Methodology
How we review forex brokers
Our process starts with regulation and works outward. Here’s exactly what we check, in what order, and how we decide what to publish.
Our review process, step by step
Verify the South African FSCA licence
Before anything else, we establish whether the broker has a real, current South African Financial Sector Conduct Authority (FSCA) licence. We check the specific entity name and FSP number, not just a broker’s marketing claim. Where we receive FSP numbers from a broker’s affiliate programme, we note that clearly and encourage readers to verify independently on the FSCA’s public register at fsca.co.za. If we can’t confirm a licence exists, we say so plainly — not in a footnote.
Identify the exact contracting entity
A broker’s group may hold licences in ten jurisdictions. What matters to a South African trader is which specific entity they’d actually be contracting with and regulated under. We name that entity where we can find it, and are explicit when we couldn’t confirm it.
Research trading platforms
We confirm which platforms the broker actually supports — MetaTrader 4, MetaTrader 5, cTrader, TradingView, or proprietary alternatives — and note where platform availability varies by region or account type.
Research account structure
We identify the broker’s account types or tiers, their cost structure (spread-only vs. raw-spread-plus-commission), and any distinctive features. We do not publish exact spread figures, commission rates or minimum deposit amounts, because these change — we send readers to check current terms directly with the broker instead.
Check South African-specific fit
We note what we know about local payment method support and ZAR account availability, while being honest when we haven’t independently confirmed these details for the South African entity specifically.
Write up findings honestly
Our reviews distinguish clearly between what we’ve independently confirmed, what’s been supplied by the broker’s affiliate programme (and is still likely accurate but warrants your own verification), and what we genuinely don’t yet know. We never fill gaps with plausible-sounding guesses.
What we don’t do
- We don’t claim to have personally opened and tested every account — we say what we’ve verified and what we haven’t.
- We don’t publish spread or commission figures that might be out of date by the time you read them.
- We don’t assign numeric scores or star ratings — we’ve seen too many of these manipulated.
- We don’t accept payment from brokers to change a review’s conclusions.
- We don’t assume a group-level licence in the UK or Cyprus covers South African clients — we check the specific South African entity.
Our reviews are updated when we become aware of material changes: regulatory developments, significant platform changes, or corrections to what we’ve published. Page-level “last reviewed” dates reflect the most recent substantive update. If you spot something that needs correcting, contact us.
Our conflict of interest policy
Broker Verdict earns affiliate commissions from some of the brokers we review. This is disclosed on every relevant page and explained in full in our affiliate disclosure. Our editorial conclusions are not for sale: a broker paying us a commission doesn’t get a better review than it would otherwise, and a broker we have an affiliate relationship with gets reported honestly if we find regulatory gaps or other issues.
For a full account of how we handle these conflicts, see our editorial policy.