Research methodology

Scope of evidence

We use only information a reader could obtain themselves: operator websites, legal documents, public registers, published fee schedules and openly available interface material. We do not fund accounts, and we do not present private testing as public fact.

The six assessment areas

• Transparency — entity, jurisdiction, registration, accessibility of legal documents.
• Cost clarity — whether total cost of ownership can be reconstructed publicly.
• Execution information — order handling, gap treatment, protections, incident reporting.
• Tooling — portfolio risk visibility, sizing tools, exportable history.
• Support paths — published channels, complaints procedure, external escalation.
• Education — whether material foregrounds risk and cost or urgency and profit.

Scoring

Each area is scored from 1 to 5 for verifiability and internal consistency. The headline score is the mean of the six areas, rounded to one decimal. A missing document lowers a score; it is never assumed to be favourable or unfavourable in substance.

What the score is not

It is not a safety rating, a profitability estimate, a compliance opinion or a recommendation. Two platforms with identical scores may suit entirely different readers, or neither.

Review cadence

Platform pages are re-checked periodically and whenever public documentation visibly changes. Each conclusion is dated. See the framework applied in full in our LW Management review or read the reader-facing version in how to evaluate a trading platform.