Everything we publish follows the same principles, whether it is a news item, a buyer guide or a provider review.
Sourcing
Factual claims are traced to primary sources (official documentation, on-chain data, regulators, audit reports and company statements) and dated so you know how current they are. Fees, licence status, supported chains and other figures that change are shown with the date we checked them. Reputable crypto press is used for events and context, never as the only source for a number.
How we assess providers
Providers are assessed against published criteria before any verdict:
- Track record: verifiable work in production, named clients and how long the company has operated.
- Transparency: what the company documents publicly, including team, ownership and terms.
- Security practices: audits, incident history, bug bounties and how past problems were handled.
- Pricing clarity: whether fees are published and easy to compare.
- Jurisdiction coverage: licences and registrations checked on the regulator’s own register for the markets a provider serves.
Each category guide adds criteria specific to that supplier type, and we describe the method before any verdict.
What we do not claim
We do not run hands-on tests unless a guide says so, invent client results or publish ratings we cannot support. An audit, licence or listing tells you something specific; we explain what, and what it does not prove.
Independence and disclosure
We take no placement fees. Affiliate links, where present, are labelled and never change an assessment. Companies cannot pay to be included or to change what we write about them.
Corrections
Corrections are made openly. Send the article link, the point at issue and a source to [email protected]. When we update a guide, its “facts checked” date changes.
Not financial advice
Our content is educational. Cryptoassets are volatile and risky; always do your own research and consider a licensed professional before acting.