Frequently asked questions

Six weighted categories: regulation (25%), trading costs (20%), withdrawals (20%), platforms and execution (15%), customer support (10%), and research and transparency (10%). Each is scored 1–5 and the final figure is the weighted average.

The full rubric, including what we check in each category, is published on our methodology page. You can disagree with a weighting and judge the review on its evidence rather than on the number.

We fund a live account with our own money, place 50+ trades across different pairs and asset classes, contact support as an ordinary customer, and request a withdrawal.

The withdrawal matters most and is the step most comparison sites skip entirely — it is the point at which a broker’s real character shows, and it carries 20% of the score here.

Every review is re-checked at least quarterly, and immediately when something material changes: a licence, a fee schedule, ownership, or a pattern of withdrawal complaints.

Each review shows the date its regulatory details were last verified, so you can see how fresh the information is rather than guessing.

Tell us. Documented reader reports — especially about withdrawals — trigger a re-test of the affected category. If the finding holds, the score changes and the review records why.

A rating that only ever moves upward is a marketing asset, not a review.

Because most sites reproduce what the broker publishes about itself. Spreads get quoted from the marketing page rather than measured, and withdrawals are rarely tested at all.

Where our score is lower than elsewhere, the review says exactly which category pulled it down and what we observed.

Affiliate commission. If you open an account through one of our links, the broker may pay us. It costs you nothing extra and your account terms are identical to going direct.

The full explanation, including what we decline, is on our how we make money page.

No, and the process is built so that they cannot. Reviewers are not told which brokers are commercial partners while they are testing, so the question cannot influence a rating even unconsciously.

Brokers we earn from have received low ratings, and those reviews say plainly why.

No. Brokers do not see reviews before publication, cannot approve them, and cannot have a finding removed. If a broker disputes something factual, we re-check it — and correct it if they are right, which occasionally happens.

No. A score compares a broker against other brokers on the criteria above. It says nothing about whether trading is suitable for you.

Most retail clients lose money trading leveraged products, and a well-run broker does not change that. Please read our risk disclosure.

Regulation — specifically which legal entity will accept your account, not which licence the group holds somewhere. Large brokers often operate several entities, and the one serving your country may carry far weaker protection than the one advertised.

Every review states which entity applies and what protection comes with it.

No, neither. We review brokers. We do not advise on whether to trade, what to trade, or how much — and we do not sell signals, courses, or managed accounts.

No. We are an independent review publication. We do not hold client funds, execute trades, or provide any financial service.

Yes, and it helps. Tell us which broker and why through the contact page. Brokers readers ask about repeatedly move up the queue.

Not in full. Short quotations with a link back are fine. Reproducing whole reviews is not, partly because they go stale — an outdated copy of a review that has since been corrected can mislead someone into a decision about their money.

See our privacy policy for the full detail. Reading the site does not require an account.

Through the contact page. Corrections are the most useful message we receive — include the broker, the specific claim, and any evidence you have.