TrustScore methodology: how we score exchangers

In short

We read exchangers' documents — exchange rules and AML/KYC policies — and turn what's written there into a trust score from 0 to 100 and short badges on the card. The main rule: every claim we make is backed by a verbatim quote from the exchanger's document. Click the card to see the quote behind each badge. If the documents don't say anything about something, we mark it "no data" — no quote means no plus and no minus.

Where the data comes from

From the exchangers' own documents: exchange rules, user agreements, AML/KYC policies. We re-read them regularly; the date of the last check is shown at the bottom of each expanded card. We collect reviews and dispute data from external platforms and always mark the source.

Listing positions are not for sale. Exchangers cannot buy a spot in the list, a score, or a badge. Ranking and scores are calculated using the same methodology for everyone — this one.

Six typical situations

When something goes wrong, it's usually one of six stories: the wrong amount was sent, payment was late, the exchanger had a technical outage, the rate changed, a payment got stuck in AML review, or the customer changed their mind before sending. For each situation we look for an answer in the documents and assign a status:

• refunds — the exchanger firmly promised to return the money: "we will refund," with no discretion caveats;
• at discretion — "we may refund," "a refund is not guaranteed": a right, not an obligation;
• outright refusal — it says "we do not refund";
• not described — the documents say nothing about this situation.

The "Refunds: X of 6" counter on the card is the number of situations with a "refunds" status. Only firm promises count: "at discretion" is not included in the counter.

How the score is calculated

Every exchanger starts at 50 points — the neutral point, the score for an exchanger we know nothing about.

The score goes up for: a firm written promise to return money if a payment gets stuck in review; each typical situation closed with a firm "we will refund"; requesting documents only on suspicion, not from everyone.

The score goes down for: "we will freeze" with no explanation of what happens to the money next; mandatory verification for everyone; an outright "we will not refund" — especially for a payment stuck in review; open disputes on external platforms.

Nothing changes the score: "we may refund if we want to" — discretion doesn't count as a promise; and any question the documents don't answer — "no data" gives neither a plus nor a minus.

There is one score per exchanger, and it's the same across every page and route.

Badges on the card

• "AML check" — what happens to the money, per the documents, if a payment gets stuck in an AML review. Green "refunded": it's written that the money will be returned. Gray "service decides": the outcome is described, but the decision stays with the exchanger. Red "frozen": it says "we will freeze," and what happens to the money after that isn't written anywhere. No badge — the documents say nothing about this.
• "Refunds: X of 6" — how many typical situations are closed with a firm promise to refund. "Refunds: not described" — there's nothing about refunds in the documents.
• "KYC" — whether documents will be requested and what happens on refusal. "Refund only after KYC" (red): they won't even return your own money without verification. "Mandatory for everyone": verification before any deal. "Funds frozen on refusal": documents may be requested case by case, but refusal means frozen funds. "Possible based on risk": requested only if the transaction looks suspicious. "Not required" (green): the exchanger has stated in writing that it skips checks.
• Refund fee — on the expanded card: how much will be withheld from your own money on a refund. "No fee" (green) — the refund is described and explicitly free; 20% or more is the red zone.

Trust levels and ranking order

Scores fall into levels: 35+ moderate, 70+ high, 85+ maximum; below 35 is the red zone, and we flag those exchangers separately. Ranking order is a risk-adjusted rate: an exchanger with the best rate but alarming documents won't rank higher purely because of the rate. The "Best rate" badge marks the highest rate on a route among exchangers with 30 or more reviews, "Highest trust" marks the highest score; both are calculated across the whole route and don't depend on active filters.

What the score doesn't mean

TrustScore is not a guarantee and not a recommendation. The score measures an exchanger's written commitments: what it promised in its documents, not how it will actually behave in your specific situation. A red "frozen" badge means "the documents grant the right to freeze funds and don't describe a way out," not "you will definitely be frozen." "No data" is neither good nor bad — it's an honest "the documents don't say."

The methodology changes

We keep refining the tagging rules and the formula. Every time the methodology changes, all scores are recalculated immediately, and the change gets a version number and a note in the exchanger's history — so a score can change even if the exchanger's documents haven't. The current version is always shown at the top of this page.

Found an inaccuracy?

Tagging relies on documents, and documents can be contradictory — so we can make mistakes. If you notice that a status or quote doesn't match the exchanger's document, write to us with a link to the specific clause: we'll review the case manually and correct the tagging. Disputed cases are tracked in a single log.

For exchangers

There is exactly one way to raise your score: describe your terms in writing. Firm refund wording for the typical situations, what happens to funds during an AML review, the conditions for requesting documents, and the refund fee. We re-read documents regularly — changes are picked up automatically. A score, a badge, or a listing spot cannot be bought.