Methodology

Our methodology: how we compare crypto exchanges

Every comparison on this site is based on verifiable public data. This is exactly how.

Introduction

Every comparison on this site is based on verifiable public data. This page explains where our numbers come from, how often we refresh them, and how we handle affiliate income.

What we collect

Per exchange we track five categories: licences and regulation (MiCA, MiFID II, PSD2/EMI, fines), costs (maker/taker fees, tiers, spreads), yield (base and max APY, eligible assets), transparency (Proof of Reserves: frequency, technology, coverage) and products (spot, perpetuals, stocks, fiat rails).

Our sources

Every comparison table carries a timestamp with its last verification date.

Update cycle

DataFrequency
Spot pricesReal-time
Perpetuals spreadsEvery 5 minutes (24h averaged)
Base APY / yieldWeekly
Fee schedulesMonthly
PoR statusWeekly
Licence statusOn change (ESMA auto-check)
ArticlesQuarterly review

How we calculate "true cost"

Effective cost = trading fees + spread − yield on collateral − lending yield. See True Cost of Trading. In the calculator all exchanges are compared at the same fee tier and volume.

Independence and business model

This site may earn affiliate commissions when you open an account through our links. That never influences rankings: they follow exclusively from the data above and the formula is public. Sponsored placements do not exist — and if that ever changes, they will be explicitly labelled.

The exchange score

Every exchange receives a 1-10 score, calculated entirely from the same data fields as the filters — never entered manually. The score is the weighted sum of five pillars:

PillarWeightWhy
1. Regulation & oversight25%The most important trust signal for EU visitors
2. Security of funds25%Proof of Reserves + hack history
3. Product range20%Breadth of what you can trade
4. Costs20%Direct impact on the user
5. Yield & capital efficiency10%Differentiating but niche

Points per pillar (v1.3): Regulation: MiCAR +3, MiFID II +4, PSD2/EMI +1, other licences (VARA, FCA, MAS, FSA Japan, BitLicense, SEC broker-dealer) +1 each (max +2), public listing +1 — capped at 10. Security: daily PoR +4, monthly +3, quarterly +1.5, none 0; never hacked (>$10M loss) +5, hacked 0 — regardless of compensation; non-custodial option +1. Products: each product +1, real stocks (security entitlement) count double (+2). Costs: absolute bands on the average of maker and taker fee (lowest non-VIP tier): ≤0.05% = 10 points, down to >0.30% = 0. Yield: on collateral during perp trading +5, lending/staking while trading +3, yield on idle stablecoins +2.

Display scale. The raw formula is deliberately strict; for a consumer-recognisable range: display score = 4 + 0.6 × raw score, rounded to 1 decimal. The scale runs from 4.0 to 10.0; rescaling is linear and identical for all exchanges — order and relative differences do not change. Sorting uses the unrounded raw score; ties go to the highest security pillar, then regulation.

Transparency. Every score on the site carries an ⓘ breakdown per pillar. Scores are never for sale: sponsored placements get an "Ad" label but keep their own calculated score. Not measured: UX, customer service, liquidity/volume and per-country availability (that is a filter, not a quality judgement).

Re-scoring. Fully every quarter, and immediately upon: a hack, loss or withdrawal of a licence, a fine or warning from an EU regulator, or a material fee change.

Changelog. v1.3 (July 2026): separate realtime/on-chain PoR tier removed; the top tier is now "daily or more frequent" (+4). v1.2: daily attestation tier added. v1.1: display scale added; monthly PoR from +2.5 to +3. v1.0: first version.

Report an error

Spotted an outdated number? Contact us — corrections are usually processed within days and reflected in the timestamp.

Ready to compare exchanges?Open the cost calculator