How we rate and review brokers and prop firms
At BrokerCheck, we understand the importance of finding the right brokerage for your needs. Our mission is to make the process of selecting a broker as straightforward and informative as possible. We do this by providing objective reviews and comparisons based on our own testing, ensuring our users receive unbiased and reliable information. Our authors are experts in what they do, and the content of our website proves it.
What we stand for
Objectivity
Our evaluations are completely independent of any financial compensation from brokerages, ensuring our reviews and comparisons are unbiased.
Data-driven
We thoroughly examine the most important aspects of each brokerage.
Continuous improvement
We continuously update our recommendations and refine our evaluation process to ensure our users have access to the most current information.
User-focused
We prioritize the most important criteria for our users, such as low fees, strict regulation, and user-friendly trading platforms.
How we test a broker
Our goal is to help you find the agency that best suits your needs and enable you to make a decision with informed knowledge.
- 1
Check the licence
We investigate the legal backgrounds of brokers, check whether they are overseen by a trusted regulator and whether they offer investor protection. Deposit and withdrawal options: We check the costs, methods, and the time it takes to deposit and withdraw money from the broker.
Main areas of evaluation
- 01
Fees and costs
We gather information on fees directly from the brokers’ websites and check all fees that apply to each asset class. We uncover hidden costs and calculate the fees for buying a position, holding it for a week, and selling it.
- 02
Security and regulation
We investigate the legal backgrounds of brokers, check whether they are overseen by a trusted regulator and whether they offer investor protection. Deposit and withdrawal options: We check the costs, methods, and the time it takes to deposit and withdraw money from the broker.
- 03
Trading platforms
We test each trading platform, focusing on the overall user experience as well as specific features such as order placement, authentication options, and customization.
- 04
Account opening process
We evaluate the ease of opening an account, the types of accounts available, and whether a minimum deposit is required.
- 05
Product offerings
We assess the number of markets they provide access to and the products they offer.
- 06
Customer service
We personally test each customer service channel, trying all available channels at different times.
- 07
Education and resources
We evaluate the quality and structure of the educational content offered by the broker.
How we assess prop firms
BrokerCheck assesses prop firms by how completely and clearly they publish their terms. The assessment draws on public documents: the firm's website, help centre and contract terms, and official company and regulatory registers where they are relevant.
Objectivity
BrokerCheck may receive compensation when readers use certain partner links. Commercial relationships are disclosed separately from the criteria used to assess prop firms, and affiliate compensation, payout totals published by the firms and consumer-review averages are not part of the calculation.
Document-based
We collect terms from firms' websites, help centres and contract terms using AI-assisted research, and consult official company and regulatory registers where they are relevant. Where those leave a question open, we look for agreement between independent review sources. We record each source link and the date it was checked.
Fixed scoring
The same weights and the same scoring rule apply to every firm, so another reader can reach the same result from the same documents.
Warnings stay visible
A relevant official warning about a firm is explained separately and prominently, and a high score never hides it.
Main areas of evaluation
- Trading rules25% of the score. We check that the drawdown formula and what it is measured on are stated, that the daily reset time and timezone are given, that evaluation and funded-account rules are kept apart, that news, weekend and strategy restrictions are listed, and that the consistency calculation and its consequences are explained.
- Fees and refund terms20% of the score. We check for prices and currencies for each programme, whether charges are one-time or recurring, any activation, platform, data or reset charges, when a refund is due and how long it takes, and which add-ons are mandatory or optional.
- Reward and payout terms20% of the score. We check the base profit share against the conditional maximum, when the first request is allowed and what starts that clock, how often later requests can be made, any minimums, methods and charges, and what review conditions and withdrawals do to the drawdown.
- Identity and accountability20% of the score. We check the contracting company and its jurisdiction, matched against an official register, the applicable terms and dispute route, whether the account is clearly described as simulated or live, and the regulatory status of the specific company and service where one applies.
- Platforms and trading conditions10% of the score. We check which platforms each programme offers, the instruments available, leverage or contract limits, commissions and other trading costs, and platform-specific restrictions and how the firm handles changes.
- Support and complaint information5% of the score. We check the contact channels, the stated hours and timezone, the supported languages, the complaint and escalation procedure, and any response commitment or a clear statement that none is promised.
Each criterion earns 1 point when every listed element is explicit and consistent, 0.5 when only some of the elements are stated and 0 when they are missing or contradictory. A clear statement that something is not offered counts as disclosed, while silence does not. A category score is its points divided by five and multiplied by 100, and the overall score is the sum of the category scores multiplied by their weights. A zero records a gap in the documents, not a finding of misconduct. If the contracting company, the applicable terms or the simulated or live status of the account cannot be established, no overall score is given. Programmes are assessed separately, and fees are shown in the currency the firm publishes, without conversion. Whether a programme suits a trading style is shown apart from the score, and a larger account, higher leverage or a higher payout share earns nothing by itself.
What both methodologies share
Both methods keep the criteria public and apply them in the same way to every broker or firm. In the prop firm method, a larger account, higher leverage or a higher payout share earns nothing by itself, and commercial relationships are disclosed separately from the criteria.
Independent of what brokers pay us
Our evaluations are completely independent of any financial compensation from brokerages, ensuring our reviews and comparisons are unbiased.