| Above $12.00 | 1 |
All comparisons use equivalent position size and account structure.
10.3 Other Account Costs — 25%
The following cost flags are checked:
- Inactivity fee
- Account-maintenance fee
- Mandatory platform/data fee
- Mandatory administration fee
- Currency-conversion markup
- Other recurring broker-imposed account charge
A charge is counted once.
| Score | Number of Cost Flags |
|---|---|
| 5 | 0 |
| 4 | 1 |
| 3 | 2 |
| 2 | 3 |
| 1 | 4+ |
If the broker does not disclose whether one or more of these fees exist, the Fee Transparency score is reduced under Section 10.4.
10.4 Fee Transparency — 10%
Six disclosures are checked.
- Typical or average spreads
- Commission schedule
- Swap/overnight financing
- Inactivity or maintenance fees
- Currency-conversion charges
- Other recurring account charges
| Score | Disclosed Items |
|---|---|
| 5 | 6 |
| 4 | 5 |
| 3 | 4 |
| 2 | 2–3 |
| 1 | 0–1 |
A contradiction between the official fee schedule and another broker page reduces the score by 1 point, subject to a minimum score of 1.
11. Deposits & Withdrawals — 10%
Components
| Component | Weight |
|---|---|
| Payment Method Availability | 30% |
| Base Account Currencies | 20% |
| Deposit & Withdrawal Fees | 25% |
| Processing & Settlement Speed | 15% |
| Funding Transparency | 10% |
11.1 Payment Method Availability — 30%
A payment method counts only when it is available to the reviewed client profile.
Payment methods are grouped by actual provider or payment rail.
Visa and Mastercard count as one card family.
Two separately branded e-wallet providers count as two methods when both operate independently.
| Score | Requirement |
|---|---|
| 5 | 5+ distinct methods, including bank transfer, cards, and at least 2 non-bank/non-card alternatives |
| 4 | 4 distinct methods, including bank transfer, cards, and at least 1 alternative |
| 3 | 3 distinct methods, including bank transfer and cards |
| 2 | 2 distinct methods |
| 1 | 1 distinct method |
11.2 Base Account Currencies — 20%
| Base Currencies | Score |
|---|---|
| 10+ | 5 |
| 6–9 | 4 |
| 3–5 | 3 |
| 2 | 2 |
| 1 | 1 |
Only currencies available as actual account base currencies count.
Funding currencies that are automatically converted do not count.
11.3 Deposit & Withdrawal Fees — 25%
A low conditional fee equals no more than:
- 0.5% of the transaction; or
- USD 5 equivalent,
depending on the broker's fee structure.
| Score | Requirement |
|---|---|
| 5 | No routine broker-imposed deposit or withdrawal fee on standard methods |
| 4 | Deposits are free and only one low conditional withdrawal fee applies |
| 3 | One common funding or withdrawal method carries a fee above the Score-4 threshold |
| 2 | Fees apply to both deposits and withdrawals or to two or more common methods |
| 1 | The percentage or fixed charges exceed 2% or USD 25 equivalent on a common method, or fee information is not disclosed |
Third-party bank or payment-provider fees do not count as broker fees.
11.4 Processing & Settlement Speed — 15%
Use broker withdrawal-processing time.
| Withdrawal Processing Time | Score |
|---|---|
| Same day / within 1 business day | 5 |
| 1–2 business days | 4 |
| 2–3 business days | 3 |
| 3–5 business days | 2 |
| More than 5 business days | 1 |
External bank or payment-network settlement time is recorded separately.
11.5 Funding Transparency — 10%
Six items are checked.
- Payment methods
- Minimum transaction
- Maximum transaction or limit
- Broker fee
- Broker processing time
- Expected settlement time
| Score | Items Disclosed |
|---|---|
| 5 | 6 |
| 4 | 5 |
| 3 | 4 |
| 2 | 2–3 |
| 1 | 0–1 |
12. Tradable Instruments — 8%
Components
| Component | Weight |
|---|---|
| Total Tradable Instruments | 35% |
| Forex Pair Availability | 30% |
| Asset-Class Diversity | 35% |
12.1 Total Tradable Instruments — 35%
| Instruments | Score |
|---|---|
| More than 2,500 | 5 |
| 1,000–2,500 | 4 |
| 500–999 | 3 |
| 300–499 | 2 |
| Fewer than 300 | 1 |
Only instruments available to the reviewed entity/client profile count.
12.2 Forex Pair Availability — 30%
| Forex Pairs | Score |
|---|---|
| More than 70 | 5 |
| 50–70 | 4 |
| 30–49 | 3 |
| 20–29 | 2 |
| Fewer than 20 | 1 |
12.3 Asset-Class Diversity — 35%
The following classes are counted:
- Forex
- Shares
- Indices
- Commodities
- Metals
- Energies
- ETFs
- Bonds
- Cryptocurrency products
- Futures
- Options
An asset class counts when the broker offers at least three tradable instruments in that class.
Forex counts as one class regardless of pair count.
A class with fewer than three instruments does not increase the diversity count but remains listed in the broker review.
| Qualifying Asset Classes | Score |
|---|---|
| 8+ | 5 |
| 6–7 | 4 |
| 4–5 | 3 |
| 2–3 | 2 |
| 1 | 1 |
The same instruments are not counted in multiple classes solely to increase the score.
13. Setup — 16%
Setup measures platforms and account structures.
| Component | Weight |
|---|---|
| Platform Score | 70% |
| Account Type Score | 30% |
Setup Score = (Platform Score × 0.70) + (Account Type Score × 0.30)
Account types are not scored again under Account Opening.
14. Platform Score
Components
| Component | Weight |
|---|---|
| Platform Availability | 40% |
| Advanced Tools & Automation | 30% |
| Charting & Analysis | 15% |
| Accessibility & Usability | 15% |
14.1 Qualifying Platform Definition
A trading platform counts when it provides all five functions:
- Live order entry
- Tradeable or real-time pricing
- Position and order management
- Trade/account history
- Charting
A branded version of the same underlying platform family counts once.
A browser portal that only provides account administration does not count as a trading platform.
14.2 Platform Availability — 40%
| Score | Requirement |
|---|---|
| 5 | 3+ qualifying platform families, or 2 platform families covering web, desktop, and mobile with automation/API functionality on at least one |
| 4 | 2 qualifying platform families, or 1 platform family covering web, desktop, and mobile with automation/API functionality |
| 3 | 1 qualifying platform available through at least 2 of web, desktop, or mobile |
| 2 | 1 qualifying platform available through only 1 major access format |
| 1 | No qualifying full trading platform |
14.3 Advanced Tools & Automation — 30%
Eight capabilities are checked.
- Automated strategies / Expert Advisors
- Trading API
- VPS support
- Strategy backtesting
- Copy/social trading
- Configurable alerts
- Custom indicators/scripts
- Third-party trading integration
| Verified Capabilities | Score |
|---|---|
| 7–8 | 5 |
| 5–6 | 4 |
| 3–4 | 3 |
| 1–2 | 2 |
| 0 | 1 |
A capability counts only when it is available to the reviewed client profile.
14.4 Charting & Analysis — 15%
Six capabilities are checked.
- Technical indicators
- Drawing tools
- Multiple timeframes
- Multiple-chart/layout support
- Saved templates/workspaces
- Custom indicators/scripts or integrated advanced external charting
| Capabilities | Score |
|---|---|
| 6 | 5 |
| 5 | 4 |
| 4 | 3 |
| 2–3 | 2 |
| 0–1 | 1 |
14.5 Accessibility & Usability — 15%
Five conditions are checked.
- Web trading
- Desktop application
- iOS application
- Android application
- Watchlists/orders/positions synchronize across supported interfaces
| Conditions Met | Score |
|---|---|
| 5 | 5 |
| 4 | 4 |
| 3 | 3 |
| 2 | 2 |
| 0–1 | 1 |
When a broker deliberately uses a browser platform instead of a desktop application, the desktop condition remains unmet. The platform can still score through the other conditions.
15. Account Type Score
Components
| Component | Weight |
|---|---|
| Account-Type Variety | 60% |
| Account Flexibility & Transparency | 40% |
15.1 Distinct Account Definition
Two accounts count as different when they differ in:
one Major Dimension, or two Secondary Dimensions.
Major Dimensions
- Pricing model
- Execution structure
- Instrument universe
- Contract or lot structure
Secondary Dimensions
- Minimum deposit
- Platform access
- Leverage framework
- Client classification
- Account-level trading restrictions
Different names or promotional labels do not create a separate account type.
Demo accounts do not count.
A swap-free option applied to an existing account does not count as a separate account unless the broker creates a distinct contractual account structure with separate trading conditions.
15.2 Account-Type Variety — 60%
| Distinct Live Account Structures | Score |
|---|---|
| 4+ | 5 |
| 3 | 4 |
| 2 | 3 |
| 1 | 2 |
| Account structure cannot be clearly established | 1 |
15.3 Account Flexibility & Transparency — 40%
Seven items are checked.
- Pricing model
- Minimum deposit
- Platform access
- Execution structure
- Leverage
- Available instruments
- Eligibility/restrictions
| Items Disclosed | Score |
|---|---|
| 7 | 5 |
| 6 | 4 |
| 4–5 | 3 |
| 2–3 | 2 |
| 0–1 | 1 |
16. Account Opening — 5%
Components
| Component | Weight |
|---|---|
| Registration Simplicity | 30% |
| KYC & Document Process | 30% |
| Verification Speed | 25% |
| Onboarding Clarity | 15% |
16.1 Registration Simplicity — 30%
Six friction flags are checked.
- Paper application required for a standard retail account
- Broker employee intervention required before submission
- Same information requested more than once without a compliance reason
- Application stages are not displayed or explained
- Application flow fails during standard testing
- Offline step required despite availability of a normal digital process
| Friction Flags | Score |
|---|---|
| 0 | 5 |
| 1 | 4 |
| 2 | 3 |
| 3 | 2 |
| 4+ | 1 |
Suitability, appropriateness, KYC, AML, tax, and identity questions do not count as friction solely because they are required.
16.2 KYC & Document Process — 30%
Six KYC friction flags are checked.
- Required documents are not listed
- No digital document-upload process
- Same valid document requested repeatedly without explanation
- Manual email submission required
- Additional non-standard documentation requested without an explanation
- Failed verification does not provide a reason or corrective step
| Friction Flags | Score |
|---|---|
| 0 | 5 |
| 1 | 4 |
| 2 | 3 |
| 3 | 2 |
| 4+ | 1 |
Legally required KYC or AML checks do not reduce the score.
16.3 Verification Speed — 25%
| Verification Time | Score |
|---|---|
| Within 1 business day | 5 |
| 1–2 business days | 4 |
| 2–3 business days | 3 |
| 3–5 business days | 2 |
| More than 5 business days | 1 |
The timer starts when the applicant submits all requested valid documents.
16.4 Onboarding Clarity — 15%
Five items are checked.
- Eligibility
- Required documents
- Geographic restrictions
- Verification process/time
- Account-activation steps
| Items Disclosed | Score |
|---|---|
| 5 | 5 |
| 4 | 4 |
| 3 | 3 |
| 2 | 2 |
| 0–1 | 1 |
17. Customer Support — 6%
Components
| Component | Weight |
|---|---|
| Answer Quality & Professionalism | 35% |
| Availability | 20% |
| Response Speed | 30% |
| Support Channels | 15% |
17.1 Testing Protocol
When direct support testing is available, use:
| Channel | Minimum Test |
|---|---|
| Live chat or equivalent real-time support | 3 separate interactions |
| Email or ticket support | 2 separate requests |
The three subject areas are:
- account/service;
- platform/trading conditions;
- fees/funding/withdrawals.
Real-time interactions are conducted at different times rather than in one continuous session.
Unanswered attempts remain in the calculation.
17.2 Answer Quality & Professionalism — 35%
Each response receives one point for each condition.
- Factually accurate
- Answers the complete question
- Directly relevant
- Provides specific information rather than a generic response
- Matches published broker terms
Maximum: 5 points per response
Use the average across all tested responses.
| Average Response Score | Sub-Factor Score |
|---|---|
| 4.5–5.0 | 5 |
| 3.5–4.49 | 4 |
| 2.5–3.49 | 3 |
| 1.5–2.49 | 2 |
| Below 1.5 | 1 |
A response containing incorrect information about regulation, fees, withdrawals, or account restrictions receives no more than 2 points for that interaction.
17.3 Availability — 20%
| Coverage | Score |
|---|---|
| 24/7 | 5 |
| 24/5 | 4 |
| At least 12 hours per weekday | 3 |
| Under 12 hours per weekday | 2 |
| No clearly stated schedule or very restricted availability | 1 |
17.4 Response Speed — 30%
Live Chat
| Average Initial Response | Score |
|---|---|
| Under 1 minute | 5 |
| 1–3 minutes | 4 |
| 3–10 minutes | 3 |
| 10–20 minutes | 2 |
| More than 20 minutes or unanswered | 1 |
Email/Ticket
| Average Initial Response | Score |
|---|---|
| Under 2 hours | 5 |
| 2–8 hours | 4 |
| Same business day | 3 |
| Next business day | 2 |
| More than 1 business day or unanswered | 1 |
When both channels are tested:
Response Speed Score = (Live Chat Score + Email/Ticket Score) ÷ 2
17.5 Support Channels — 15%
Only functioning human-support channels count.
| Human Channels | Score |
|---|---|
| 4+ | 5 |
| 3 | 4 |
| 2 | 3 |
| 1 | 2 |
| 0 | 1 |
Human-support channels include:
- live chat;
- phone;
- email;
- ticket system;
- messaging service with human agents;
- in-platform human support.
A chatbot without human escalation does not count.
18. Trading Conditions — 14%
Components
| Component | Weight |
|---|---|
| Execution Model & Transparency | 25% |
| Execution Evidence & Quality | 25% |
| Leverage & Margin Framework | 20% |
| Strategy Flexibility | 15% |
| Order & Risk-Management Conditions | 15% |
18.1 Execution Model & Transparency — 25%
Six disclosures are checked.
- Execution model
- Broker role: principal, agent, market maker, or equivalent
- Order-handling policy
- Conflict-of-interest policy
- Execution venue/liquidity arrangement
- Slippage, rejection, or requote treatment
| Items Disclosed | Score |
|---|---|
| 6 | 5 |
| 5 | 4 |
| 4 | 3 |
| 2–3 | 2 |
| 0–1 | 1 |
A direct contradiction between execution-policy documents and promotional claims reduces the score by 1 point.
18.2 Execution Evidence & Quality — 25%
Execution statistics qualify only when the publication includes enough information to interpret the result.
Seven evidence conditions are checked.
- Measurement period
- Publication date
- Account/product scope
- Sample size or sample scope
- Metric definition
- At least one outcome metric beyond average execution speed
- Independent validation or audit
Outcome metrics include:
- slippage;
- fill rate;
- rejection rate;
- requote rate;
- price improvement;
- equivalent execution-quality measure.
| Conditions Met | Score |
|---|---|
| 6–7 including independent validation | 5 |
| 5–6 without independent validation | 4 |
| 3–4 | 3 |
| 1–2 | 2 |
| 0 | 1 |
A statement such as “execution from 0.01 seconds” without scope, sample, methodology, and measurement period does not qualify as verified execution evidence.
Poor-Execution Override
When independently verified evidence establishes:
- persistent abnormal rejection rates;
- persistent one-sided negative slippage;
- repeated execution failures; or
- another documented execution problem affecting normal trading,
the sub-factor score is capped at 2.5 until newer evidence establishes that the issue has been corrected.
18.3 Leverage & Margin Framework — 20%
Six items are checked.
- Maximum leverage
- Instrument-specific leverage
- Margin-call level/process
- Stop-out level
- Rules for changing margin requirements
- Jurisdiction/account restrictions
| Items Disclosed | Score |
|---|---|
| 6 | 5 |
| 5 | 4 |
| 4 | 3 |
| 2–3 | 2 |
| 0–1 | 1 |
Maximum leverage itself does not increase the score.
18.4 Strategy Flexibility — 15%
Six strategy types are checked.
- Scalping
- Hedging
- Expert Advisors
- Algorithmic/API trading
- News trading
- High-frequency or short-duration trading
A strategy counts as permitted only when broker terms do not prohibit it for the reviewed account.
| Permitted Strategies | Score |
|---|---|
| 6 | 5 |
| 5 | 4 |
| 3–4 | 3 |
| 1–2 | 2 |
| 0 | 1 |
When a platform does not technically support a strategy, record the strategy as Not Offered, not permitted.
18.5 Order & Risk-Management Conditions — 15%
Eight conditions are checked.
- Market orders
- Limit orders
- Stop/pending orders
- Stop-loss
- Take-profit
- Trailing stop
- Margin-call rules
- Stop-out rules
| Conditions Met | Score |
|---|---|
| 7–8 | 5 |
| 5–6 | 4 |
| 3–4 | 3 |
| 1–2 | 2 |
| 0 | 1 |
Guaranteed stop-loss functionality is reported separately and does not determine the maximum score.
19. Trader Experience Level
Different traders require different broker features. In addition to the overall broker rating, each broker review identifies the trading-experience levels for which the broker's verified features are suited.
Trader Experience Level labels do not change the broker's numerical rating. They are descriptive classifications based on the broker's platforms, account structure, costs, educational resources, market access, trading tools, support, and trading conditions.
A broker can receive more than one experience-level label when it meets the requirements for multiple trader groups.
Only features available to the reviewed client profile and supported by the evidence used in the broker review are considered.
Beginner Traders
A broker receives the Beginner Traders label when its offering provides the core features required for traders with limited trading experience.
The assessment covers:
| Area | What We Look For |
|---|---|
| Regulatory Protection | The broker operates under verified financial regulation applicable to the reviewed client |
| Platform Simplicity | At least one platform provides straightforward order placement, position management, charts, and account access |
| Fee Transparency | Spreads, commissions, account fees, and other common charges are disclosed before trading |
| Account Opening | Registration and identity verification are completed through a defined and accessible process |
| Demo Account | A functioning demo account is available without requiring a funded live account |
| Education | The broker provides educational material covering trading concepts, platform use, markets, or risk management |
| Funding | Deposit and withdrawal methods, fees, and processing conditions are disclosed |
| Customer Support | At least one human-support channel is available |
| Trading Guidance Features | Copy trading, social trading, platform tutorials, or equivalent guided features are identified when available |
A broker is labeled Beginner Traders when its offering is accessible without requiring advanced platform knowledge, professional trading tools, or specialized account structures to perform standard trading and account-management tasks.
A demo account or educational library alone does not qualify a broker for the label when the broader onboarding, pricing, platform, or support experience creates substantial barriers for new traders.
Intermediate Traders
A broker receives the Intermediate Traders label when its offering supports traders who already understand basic order placement, risk management, account operation, and trading costs.
The assessment covers:
| Area | What We Look For |
|---|---|
| Trading Costs | Competitive spread or commission structures are available and documented |
| Platform Functionality | Platforms provide charting, indicators, multiple order types, and position-management tools |
| Market Access | The broker provides access to multiple asset classes or a broad selection within its primary markets |
| Account Choice | More than one pricing, account, or trading structure is available, or one account provides broad flexibility |
| Research | Market analysis, economic calendars, news, technical research, trading ideas, or equivalent research features are available |
| Cross-Device Access | Trading is available through more than one major interface such as web, desktop, iOS, or Android |
| Trading Conditions | Margin, leverage, order rules, and strategy restrictions are disclosed |
| Account Management | Funding, withdrawals, account settings, and platform access can be managed through defined procedures |
A broker is labeled Intermediate Traders when its platform, market range, account structure, and research tools provide functionality beyond basic trading without requiring professional infrastructure.
Advanced and Professional Traders
A broker receives the Advanced and Professional Traders label when it provides tools and trading conditions designed for traders who require advanced execution, automation, account structures, or market access.
The assessment covers:
| Area | What We Look For |
|---|---|
| Advanced Platforms | Platforms support advanced order management, customization, or professional trading workflows |
| Raw / Commission Pricing | Raw-spread, commission-based, ECN-style, institutional, or professional pricing structures are available where applicable |
| Automation | Expert Advisors, algorithmic trading, custom scripting, or automated strategies are supported |
| API Access | A documented trading API is available where offered by the broker |
| VPS Support | VPS access or integration is available for automated or continuous trading |
| Backtesting | Strategy-testing or backtesting functionality is available through the broker's supported platform environment |
| Market Access | The broker provides a broad instrument range or specialized access suited to active traders |
| Execution Information | Execution model, order handling, slippage, rejection, or related execution conditions are disclosed |
| Strategy Flexibility | Rules covering scalping, hedging, automation, news trading, and other advanced strategies are disclosed |
| Risk and Margin Controls | Margin, stop-out, leverage, and order-management rules are defined |
| Research and Analysis | Advanced charting, research tools, market analysis, or professional data functionality is available |
A broker is labeled Advanced and Professional Traders when its offering includes advanced trading functionality beyond standard retail order placement and basic charting.
High leverage alone does not qualify a broker for this label.
Applying Experience-Level Labels
Experience-level labels are based on the broker's verified characteristics rather than its marketing descriptions.
| Rule | Application |
|---|---|
| One broker can receive multiple labels | A broker can be suitable for Beginner, Intermediate, and Advanced traders at the same time |
| Labels do not affect the overall score | Trader Experience Level is separate from the weighted broker rating |
| Marketing statements do not determine the label | Claims such as "ideal for beginners" or "built for professionals" are not used without supporting features |
| Client-specific availability applies | Only features available to the reviewed client profile are considered |
| Unavailable features are not assumed | A feature counts only when its availability is verified |
| Labels are reviewed when features change | Platform, account, research, education, or trading-condition changes trigger a review of the applicable labels |
20. Anti-Gaming Rules
| Practice | Scoring Rule |
|---|---|
| Several names for the same account structure | Count once |
| Several branded versions of the same underlying trading platform | Count once |
| Visa and Mastercard presented separately | Count as one card family |
| Multiple instruments inside the same asset group | Increase instrument count but not asset-class count |
| Group license not applicable to reviewed account | Do not use as primary regulatory score |
| Advertised minimum spread without representative spread | Do not treat as typical spread |
| Execution-speed marketing claim without methodology | Do not count as verified execution evidence |
| Chatbot presented as customer support | Do not count as human-support channel |
| Broker marketing page conflicts with client agreement | Client agreement takes priority |
| Missing data labeled N/A | Reject N/A status unless the factor genuinely does not apply |
| Several account tiers differ only by deposit size | Count as one account unless another defined distinction exists |
| Same payment rail appears under different labels | Count once |
21. Reassessment Triggers
A broker score is reassessed when one of the following events occurs:
- License issued, suspended, surrendered, restricted, transferred, or revoked
- Client-serving legal entity changes
- Official regulatory warning affecting the reviewed entity
- New enforcement action
- Pricing model changes
- Commission or spread structure changes
- Funding fee changes
- Deposit or withdrawal method changes
- Major platform added or removed
- Account structure changes
- Instrument range changes enough to cross a scoring threshold
- KYC process changes
- Support availability changes enough to cross a scoring threshold
- Execution policy changes
- Margin or leverage rules change
- Strategy restrictions change
The Trust Rating framework also recognizes that regulatory status changes over time as licenses are issued, restricted, suspended, surrendered, transferred, or withdrawn.
22. Scheduled Methodology Review
The methodology receives a formal review every 12 months.
The review covers:
- numerical thresholds;
- market-wide spread levels;
- commission structures;
- instrument-count distribution;
- platform technology;
- payment methods;
- support standards;
- regulatory developments;
- execution-data standards.
Threshold changes are based on documented broker-market data used in the review.
23. Core Principles
| Principle | Rule |
|---|---|
| Consistency | Apply the same scoring rules to every broker |
| Evidence | Award points only when the required evidence exists |
| Reproducibility | A second reviewer using the same evidence and rules reaches the same score or differs by no more than the defined 0.5-point scoring increment |
| Jurisdictional consistency | Use conditions belonging to one defined client profile |
| Resistance to gaming | Count actual differences rather than additional names, labels, or selective statistics |
| Transparency | Publish category weights, sub-factor weights, formulas, and scoring rules |
| Maintainability | Review benchmarks every 12 months and record methodology changes |
Final Methodology Rule
Every broker rating follows the same sequence:
Identify the reviewed entity → collect evidence → assign evidence status → apply the published scoring tables → calculate sub-factor scores → calculate category scores → apply category weights → calculate the final rating.
No unpublished bonus, penalty, assumption, or discretionary scoring rule is added to the calculation.