How We Test and Rate Brokers
Transparent, data-driven, tested with real money. Every score on The Broker Report is earned — never paid for.
Our Testing Process
Every broker review follows the same hands-on workflow. No lazy desk-research filler — we test the parts traders actually care about before we publish a score.
Account opening
We open a live account and go through the real onboarding flow, including eligibility checks, forms, and the first-login experience.
Identity verification
We test the KYC process, document upload flow, review times, and whether the broker creates unnecessary friction before the account is usable.
Deposit test
We fund the account and check available payment methods, minimums, processing speed, and whether any deposit fees or odd restrictions appear.
Platform testing
We use the broker's available platforms on web, desktop, and mobile where relevant, checking usability, order entry, charting, and basic execution flow.
Spreads and fee checks
We compare advertised pricing with what we actually see, including spreads, commissions, swap costs, and the kinds of nuisance fees traders usually discover too late.
Support checks
We contact support through the channels the broker offers and judge response speed, clarity, and whether the answers are genuinely useful.
Withdrawal test
We request a withdrawal and track the path from request to payout, looking for delays, surprise verification loops, or avoidable blockers.
Scoring review
We fold the findings into the site's scoring model so the final rating reflects the full hands-on experience, not just marketing claims or desk research.
Scoring Categories
Not all factors are equal. Trading costs and regulation matter more than education — and our weights reflect that.
How we calculate the overall score: The final score is a weighted average across all 8 categories. A broker scoring 9/10 on Regulation (22% weight) contributes 1.98 points. A 9/10 on Education (5% weight) contributes only 0.45. This ensures the score reflects what actually impacts your trading experience and safety.
50+ Data Points Per Broker
We collect and verify over 50 individual data points for every broker we review. Here's what we track.
Fees
12 points- • EUR/USD spread
- • GBP/USD spread
- • Commission per lot
- • Swap long
- • Swap short
- • Inactivity fee
- • Withdrawal fee
- • Deposit fee
- • Conversion fee
- • Overnight fee
- • Minimum trade size
- • Typical slippage
Regulation
8 points- • Primary license
- • Secondary licenses
- • Tier classification
- • Segregated accounts
- • Compensation scheme
- • Negative balance protection
- • Regulatory history
- • Public company
Platforms
10 points- • Web trading
- • Desktop app
- • Mobile app (iOS)
- • Mobile app (Android)
- • MT4 support
- • MT5 support
- • cTrader support
- • Proprietary platform
- • Charting tools
- • Execution speed
Account & Support
10 points- • Account types
- • Demo account
- • Islamic account
- • Minimum deposit
- • Leverage options
- • Live chat hours
- • Phone support
- • Email response time
- • Languages supported
- • Knowledge base quality
Products & Education
12 points- • Forex pairs count
- • Stock CFDs
- • Index CFDs
- • Commodity CFDs
- • Crypto assets
- • ETFs
- • Video tutorials
- • Webinars
- • Trading guides
- • Market analysis
- • Economic calendar
- • Research tools
Knockout Criteria
Before we even start scoring, a broker must meet these non-negotiable requirements. Fail any one and we won't review them.
At least one Tier 1 or Tier 2 regulatory license
Minimum 2 years of operating history
No unresolved regulatory actions or sanctions
Functional withdrawal process (verified with real money)
Working customer support across multiple channels
How We Stay Independent
Trust is the foundation of everything we do. Here's how we protect it.
Affiliate revenue disclosed
We may earn commissions from some brokers, but those relationships do not change the scoring model, ranking logic, or review verdicts.
No pay-for-play
Brokers cannot buy a higher score, a softer verdict, or better placement. If the data is weak, the score stays weak.
Editorial and commercial separation
Research, testing, and scoring are handled separately from partnership or monetization decisions.
Evidence before opinion
We attach evidence labels to claims and keep opinion separate from facts. Strong copy is not a substitute for proof.
Unknowns stay visible
If we cannot verify a fee, timing, entity detail, or platform claim safely, we mark it Unknown instead of guessing.
Corrections and changelog
Meaningful methodology changes are logged publicly, and factual errors are corrected when the evidence supports a fix.
Update Frequency
A review is only useful if it's up to date. Here's how often we check and update our data.
Evidence Labels, Unknowns Policy, and Glossary
This is the trust layer behind every review. We separate verified facts from broker claims, independent third-party records, and genuine unknowns so the rating can be inspected instead of simply trusted on vibes.
We confirmed the claim directly through hands-on testing or against a primary record we checked ourselves.
Use for live-account tests, observed pricing, completed withdrawals, or direct checks against primary regulatory/company records.
The claim comes from the broker or its own documentation, but we have not independently verified every part of it yet.
Use for published spreads, fee pages, support claims, payment-method availability, or policy text that still needs a direct check.
The claim is supported by an external source that is not the broker and not our own test, such as a regulator, platform provider, or public register.
Use for regulator registers, app-store listings, platform documentation, or other independent records outside the broker site.
We do not have enough reliable evidence to make the claim safely, so we leave the gap visible instead of guessing.
Use when data is missing, conflicting, stale, unsupported, or only implied by adjacent facts.
How the labels work in practice
Observed EUR/USD average spread during live testing, a completed Skrill withdrawal, or a regulatory record we checked directly.
Published minimum spread, payment-method support page, fee schedule, or support claim that still needs an independent check.
FCA register entry, CySEC license record, App Store listing, or platform documentation from MetaTrader/cTrader.
A method appears in metadata, but timing is missing, conflicting, or only implied by adjacent claims.
Fact vs. judgment vs. unknown
- Facts stay tied to evidence labels and source notes.
- Judgments are our interpretation of those facts — for example whether customer support was actually helpful.
- Unknowns remain visible when the repo or the broker does not give us enough proof.
- No filling gaps with hope. If we cannot verify a claim safely, we do not upgrade it by assumption.
Fact
A statement we can tie to a checked source, a completed test, or a documented external record.
Judgment
Our editorial interpretation of the facts — for example whether a support experience was strong, average, or weak.
Unknown
A material detail we could not safely verify yet. We keep the gap visible instead of filling it with assumptions.
Knockout criteria
Minimum trust requirements a broker must clear before it is eligible for a scored review at all.
Weighted score
The final rating produced by multiplying each category score by its published weight and summing the result.
Freshness
How recently a claim was checked. Fees, regulation, and platforms age at different speeds, so we re-check them on different cadences.
Source priority
We prefer primary records first, then external independent records, then broker-controlled disclosures. If none of those are strong enough, the claim stays Unknown until we can verify it properly.
Primary records we prioritize
- FCA Registerhttps://register.fca.org.uk/
Used for UK-authorized firms and permission checks.
- CySEC Registerhttps://www.cysec.gov.cy/en-GB/entities/investment-firms/cypriot/71702/
Used for Cyprus-based regulated entities and public-license checks.
- ASIC Professional Registershttps://connectonline.asic.gov.au/
Used for Australian company and AFSL verification.
Broker-controlled disclosures
- XM legal documentshttps://www.xm.com/legal-documents
Useful for published entity, policy, and terms disclosures, but still treated as Broker-stated until cross-checked.
- Exness contract specificationshttps://www.exness.com/trading/specifications/
Published spreads, swaps, and trading conditions help frame testing, but do not replace verification.
Independent third-party checks
- DFSA Public Registerhttps://www.dfsa.ae/public-register
External authority record for DIFC firms.
- ADGM Public Registershttps://www.adgm.com/public-registers
External authority record for Abu Dhabi Global Market firms.
- FSCA Searchhttps://www.fsca.co.za/Fais/Search_FSP.htm
Independent public lookup for South African FSP status.
How We Compare
Most broker review sites rely on desk research and outdated info. We do things differently.
| The Broker Report | Industry Average | |
|---|---|---|
| Data points per broker | 50+ | 15–20 |
| Testing method | Real money | Mostly desk research |
| Update frequency | Monthly+ | Annual |
| Independence | Fully independent | Often pay-for-play |
Live Score Example — XM
Here's exactly how we calculate XM's overall score of 8.5/10. Every number comes from real testing data — nothing is made up.
| Category | Score (0–10) | Weight | Contribution |
|---|---|---|---|
| 🛡️ Regulation & Safety | 9.0 | 22% | 1.98 |
| 💰 Trading Costs | 8.0 | 22% | 1.76 |
| 🖥️ Platforms & Tools | 8.5 | 15% | 1.28 |
| 🏦 Deposit & Withdrawal | 8.5 | 13% | 1.11 |
| 💬 Customer Service | 8.0 | 8% | 0.64 |
| 📊 Product Range | 8.0 | 8% | 0.64 |
| 📝 Account Opening | 8.5 | 7% | 0.60 |
| 🎓 Education | 9.5 | 5% | 0.48 |
| Overall Score | 8.49 → 8.5/10 | ||
How to read this: XM scores 9.0 for Regulation — multiplied by its 22% weight, that contributes 1.98 points. Education scores highest at 9.5, but its 5% weight means it only adds 0.48. The sum of all weighted contributions gives the final score of 8.5/10.
Our Sources
We don't take brokers' word for it. Every regulatory claim is verified against official government databases.
Methodology FAQ
Straight answers to the questions we get asked most about our review process.
Can brokers pay for higher scores?
How often do you update reviews?
Do you use real money for testing?
What if a broker's score changes?
How do you handle affiliate relationships?
Can users report inaccuracies?
How many people test each broker?
Methodology Changelog
Our methodology evolves. Here's what changed and when.
Major Methodology Overhaul
Expanded to 50+ data points across 8 categories. Added tier-based regulatory classification. Redesigned scoring weights — Regulation and Trading Costs now equally weighted at 22%. Added knockout criteria, live scoring examples, and regulatory source verification.
Initial Methodology
Launched with 8 scoring categories, 30 data points, and weighted scoring model. Established 8-step testing process with real-money verification.
Ready to Find the Right Broker?
Now that you know how we test, explore our reviews and find the broker that fits your trading style.