How we work

Sourcing

Factual claims about rules, regulations, official positions and documented events are checked against a primary source — the regulator, the tax authority, the court record, the agency report — rather than against another article. Where a primary source exists and is public, we link it, and the link goes to the source rather than to coverage of it.

Where no primary source exists, we say what the claim rests on. Where the honest answer is that nobody knows, we write that instead of producing an authoritative-sounding guess. Several pages here end in uncertainty on purpose.

Why every page has a checked date

Regulatory positions, fee schedules and platform policies change. A page that was correct in August 2026 can be wrong by the time you read it, and a page that does not tell you when it was written invites you to treat stale information as current.

So each page carries the month its claims were verified, and where a rule is likely to move we say so and point at the source you should check instead of us. We would rather send a reader to a regulator's website than be the last word on something we cannot keep current.

Numbers

We do not invent figures, and we do not print precise-sounding numbers we cannot source. Where a platform's fees, limits or processing times are involved, we describe the shape and tell you to read the current schedule, because writing a specific number into a page like this guarantees it will eventually be wrong on a page people budget against.

We also avoid false precision about our own experience. You will not find timestamped claims of testing something at a particular minute, or screenshots of account balances, because those are the easiest form of fabricated authority and the hardest for a reader to check.

What software does here, and what it does not

Drafting on this site is assisted by software, including language models. Saying so is more useful than the alternative, which is pretending otherwise while readers guess.

What that assistance does not extend to: no factual claim is published because software produced it. Regulatory positions, figures, dates and documented events on this site were checked against the primary sources linked on each page, and the three entries already on the corrections page are corrections to exactly this class of error, caught before publication. Where a check could not be completed, the page says the claim is uncertain rather than smoothing it over.

Page structure, navigation, breadcrumbs and structured data are generated by a build script so that they are consistent. The body of every article is written for that article.

What we will not publish

• Price predictions or forecasts, ours or anyone else's, presented as information.
• An accusation that a named company is a fraud. We describe structures and publish checks so readers can evaluate a specific platform themselves. We are not in a position to make that finding about a business, and a site that does it lightly is a liability to the people reading it.
• Promises of outcomes — returns, safety, or recovery of lost funds.
• Fabricated experience. No invented credentials, no manufactured test results, no anecdotes that did not happen.
• Sponsored content of any kind. See the disclosure page.

Corrections

Errors are corrected on the page and logged on the corrections page with the date and what changed. We do not quietly edit a claim and leave the page looking as though it always said that. If a correction changes what a reader would have concluded, it is logged whether or not anyone noticed.

Our commercial interest, and what we do about it

This site earns a promotion service fee when someone registers through the single referral link on the one page that carries it. That creates an obvious incentive, disclosed in the footer of every page and in full on the disclosure page.

The editorial answer to it is not a claim of neutrality, which nobody should accept. It is that the material arguing against opening an account is given equal prominence: the case for not doing this sits in the same ledger on the home page as everything else, the self-check can and does return "not right now", and the page on criticism of the industry concludes that several criticisms are correct — including the one about people who write about crypto being paid by it.

A reader who leaves this site having decided not to buy anything has been served properly. That is the standard we are trying to hold.