Editorial Policy

This page documents the standards behind Forxzen's content. It applies to every page on the site, in every language.

How content is researched and written

Guides and glossary entries are written by named authors with experience in trading, financial regulation and market education. We use primary sources — broker terms, regulator registers, and official regulatory publications from bodies like the FCA, CySEC and ASIC. AI tools may assist with drafting, but every page is reviewed and edited by a human before publication, and factual claims are verified independently.

Broker review methodology

Once our broker review process goes live, brokers will be scored on a transparent set of criteria, each weighted and assessed the same way for every brand:

• Regulation & safety — valid licences (with verification links), segregated client funds, and negative balance protection.
• Costs — real trading costs after spreads, commissions and swap rates, not headline figures.
• Markets & platforms — depth of instruments offered and quality of the trading platform.
• Funding — deposit/withdrawal methods, limits and payout speed.
• Support & experience — channels, responsiveness, and mobile quality.

The overall rating will be derived from these criteria, not from commercial terms.

Editorial independence

Forxzen earns affiliate commission when readers sign up with brokers we link to (see Affiliate Disclosure). Commercial relationships never influence a score, ranking or verdict. A broker cannot pay to rank higher or to remove criticism. Where a recommended broker has a weakness, we say so.

Freshness and updates

Time-sensitive content (bonuses, odds, regulation) is reviewed regularly; evergreen content is reviewed periodically. Each page carries an accurate "last updated" date and we never backdate or fake these.

Corrections

We correct errors promptly. If you spot a mistake, contact us via the Contact page and we will review and update the page, noting material corrections where appropriate.