Introduction
Every comparison on this site is based on verifiable public data. This page explains where our numbers come from, how often we refresh them, and how we protect our independence.
Which exchanges are included in the comparison?
Not every place where you can buy crypto appears here. We assessed 98 platforms; twelve meet all five requirements below and are therefore included in the comparison. The rest failed on at least one point.
| Requirement | What that means |
|---|---|
| 1. A trading platform, not a broker | There must be an order book in which users trade with each other. If a firm executes your order against its own liquidity provider — under MiCAR this is called execution outside a trading platform — then you are trading against the house. In that case there is no maker and no taker, and so nothing to calculate. |
| 2. A public, dated fee schedule | Maker and taker fees per volume tier, published on the platform's own site. If the fee is hidden in the spread, there is nothing to check. |
| 3. Accessible from the EU, and authorised | MiCAR, MiFID II or an equivalent regime, with a register number. A brand name tells you nothing; what matters is the legal entity that holds your money. |
| 4. Euros in and euros out | SEPA or iDEAL. A platform you can only enter with stablecoins cannot fairly be compared with a platform where you simply deposit euros. |
| 5. Enough volume for a price to mean anything | In thin order books a fee of 0.10% says little, because slippage overshadows the fee. You would then be measuring the wrong cost. |
An example: Robinhood
The question that comes up most often is why a well-known name is missing. Robinhood is the clearest case of this, and the answer is not what most people expect.
Robinhood Europe, UAB is indeed authorised: the Bank of Lithuania supervises it, both as a financial intermediary (LB002288) and as a crypto-asset provider under MiCAR (LB002294). Regulation is therefore not the reason. Its own EU user agreement shows where it does come unstuck: orders are executed outside a trading platform, against a liquidity provider. No order book, no maker/taker tiers, and the fee is built into the price you are given. To give Robinhood a place here I would have to estimate that spread — and an estimate that looks like a calculation is precisely what this site does not do.
The fact that Robinhood owns Bitstamp, and that Bitstamp does appear here, is not a contradiction: Bitstamp runs an order book with public tiers. The criterion concerns the product, not the owner.
Do you think a platform is wrongly missing here? Send the fee schedule or the register number via the contact details and it will be reviewed again.
What we collect
Per exchange we track five categories: licences and regulation (MiCA, MiFID II, PSD2/EMI, fines), costs (maker/taker fees, tiers, spreads), yield (base and max APY, eligible assets), transparency (Proof of Reserves: frequency, technology, coverage) and products (spot, perpetuals, stocks, fiat rails).
Our sources
Licences
We use the public ESMA CASP register, plus the registers of national supervisors such as DNB, AFM, MFSA, CySEC, FCMC, CSSF, BaFin and ATVP.
Fines and enforcement
We check official publications from DNB and other supervisors.
Fees
We use the public fee schedules of each exchange.
Spreads
We measure spreads via public APIs and 24-hour averages, not single snapshots.
Yield
We use exchange documentation and APIs where available, and verify manually where needed.
Proof of Reserves
We check the published PoR reports of each exchange.
Every comparison table carries a timestamp with its last verification date.
Update cycle
| Data | Frequency |
|---|---|
| Spot prices | Real-time |
| Perpetuals spreads | Every 5 minutes (24h averaged) |
| Base APY / yield | Weekly |
| Fee schedules | Monthly |
| PoR status | Weekly |
| Licence status | On change (ESMA auto-check) |
| Articles | Quarterly review |
How we calculate "true cost"
Effective cost = trading fees + spread − yield on collateral − lending yield. See True Cost of Trading. In the calculator all exchanges are compared at the same fee tier and volume.
Independence and business model
ExchangeFacts receives no compensation when you open an account through a link. Any benefit or discount is passed on to you. Rankings follow exclusively from the data above and the formula is public. Sponsored placements do not exist — and if that ever changes, they will be explicitly labelled.
The exchange score
Every exchange receives a 1-10 score, calculated entirely from the same data fields as the filters — never entered manually. The score is the weighted sum of five pillars:
| Pillar | Weight | Why |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Regulation & oversight | 25% | The most important trust signal for EU visitors |
| 2. Security of funds | 25% | Proof of Reserves + hack history |
| 3. Product range | 20% | Breadth of what you can trade |
| 4. Costs | 20% | Direct impact on the user |
| 5. Yield & capital efficiency | 10% | Differentiating but niche |
Points per pillar (v1.6)
| 1. Regulation & oversight (25% weight) | Points |
|---|---|
| MiCAR licence (EU) | +3 |
| MiFID II authorisation (EU) | +4 |
| PSD2 / EMI (EU payments) | +1 |
| Other licences: VARA, FCA, MAS, FSA Japan, BitLicense, SEC broker-dealer | +1 each, max +2 |
| Publicly listed | +1 |
| No licence at all | 0 |
| Maximum | 10 |
International regulation score
Outside the EU we use a separate regulation score with two components. Licensing measures the quality, direct applicability and international coverage of active authorisations (0–6). The conduct record measures formal fines, bans and criminal resolutions (0–4). An exchange can therefore retain valid licences while losing points for serious or repeated regulatory misconduct. Since v1.6 licences carry fixed weights: CFTC +4 · FinCEN MSB +2 · JFSA (Japan) +2 · VARA (Dubai) +1 · public listing +1, capped at 6. A registration that only covers a separate entity does not count (such as Binance’s MSB, which covers Binance.US only).
| International regulation score | Points |
|---|---|
| Licences: CFTC +4 · MSB +2 · JFSA +2 · VARA +1 · listing +1 | 0–6 |
| Registration only, provisional approval, partner access or expired authorisation | 0 for that authorisation |
| Conduct record: starting point without material enforcement | 4 |
| Criminal guilty plea by the exchange/operator for AML, sanctions or unlicensed services | −4 |
| Major AML or sanctions resolution with an independent monitor or amount of at least $100m | −2 |
| Formal fine or ban for unlicensed services or deficient controls | −0.5 per jurisdiction; max −2 |
| Repeated formal warning in the same market | −0.5 |
| Dismissed/withdrawn case or duplicate measure concerning the same conduct | no extra deduction |
| Total | 0–10 |
| Exchange | Licences /6 | Conduct /4 | Total /10 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Crypto.com | 6 | 3 | 9 |
| Coinbase | 6 | 2 | 8 |
| Kraken | 6 | 2 | 8 |
| Gemini | 6 | 2 | 8 |
| Backpack | 3 | 4 | 7 |
| Deribit | 1 | 4 | 5 |
| OKX | 5 | 0 | 5 |
| Binance | 3 | 0 | 3 |
| Bybit | 0 | 1 | 1 |
Compliance penalty
Since v1.6 a fixed deduction is applied to the displayed score, per entity and independent of region: −1.0 for a criminal guilty plea or conviction of the operator (money laundering, sanctions or unlicensed operation — Binance 2023, OKX’s international entity 2025) and −0.5 for repeated formal regulator warnings or bans (Bybit’s international entity). Civil settlements carry no deduction. EU entities with their own licence and a clean record (OKX EU, Bybit EU) do not inherit the deduction of their international sister entity.
| 2. Security of funds (25% weight) | Points |
|---|---|
| Proof of Reserves: daily or more frequent | +5 |
| Proof of Reserves: periodic (monthly, quarterly or annually audited) | +3 |
| No PoR | +1 |
| Never lost client funds — fully reimbursed losses do not count as lost; prolonged freezes of client funds do | +3 |
| Publicly listed | +2 |
| Maximum | 10 |
| 3. Product range (20% weight) | Points |
|---|---|
| Spot crypto | +1 |
| Perpetuals | +1 |
| Expiry futures | +1 |
| Options | +1 |
| Real stocks (security entitlement) | +2 |
| Wrapper stocks (tokenized) | +1 |
| Stock perpetuals | +1 |
| Prediction markets | +1 |
| Spot forex / EUR pairs | +1 |
| 4. Costs (20% weight) — average of maker and taker fee, lowest non-VIP tier | Points |
|---|---|
| ≤ 0.05% | 10 |
| 0.05% – 0.10% | 8 |
| 0.10% – 0.15% | 6 |
| 0.15% – 0.20% | 4 |
| 0.20% – 0.30% | 2 |
| > 0.30% | 0 |
| 5. Yield & capital efficiency (10% weight) | Points |
|---|---|
| Yield on collateral during perp trading | +5 |
| Lending/staking possible while trading | +3 |
| Yield on idle stablecoins | +2 |
Display scale
- Formula: display score = 4 + 0.6 × raw score, rounded to 1 decimal.
- Range: the scale runs from 4.0 (raw 0) to 10.0 (raw 10) — the raw formula is deliberately strict; rescaling makes it a recognisable consumer score.
- Fair: rescaling is linear and identical for every exchange; order and relative differences do not change.
- Sorting: uses the unrounded raw score. Ties go to the highest security pillar, then regulation.
Transparency. Every score on the site carries an ⓘ breakdown per pillar. Scores are never for sale: sponsored placements get an "Ad" label but keep their own calculated score. Not measured: UX, customer service, liquidity/volume and per-country availability (that is a filter, not a quality judgement).
Re-scoring. Fully every quarter, and immediately upon: a hack, loss or withdrawal of a licence, a fine or warning from an EU regulator, or a material fee change.
Changelog. v1.6 (23 August 2026): security pillar redistributed (PoR +5/+3/+1, never lost client funds +3, public listing +2; non-custodial removed); fixed licence weights in the international regulation score; compliance penalty on the displayed score (−1.0 criminal, −0.5 repeated warnings). v1.5 (August 2026): expanded the international regulation score with the conduct record; criminal resolutions, formal bans and repeated enforcement are now deducted. v1.4 (August 2026): added a separate international regulation score based on US spot, US futures, Dubai, Japan and public listing. v1.3 (July 2026): separate realtime/on-chain PoR tier removed; the top tier is now "daily or more frequent" (+4). v1.2: daily attestation tier added. v1.1: display scale added; monthly PoR from +2.5 to +3. v1.0: first version.
Report an error
Spotted an outdated number? Contact us — corrections are usually processed within days and reflected in the timestamp.