Ranking methodology
TraderView Research · Last verified
TraderView Research scores every platform on six weighted components: popularity and verifiable usage signals (20%), fees and value (20%), trading and analytics features (20%), security transparency and custody (20%), user experience (10%), and chain and device coverage (10%). Scores are editorial judgements based on published, checkable evidence.
The formula
| Component | Weight | What we look at |
|---|---|---|
| Popularity and verifiable usage signals | 20% | Publicly checkable activity: on-chain volume where a program or router is identifiable, official announcements, app-store presence. Third-party traffic estimates are labelled as estimates and never presented as user counts. |
| Fees and value | 20% | Published trading fee, referral terms, subscription tiers, and whether the schedule is documented at all. |
| Trading and analytics features | 20% | Order types, automation, wallet analytics, copy trading, perpetuals, discovery tooling. |
| Security transparency and custody | 20% | Custody model, key export, documentation quality, audits, incident history, official warnings. |
| User experience | 10% | Onboarding, information density, error handling, mobile ergonomics. |
| Chain and device coverage | 10% | Number of supported chains and available interfaces (web, mobile, Telegram). |
Evidence rules
- We never invent fees, audits, user numbers, trading volume or referral benefits.
- If a value cannot be verified from an official source, we publish “Not publicly confirmed”.
- A platform never receives a high security score for claiming it is secure. Custody, documentation, audits, incident history, official warnings and transparency drive that component.
- Third-party traffic estimates are labelled as estimates, with the measurement period and a link to the source. We do not scrape Similarweb automatically.
- Affiliate relationships never change a score or a rank. Non-affiliate platforms appear in the same tables.
What we will not claim
We do not claim any platform is guaranteed safe, profitable, or the best choice for every trader. New platforms are labelled “New platform to watch” rather than described as large or established until verified data supports it.
Current scores
| Platform | Overall | Security | Fees |
|---|---|---|---|
| Axiom | 8.4 | 7.6 | 7.5 |
| GMGN | 8.3 | 7.6 | 7.5 |
| Fomo | 7.4 | 7.2 | 6.5 |
| Padre Terminal | 8.0 | 7.4 | 8.2 |
| Photon | 7.7 | 7.4 | 7.5 |
| BullX | 7.8 | 7.2 | 7.5 |
| Legend | 7.3 | 7.0 | 6.5 |
| Trojan | 7.4 | 6.8 | 8.0 |
| Genius | 7.0 | 6.8 | 6.5 |
| Bloom | 7.3 | 6.8 | 7.5 |
| Banana Gun | 7.4 | 6.4 | 8.6 |
| BonkBot | 6.9 | 6.8 | 7.5 |
| Maestro | 7.4 | 6.4 | 7.5 |
| TradeWiz | 6.1 | 6.0 | 6.0 |
| MEVX | 6.6 | 6.4 | 6.0 |
Machine-readable data
The full dataset behind these rankings is public at /data/platforms.json and the scoring weights at /data/methodology.json.