Editorial policy and data review process

Source and evidence hierarchy

We prioritize official fee schedules, contract specifications, public APIs and the exchanges' own explanations. Timestamped in-house observations can supplement them. Third-party articles, search snippets, and promotional copy are leads, not sole support for a high-risk conclusion.

• Fee data should identify the exchange, product, unit, conditions, source, and time.
• Regional eligibility is not inferred from a registration page loading successfully.
• Incomplete account testing is not described as firsthand experience.

Drafting, checks and publication

Content starts with the task a reader needs to complete, followed by the evidence, assumptions and anything still unconfirmed; drafts are written with AI assistance. Before publishing, checks run automatically: worked examples are recalculated in their calculator, the Chinese and English versions are compared, source links and site links are checked, and the disclosure's placement is verified. A page that fails any of them is not published.

When material evidence remains pending, the limitation stays visible. Guesswork does not fill the gap, and an unverified claim cannot determine an exchange ranking.

Updates and dates

A page date changes only after a substantive factual, methodological, or editorial update. A record timestamp does not make data permanently current; variable fees, products, and regional rules should be rechecked with the official source before action.

• Copy clarifications are distinguished from material data updates.
• Conflicting sources retain uncertainty until official data is checked again.
• Material errors are recorded under the corrections policy.

Commercial relationships remain separate

Affiliate commission does not enter cost formulas, source selection, exchange ranking, scoring, or editorial conclusions. Comparisons are generated from aligned conditions before affiliate calls to action and disclosures are presented separately.