How we rank — and how we keep commission out of it
Every Clarity Score uses the same eight criteria and weights. The category marks are our editorial assessments; the calculation below turns them into one score out of 100.
The one rule that matters
Affiliate commission is weighted 0%. We earn money when you open an account through our links, and that has no bearing on a platform's score or its position in our rankings. We publish each platform's commission band on its review page. See how we make money.
Eight weighted criteria (0–100)
Each category receives an editorial mark from 0 to 100. We multiply each mark by its published weight, add the eight contributions, and round the total once to the nearest whole number. No category is dropped or given a different weight for an individual broker.
Category marks involve judgement about the available research; they are not an automatic points-per-feature checklist. An affiliate agreement, commission rate or sponsored placement adds no points.
Regulation & safety
25%Tier-1 licensing (FCA, ASIC, SEC and equivalents), segregation of client funds, investor compensation schemes and negative-balance protection.
Fees & all-in cost
20%All-in cost: spreads, commissions, swap/overnight charges, currency conversion, inactivity and withdrawal fees — modelled on realistic usage.
Platform & app quality
15%Web, desktop and mobile experience: usability, reliability, charting, order types and risk tools. Assessed from platform documentation, feature disclosures and publicly available information.
Asset coverage
10%Breadth and depth across the asset classes a platform claims to serve.
Deposits & withdrawals
10%Deposit/withdrawal methods, measured or reported speed, and friction (verification, minimums, fees).
Reputation & complaints
8%Regulator actions and warnings, complaint volume and severity, and how complaints are resolved.
Customer support
7%Channels, hours and published/reported response standards.
Transparency
5%Clear fee schedules, plain terms, and honest marketing. Hidden fees and misleading promotions lower this score.
What we deliberately separate
Research-based, clearly labelled
Broker data is research-based and checked against public broker disclosures and regulator registers where available. Broker entities, licence status, costs, products and availability can change. Users must verify directly with the broker and official regulator before depositing.
We do not claim live account testing unless we state it explicitly. Where a licence has not yet been confirmed on the regulator's own register, we mark it as still to be verified rather than implying it is confirmed.
Evidence gaps stay explicit
Unavailable or untested information is not proof of good service or an absence of complaints. We identify those limitations in our research. The existing model has no automatic missing-evidence deduction or replacement mark; any editorial score change needs its own research and explanation.
Different comparisons answer different questions
The Clarity Score stays the same across profiles and comparisons. Specialist lists can sort by a category or a separate measure, such as fees, beginner fit or comparable withdrawal timing. The quiz combines your preferences into a separate fit score. App, beginner and advanced ratings and the 1–5 cost indicator are not additional weights in the Clarity Score.
Risk level is a label, not a penalty
A CFD broker isn't scored lower for being a CFD broker — it's tagged higher risk. We flag risk prominently so you can weigh it, rather than hiding it inside a number.
Sponsored ≠ ranked
Paid placements are always labelled Sponsored and sit outside the ranked results. We never sell a position in the ranking.
We update and log changes
Every review shows a last-reviewed date. We re-check platforms on a regular cadence and correct errors publicly. Spotted something wrong? Tell us.
The current state of that work, computed live from our licence-evidence log: 115 licence records tracked — 105 read first-hand on an official register, 6 corrected after a register check (logged publicly), 4 still pending verification — labelled as such, never implied verified.
More about who we are and what we check: About Clarytrade →
Methodology previously updated: July 2026. Documentation clarified 23 October 2026; weights and scores unchanged.
Research data reuse terms — version 1
Clarytrade's original research datasets are free to cite and reuse with attribution to Clarytrade (clarytrade.com). Cite the study or snapshot page and retain its date and source references so readers can understand what was checked and when.
This permission covers Clarytrade's original data compilations and annotations. Quoted broker text, regulator documents, names and logos remain subject to their respective owners' rights. The FCA warnings and ESMA register datasets use the separate source licences identified on their pages.
Reuse terms version 1, published 20 September 2026.