Fact-Checking Policy

Financial and regulatory information changes fast. I use fact-checking to reduce avoidable errors, not to pretend every page can stay perfect forever.

What I usually check

I focus on the claims that can change a reader’s decision: the legal entity, regulatory status, country restrictions, ownership, service status, fees, deposits, withdrawals, bonuses, payout claims, and anything described as my personal experience. The depth of the check depends on the claim and the evidence available.

Sources I prefer

1. Regulator registers, warnings, enforcement notices, and legislation.
2. Official company filings, legal documents, platform terms, and fee schedules.
3. My own observations or tests, described as what I saw at the time.
4. Reputable secondary reporting and consumer reports, used with context and caution.

I use the best source I can find for the claim. I do not promise that every sentence has a separate primary-source citation or a permanent evidence file.

How AI can be used

I sometimes use AI-assisted tools to compare sources, summarise long documents, find inconsistencies, or suggest claims that need another look. This can speed up the work, but AI can misunderstand a source, miss context, or introduce factual and wording errors. I do not treat an AI answer as proof, and readers should verify important financial or regulatory information against current official sources.

Notes, screenshots, and complaint reports

For important or fast-changing claims, I may save source URLs, dates, screenshots, or notes. I do not keep a formal evidence file for every sentence, every routine test, or every older review.

A consumer complaint is one person’s report, not a proven event. I look for details, supporting material, company responses, regulator action, and repeated patterns across independent sources. Sometimes the available evidence remains incomplete, and I say so.

When sources disagree

If sources conflict or I cannot confirm a claim, I try to make that uncertainty visible. The absence of a regulator warning does not prove that a platform is authorised or safe.

Rechecking older pages

I revisit broker and regulatory pages when I notice a material change or when a page becomes a priority again. A review date shows when I last revisited the page; it is not a guarantee that every fact will remain current afterwards.

If you spot an error or have stronger evidence, use the corrections process or send it through the contact page. The editorial policy explains the broader approach.

Last reviewed: 22 September 2026.