The same independent principles as every IndexFair rating, applied to FCA-registered crypto exchanges — with a market-specific aspect set and the regulatory regime stated plainly.
Every IndexFair score is a single number from 0 to 10, attached to one exchange, in one country. It is the deterministic output of a versioned formula: given the same inputs and the same methodology version, the same number reproduces. Each score carries a ± confidence interval and a percentile against its market; below a minimum effective sample we withhold the number rather than publish one at low confidence.
A crypto-exchange score is a three-block composite — regulatory facts, aggregated user experience, and operational signals:
| Block | Composite weight | What it captures |
|---|---|---|
Block ATrust & Compliance | 35% | Regulatory facts: the brand’s FCA cryptoasset registration status, verified against the FCA register. |
Block BUser Experience | 40% | Aggregated user-review signal across the nine exchange aspects below, with fake-review filtering, time decay, and Bayesian confidence applied. |
Block COperational & Corporate | 25% | Observable operational signals: cross-source divergence, support responsiveness, and complaint-resolution patterns. |
Block A is a regulatory fact, not an opinion: whether the brand is on the FCA cryptoasset register. The UK regime is in transition — the register today operates under the Money Laundering Regulations (MLR); the FSMA financial-promotions regime activates 25 Oct 2027. IndexFair treats MLR-registered and FSMA-authorised brands as equivalent Block A green signals. The regime is surfaced as context on each exchange page, not turned into a tier ranking.
Block B aggregates genuine user reviews across nine exchange aspects. The weights below are the per-aspect composition of the User Experience block:
| Aspect | Weight | What it measures |
|---|---|---|
| Fiat payouts | 18% | Reliability and speed of withdrawing fiat back to a bank — completion rate, delays, and frozen-withdrawal reports. |
| Security track record | 18% | History of hacks, fund losses, and how the exchange handled them. Review-derived at launch; on-chain proof-of-reserves is a planned input, not yet wired. |
| Fees transparency | 12% | Whether trading, spread, and withdrawal fees are disclosed up front and match what users are actually charged. |
| Support quality | 12% | Response latency and resolution rate for account, withdrawal, and verification issues. |
| KYC friction | 10% | Proportionality and reliability of identity verification — stuck or repeated KYC, document rejections, account lockouts. |
| Fiat ramps | 8% | Range and reliability of deposit and withdrawal methods (bank transfer, card, local rails) available in the user’s country. |
| Asset breadth | 7% | Range of tradable assets and pairs relative to what users report wanting. |
| Regulatory compliance | 10% | User-reported conduct consistent with the exchange’s regulatory obligations — distinct from the Block A registration check above. |
| Platform UX | 5% | Onboarding friction, app and web reliability, and how the trading interface feels to use. |
Every score is built from genuine user reviews and observed facts. The mix below is the backbone of our coverage, not an exhaustive list — we deliberately don't publish every source we read: a score whose full input list is public is a score that can be flooded to order.
Genuine user reports of deposits, withdrawals, verification, and support — read for the substance of each report, never the headline star rating.
The brand’s registration status, verified directly against the regulator — the factual backbone of Block A.
On-chain reserve and solvency evidence is a planned input for the security track record; it is not yet wired into the score.
This page covers the crypto exchange leaf. Wallet and DeFi ratings follow the same principles with their own aspect sets and will be documented here as those leaves go live.