How we test crypto futures trading services
At GNcrypto, we put transparency first when evaluating cryptocurrency derivatives platforms. Our reviews of futures trading services are based on hands-on testing and thorough analysis across all key dimensions specific to leveraged trading.
What We Test
We rate futures trading platforms on seven criteria that matter when you’re actually trading with leverage. Each platform gets a score from 1.0 to 5.0 based on weighted performance across fees, leverage options, liquidity, risk controls, and execution quality.
Our focus: Can you trade with appropriate leverage, manage risk effectively, and avoid liquidation traps or hidden costs?
We don’t rate solvency or audit balance sheets. These scores reflect trading quality, margin systems, and platform stability under stress – not whether the platform will be solvent in five years.
How We Score Platforms
Each criterion gets rated on a 5-point scale:
5/5 – Best in class (Binance-level liquidity, BitMEX-level risk tools)
4/5 – Above average, works well for most traders
3/5 – Acceptable with trade-offs (thin books, aggressive liquidations, basic tools)
2/5 – Serious problems (low liquidity, frequent downtime, opaque funding)
1/5 – Broken or unsafe (cascade liquidations, frozen withdrawals, manipulated mark price)
Why We Use Weighted Scores
Not all criteria carry equal weight. Funding costs matter more than charting features. Liquidation mechanisms matter more than UI design.
Our weighting system:
Tier 1 – Critical (60%)
These determine whether you can trade profitably with leverage:
- Trading Fees & Funding Costs – 25%
- Leverage & Margin Requirements – 20%
- Contract Selection & Liquidity – 15%
Tier 2 – Quality (25%)
These affect execution quality and risk management:
- Platform Performance & Risk Controls – 15%
- Security & Regulatory Compliance – 10%
Tier 3 – Experience (15%)
Important, but won’t kill a platform if lacking:
- User Experience & Trading Interface – 10%
- Customer Support & Educational Resources – 5%
Example: A platform with perfect UX (5/5) but constant downtime during volatility (2/5) scores poorly overall. A platform with deep liquidity (5/5) and robust risk controls (5/5) but a clunky interface (3/5) still ranks high.
The 7 Criteria
1. Trading Fees & Funding Costs (25% weight)
What we check:
- Maker and taker fees across VIP tiers for perpetual and dated futures
- Funding rates (frequency, calculation method, historical averages)
- Liquidation fees and insurance fund mechanics
- Deposit and withdrawal fees (crypto and fiat)
- Conversion and settlement charges
Why it matters:
A 0.05% taker fee looks cheap until you add 0.01% funding every 8 hours. Over a week, that’s 0.21% in funding alone. On 10x leverage, costs compound fast.
How we test:
We open and close positions with $200 capital using different leverage levels (5x, 10x, 20x), creating position sizes of $1K-$4K, track funding rate payments over multiple periods, and document every fee component. We calculate the total cost to hold a position for 24 hours, 3 days, and 1 week.
5/5 example: 0.02% maker / 0.05% taker, 0.01% funding 3x daily, 0.02% liquidation fee, free withdrawals
3/5 example: 0.05% maker / 0.08% taker, 0.03% funding 3x daily, 0.5% liquidation fee
1/5 example: 0.1%+ fees, 0.1%+ funding, 1%+ liquidation fee, opaque insurance fund
2. Leverage & Margin Requirements (20% weight)
What we check:
- Maximum leverage available per asset (perpetuals vs. dated futures)
- Margin types supported (isolated vs. cross-margin)
- Initial and maintenance margin requirements
- Margin call and liquidation mechanisms (partial vs. full liquidation)
- Auto-deleveraging (ADL) system and queue transparency
- Portfolio margin availability for advanced traders
Why it matters:
125x leverage sounds attractive until a 0.8% move liquidates you. Platforms with partial liquidation protect capital better than full liquidation. Opaque ADL systems can close your winning position without warning.
How we test:
We test margin calculations manually, monitor liquidation trigger points by letting small positions approach liquidation (with stop-losses as backup), observe how platforms handle margin calls, and review ADL queue transparency. We test both isolated and cross-margin modes.
5/5 example: Up to 100x with clear margin tiers, partial liquidation, transparent ADL queue, portfolio margin available
3/5 example: Up to 50x, full liquidation only, basic ADL system, cross-margin available
1/5 example: Fixed 20x max, instant full liquidation, no ADL transparency, frequent cascade liquidations
3. Contract Selection & Liquidity (15% weight)
What we check:
- Number of perpetual and dated futures contracts
- Order book depth for major contracts (BTC, ETH, alts)
- Bid-ask spreads in normal and volatile conditions
- Open interest levels and funding rate stability
- Settlement methods (cash-settled vs. physically settled)
- Availability of inverse vs. linear contracts
Why it matters:
Thin books mean slippage kills your edge. A 0.1% spread on 10x leverage effectively costs you 1% of your position. Illiquid altcoin futures can gap 5% on a modest order.
How we test:
We monitor order books on BTC and ETH perpetuals, measure spreads during normal hours and high volatility (US market open, major news), test limit orders at different leverage levels, and place market orders to measure slippage on positions ranging from $1K to $4K (using 5x-20x leverage on $200 capital).
5/5 example: 200+ contracts, $500M+ daily volume on BTC perp, 0.01% spread on majors, $2K-$4K leveraged positions fill cleanly
3/5 example: 50 contracts, $50M daily volume, 0.05% spreads, $1K-$2K positions executable but spreads widen during volatility
1/5 example: 10 contracts, $5M volume, 0.5%+ spreads, $1K positions cause noticeable slippage
4. Platform Performance & Risk Controls (15% weight)
What we check:
- Order execution speed under load
- Platform stability during liquidation cascades and market swings
- Historical downtime during critical trading periods
- Risk management tools: stop-loss, take-profit, trailing stops, conditional orders
- Position monitoring alerts and margin warnings
- API reliability for algorithmic and high-frequency trading
- Mark price vs. last price methodology to prevent manipulation
Why it matters:
Platform downtime during a -10% BTC move means you can’t exit or adjust stops. Manipulated mark price triggers liquidations even when the actual market hasn’t moved.
How we test:
We monitor platform uptime during high-volatility events (Fed announcements, major liquidation cascades), test stop-loss execution during fast moves, measure order latency with API calls, and verify mark price calculation methodology. We attempt to place orders during peak load.
5/5 example: 99.9% uptime during volatility, stops execute within 100ms, robust API, mark price uses volume-weighted index
3/5 example: Occasional lag during spikes, stops execute with 1-2 second delay, basic API
1/5 example: Frequent downtime during moves, stops don’t execute, API goes offline, mark price diverges from index
5. Security & Regulatory Compliance (10% weight)
What we check:
- Licenses and regulatory compliance (especially derivatives-specific regulations)
- Proof of reserves and insurance fund transparency
- Security features: 2FA, withdrawal whitelists, anti-phishing codes, hardware key support
- Cold storage practices for user collateral
- Past security incidents and platform responses
- KYC/AML standards and compliance certifications (ISO 27001, PCI DSS)
- Segregation of client funds vs. platform assets
Why it matters:
Unregulated derivatives platforms can freeze withdrawals during volatility. Opaque insurance funds mean socialized losses hit your account. Poor security means your collateral is at risk even if you trade perfectly.
How we test:
We verify licenses and regulatory filings, review insurance fund policies and historical payouts, test security features (2FA, withdrawal whitelists), check Proof of Reserves if available, and review past incident responses (hacks, liquidation engine failures).
5/5 example: CFTC/FCA registered, published Proof of Reserves, segregated funds, $100M+ insurance fund, hardware key support
3/5 example: Offshore but established, basic insurance fund, 2FA and whitelists, no major incidents
1/5 example: No licenses, no Proof of Reserves, history of frozen withdrawals, past hacks
6. User Experience & Trading Interface (10% weight)
What we check:
- Interface clarity for position management and margin monitoring
- Advanced order types: limit, market, stop-loss, stop-limit, trailing stop, OCO, conditional orders
- Charting tools and technical indicators (TradingView integration, custom indicators)
- Position calculator and PnL visualization tools
- Mobile app functionality for position management on the go
- Funding and withdrawal workflows
- Multi-asset collateral support (USDT, USDC, BTC, etc.)
Why it matters:
A confusing interface can cause you to fat-finger a 10x order instead of 1x. Poor margin monitoring means you don’t see liquidation coming. Missing order types limit your risk management options.
How we test:
We use the platform for 2-3 weeks, place various order types on desktop and mobile, test position calculators for accuracy, monitor real-time PnL display, and attempt to manage positions during volatile periods. We check if margin requirements are clearly displayed before order confirmation.
5/5 example: Clean interface, TradingView charts, all advanced orders, live PnL, robust mobile app, multi-collateral
3/5 example: Functional web interface, basic charts, standard orders, limited mobile features
1/5 example: Confusing layout, no position calculator, basic orders only, crashes on mobile
7. Customer Support & Educational Resources (5% weight)
What we check:
- Support responsiveness for margin calls, liquidations, and technical issues (live chat, email, phone)
- Problem resolution speed during critical situations
- Educational resources: futures trading guides, risk management tutorials, funding rate explanations
- Demo/testnet accounts for practice trading
- API documentation quality for algorithmic traders
Why it matters:
When you’re liquidated during a platform bug or your withdrawal is stuck, responsive support matters. Good educational resources help beginners avoid rookie mistakes like overleveraging.
How we test:
We submit real support tickets simulating margin call scenarios and urgent liquidation queries, test response times during peak hours and off-hours, review educational content for accuracy and completeness, and test demo accounts if available.
5/5 example: 24/7 live chat with <5min response, comprehensive guides, robust testnet, detailed API docs
3/5 example: Email support with 24hr response, basic tutorials, limited demo mode
1/5 example: No live support, days to respond, no educational content, no testnet
How We Calculate Final Scores
Step 1: Rate each criterion on the 1-5 scale
Step 2: Multiply each score by its weight
Step 3: Sum the weighted scores
Example: Platform X
| Criterion | Score | Weight | Weighted Score |
|---|---|---|---|
| Trading Fees & Funding Costs | 5/5 | 0.25 | 1.25 |
| Leverage & Margin Requirements | 4/5 | 0.20 | 0.80 |
| Contract Selection & Liquidity | 5/5 | 0.15 | 0.75 |
| Platform Performance & Risk Controls | 4/5 | 0.15 | 0.60 |
| Security & Regulatory Compliance | 3/5 | 0.10 | 0.30 |
| User Experience & Trading Interface | 4/5 | 0.10 | 0.40 |
| Customer Support & Educational Resources | 3/5 | 0.05 | 0.15 |
| Total | 28/35 | 1.00 | 4.25/5.00 |
Final rating: 4.25/5 (85%)
What We Don’t Rate
- Solvency or reserves – We’re not auditors. Check Proof of Reserves if available, but don’t rely on our ratings for financial safety.
- Tax reporting tools – Varies by jurisdiction and changes frequently.
- Social trading features – Hard to test systematically; focus is on core derivatives functionality.
- Long-term platform survival – Liquidity and regulations change. A 5/5 today might be 2/5 next year if volume dries up or regulators crack down.
Why Trust Our Ratings?
We test platforms with real capital, open leveraged positions, monitor funding costs over multiple cycles, and measure execution quality during volatility. We don’t accept payment for ratings or modify scores based on partnerships.
Our process:
- Open account, complete KYC (if required)
- Deposit $200 via crypto
- Open 5-10 leveraged positions across different contracts and leverage levels
- Monitor funding rates over 3-7 days
- Test stop-loss execution and margin call behavior
- Measure spreads and slippage during volatile and calm periods
- Test withdrawal process (crypto)
- Review liquidation history and insurance fund transparency
- Compare fees and execution quality to competitors
What we don’t do:
We don’t trade with house money or demo accounts for ratings. We don’t test platforms we can’t legally access. We don’t rate platforms that require $10K+ minimums or institutional-only access.
Questions?
If you think we’ve missed something or scored a platform unfairly, contact us at [email protected]. We update ratings quarterly or when platforms make major changes (new licenses, liquidation incidents, fee adjustments).
Last updated: January 2026
Next methodology review: Expected Q2 2026