How we verify payouts and ratings

Our payout data is the part no competitor can copy: instead of taking a firm’s word for it, we read payouts straight off the public blockchain. It’s first-party data we collect ourselves, and anyone can verify it independently.

1. 1We watch on-chain settlementFor firms that pay traders on-chain, we track payouts settled through RisePay and direct wallet transfers on the blockchain — the same public ledger anyone can audit.
2. 2We attribute each payout to a firmPayout transactions are mapped to the firm that sent them, then grouped so you can see each firm's totals over the last 24 hours, 7 days, 30 days and all time.
3. 3We refresh continuouslyThe tracker updates as new payouts settle, so the leaderboards and each firm's live feed reflect recent on-chain activity rather than a stale snapshot.

On-chain data is powerful because it’s public and verifiable — but it doesn’t see everything. We’d rather tell you where the edges are than pretend the figures are complete.

• It's a verified floor, not the full totalPayouts sent by bank wire, card, PayPal or a firm's internal balance can't be seen on-chain, so they aren't counted. The real total a firm has paid is at least what we show — often more.
• Wallets can move funds for other reasonsOn-chain wallets sometimes move money for operational reasons, not just trader payouts. We work to attribute genuine payouts, but on-chain data is a signal, not a firm's audited books.
• A listing is not an endorsementAppearing on the payouts pages means we can see on-chain payout activity for a firm — nothing more. It isn't a recommendation, and it doesn't mean a firm is right for you.

Firm ratings are aggregated from publicly available scores on TrustPilot and Prop Firm Match, shown alongside a combined average so you can judge reputation at a glance. They’re updated periodically and reflect those sources — not the opinion of Capital Critic.

Across the rest of the site those two appear as Review score (TrustPilot) and Community rating (Prop Firm Match). The reviews table shows their mean alone, labelled Average rating, with the number of reviews behind it — both sources’ counts added together.

Not every firm carries a score on both. Where only one publishes one, the average is that single score and the reviews table says so beneath it — 1 source rather than 2— because “4.8 from 481 reviews” and “4.8 from 38,000” are not the same claim and shouldn’t look alike.

For the same reason, a firm needs a score on both sources to be named “Highest rated” on a market page. Sorting is yours to do — you can order the table by rating and a single-source firm may well sit at the top. That badge is us putting our own name to a number, and we only do it when both sources have rated the firm.

Scores are published to one decimal, so several firms usually share the same one. When they do we rank the tie on the evidence behind it — more sources first, then more reviews. A 4.7 that TrustPilot and the community arrived at independently says more than one source’s 4.7; and between two firms both have scored, a 4.7 across 50,000 reviews is steadier than the same 4.7 across 250. That order runs everywhere you can sort by rating, and the badge names how many firms it is tied with.

We show those third-party scores as they are; we never restate them as our own rating. As firms gather enough verified, on-site ratings, Capital Critic’s own first-party reviews will join the table too.

Rankings are driven by ratings and verified data — never by who paid the most. Some links on the site are affiliate links, and if you use one it may earn us a commission at no cost to you. That never moves a firm up a table or changes a score. If our incentives and yours ever pointed in different directions, the trader wins.

Read more about who’s behind the site and why on our about page.