How We Score

Our Scoring Methodology

Every Bitcoin Verdict review uses the same 100-point scoring framework. No black boxes. No paid placements. Each score is broken down so you can see exactly why a product earned its grade.

Editorial Independence

Bitcoin Verdict is reader-supported. When you click a link and make a purchase, we may earn a commission. This never influences our scores or recommendations - products are evaluated the same way regardless of whether they have an affiliate program. We disclose affiliate relationships on each review page. No company can pay for a better grade.

Bitcoin-Only Focus

We only review products designed for Bitcoin holders. We do not cover altcoin exchanges, multi-coin wallets optimized for speculation, or DeFi tools. Our scoring criteria reflect Bitcoin-specific priorities - especially self-custody and security.

The Four Criteria

100 points total, weighted by what matters most to Bitcoin holders.

Security

30 pts

Non-custodial or full self-custody options
Open-source code or third-party audits
Two-factor authentication and account protections
Track record - no major hacks or key compromises
Insurance or proof of reserves (exchanges)

Fees

25 pts

Trading or spread fees vs competitors
Withdrawal and network fee handling
Hidden fees or unfavorable exchange rates
One-time purchase cost (hardware wallets)
Annual or subscription fees (IRAs, tax software)

Ease of Use

25 pts

Onboarding and account setup clarity
Interface design for non-technical users
Mobile app quality
Send, receive, and backup experience
Help documentation and learning resources

Trust

20 pts

Company history and regulatory compliance
Customer support quality and responsiveness
Transparency about team and operations
Reputation in the Bitcoin community
Complaints and resolution track record

Grading Scale

Scores convert to letter grades. The grade is the first thing you see in every review.

Excellent(90-100 pts)

Best in class. Clear recommendation.

Good(80-89 pts)

Strong option with minor trade-offs.

Acceptable(70-79 pts)

Usable, but better options exist.

Below Average(60-69 pts)

Notable problems. Use with caution.

Not Recommended(Below 60 pts)

Avoid. Significant risks or issues.

How We Research

Each review reflects real evaluation, not a checklist.

Hands-on testing

We set up accounts, complete onboarding, and test core flows - buying, sending, receiving, and (for wallets) full backup and recovery.

Fee analysis

We map every fee structure: trading spreads, withdrawal costs, network fee handling, and any hidden charges buried in terms of service.

Security review

We check custody model, audit history, code transparency, and account security options. We review historical incidents and how they were handled.

Trust signals

We verify regulatory standing, read third-party reviews, check community sentiment, and assess the team's track record and transparency.

Scoring and grade

Each criterion is scored against the rubric, totaled, and converted to a letter grade. Scores are reviewed before publishing and updated when products change significantly.