Scoring rules
Each indicator is answered yes, partial, no or not applicable. A yes requires a verifiable source, otherwise the answer becomes no. A partial is worth half the points and must be justified. Not-applicable indicators are removed from the denominator and the score is scaled to 100, which allows platforms of different kinds to be compared.
Levels of proof
A: official registry, court decision, procedural act or publication by a public authority. C: document produced by the company itself. T: named third-party source, or the author's personal verification on their own investor account.
When information comes from an unconfirmed claim, it is published as such, attributed to its author and dated, never presented as an established fact.
The four indicators tested on a real account
Four indicators can only be verified by using the platform: the return actually received, the observed withdrawal times, the fees actually charged and the sign-up process. No public source exists for these points. They therefore rely on the author's own findings, and the record states this explicitly next to each answer concerned. For all other indicators, a positive answer without a public source cannot be published.
Reading scale
The final score places the platform in one of the six bands below. The scale qualifies the state of the file, never the honesty of individuals.
| Score | Published verdict |
|---|
| 85 à 100 | Complete file, no open issues |
| 70 à 84 | Solid file, minor unresolved points |
| 55 à 69 | Documented grey areas |
| 40 à 54 | Documented failures on structural points |
| 25 à 39 | File incompatible with informed investment |
| 0 à 24 | Proven failure |
Red flags
A red flag does not remove a few points, it caps the maximum reachable score. If several flags are active, the lowest cap applies. Each flag requires a level-A source.
Withdrawals blocked and unresolved for over 90 days
plafond 35
Active warning or blacklisting by a regulator
plafond 40
Collective proceedings or insolvency of a key group entity
plafond 45
Company officer implicated: unexplained multiple identity, or conviction for a financial offence
plafond 45
Unidentifiable offshore operating entity, or separate from the soliciting entity
plafond 50
Documented gap between public communication and verifiable reality
plafond 60
Mandatory accounts never filed
plafond 60
Right of reply
Any rated company, as well as any person named, has a permanent right of reply. It may at any time send links, documents or clarifications on the points where the record flags missing information, an absent source or data it considers inaccurate.
Elements received are verified then incorporated. If a document fills a gap, the indicator concerned is re-scored and the control date updated. If a factual element is wrong, it is corrected. Every change remains visible in the record's history, with the previous value, its source and its control date.
Indicator 8.1 measures the company's responsiveness when asked substantive questions: a documented reply within fifteen days earns the points, silence or a generic reply does not. A refusal to reply triggers no cap.
Conflicts of interest
Any personal holding or commercial partnership with a rated platform is disclosed on its record, without exception, including when that partnership concerns a medium other than this site.
No affiliate links are used. No platform can buy its rating, have it changed or have it removed. A company that disputes a factual element may request a correction, which is applied only if the element is indeed wrong and remains visible in the history.
Review
Each platform is re-assessed once a year. A major event, a regulator warning, blocked withdrawals, legal proceedings, insolvency, triggers an immediate exceptional review flagged as such. All past assessments remain viewable.
La grille
1. Structure et transparence juridique 20 pts
1.1 The legal entity is identifiable in a searchable public registry: name, number, registered office, incorporation date
4 pts
Where to check: Infogreffe, Zefix, Companies House, ariregister, local registry · Level of proof A
1.2 Beneficial owners and shareholding are accessible, with no offshore-company screen
4 pts
Where to check: Beneficial-owners registry, articles of association, Kbis · Level of proof A
1.3 The accounts for the last closed financial year are filed within the legal deadline
4 pts
Where to check: Commercial registry, court registry · Level of proof A
1.4 The accounts are certified by a named auditor, without reservation and without unexplained auditor change
4 pts
Where to check: Audit report, registry · Level of proof A
1.5 Continuity of the entity over 3 years: no unexplained change of name, office, purpose or officers, no shell-company origin
4 pts
Where to check: Registry history, official gazette · Level of proof A
2. Regulation, conformite et exposition judiciaire 20 pts
2.1 An authorisation or registration is in force, verified on the regulator's own registry and not on the platform's website
4 pts
Where to check: AMF/ORIAS, ESMA, FINMA, FCA registers, national registry · Level of proof A
2.2 The scope of the authorisation actually covers the activity carried out and the product sold
3 pts
Where to check: Registry record compared with the commercial offer · Level of proof A
2.3 No proceedings brought by a public or judicial authority over 5 years: regulator warning, blacklisting, action by a public body, referral to a prosecutor
4 pts
Where to check: Regulators' registers and press releases, judicial portals, public-authority publications · Level of proof A
2.4 The entity that collects the funds is the same as the one that communicates, and it is in a cooperative jurisdiction
3 pts
Where to check: T&Cs, contract, bank details, legal notice · Level of proof A
2.5 No significant litigation, insolvency proceedings or ongoing sanction targeting the entity or a group entity
3 pts
Where to check: Judicial portals, insolvency registers · Level of proof A
2.6 No officer is personally implicated in proceedings related to the platform's activity
3 pts
Where to check: Procedural acts, judicial portals, public-authority publications · Level of proof A
3. Securite des fonds et des actifs 15 pts
3.1 Client funds are segregated with an authorised third party, with the mechanism described contractually
4 pts
Where to check: T&Cs, framework contract, name of the payment institution · Level of proof C
3.2 The underlying asset exists and is independently verifiable: title deed, notarial deed, custody statement, on-chain proof of reserve
4 pts
Where to check: Land registry, property register, block explorer, deposit certificate · Level of proof A
3.3 No security incident, hack, misappropriation or uncompensated loss of funds in the history
4 pts
Where to check: Press, forums, company communications · Level of proof A
3.4 On-chain products: contracts audited by a named firm, public report, fixed vulnerabilities
3 pts
Where to check: Published audit report, contract address · Level of proof C
4. Track record verifiable 15 pts
4.1 More than 3 years of actual activity, with at least one full cycle completed
4 pts
Where to check: Registry, project history · Level of proof A
4.2 Performance statistics are published, dated and exhaustive: all projects, not a selection
4 pts
Where to check: Statistics page, annual report · Level of proof C
4.3 The default or delay rate recalculated from matured projects matches the one displayed, with a gap below 2 points
4 pts
Where to check: Manual recalculation project by project · Level of proof A
4.4 The return actually received matches the advertised return
3 pts
Where to check: Investor statements, cross-checked testimonies, personal test · Level of proof T
5. Liquidite et sortie 10 pts
5.1 An early exit exists and actually works: transactions observable over the last 3 months
4 pts
Where to check: Secondary market, volumes, on-chain · Level of proof A
5.2 The observed withdrawal times match the announced times
3 pts
Where to check: Personal test, cross-checked testimonies · Level of proof T
5.3 No withdrawal freeze, blocking or suspension of the secondary market in the history
3 pts
Where to check: Communications, forums, press · Level of proof A
6. Qualite de l'information 10 pts
6.1 A complete and dated regulatory information document exists per product or per project
4 pts
Where to check: KID, prospectus, information memorandum · Level of proof C
6.2 Risks are set out explicitly, including total loss, without being drowned in marketing
3 pts
Where to check: Product pages, pre-contractual documents · Level of proof C
6.3 Periodic reporting is effective, including when things go wrong: delays and defaults announced spontaneously
3 pts
Where to check: History of investor communications · Level of proof C
7. Frais et alignement d'interets 5 pts
7.1 Complete and public fee schedule: entry, management, exit, performance, currency exchange
2 pts
Where to check: Pricing page, T&Cs · Level of proof C
7.2 The platform is paid by the project owner, or co-invests its own funds on the same terms
2 pts
Where to check: T&Cs, company communication · Level of proof C
7.3 No gap between the advertised fees and the fees actually charged
1 pts
Where to check: Personal test, statements · Level of proof T
8. Support et relation 5 pts
8.1 Reply to the survey questionnaire within 15 days, on the substance and not with a generic formula
2 pts
Where to check: Archived correspondence · Level of proof A
8.2 Support reachable and identifiable: real physical address, named contact
2 pts
Where to check: Legal notice, contact test · Level of proof A
8.3 Compliant sign-up process: real KYC, no deposit possible before identity verification
1 pts
Where to check: Personal test · Level of proof T