How We Score
Our Scoring Methodology
Every Bitcoin Verdict review uses the same 100-point scoring framework. No black boxes. No paid placements. Each score is broken down so you can see exactly why a product earned its grade.
Editorial Independence
Bitcoin Verdict is reader-supported. When you click a link and make a purchase, we may earn a commission. This never influences our scores or recommendations - products are evaluated the same way regardless of whether they have an affiliate program. We disclose affiliate relationships on each review page. No company can pay for a better grade.
Bitcoin-Only Focus
We only review products designed for Bitcoin holders. We do not cover altcoin exchanges, multi-coin wallets optimized for speculation, or DeFi tools. Our scoring criteria reflect Bitcoin-specific priorities - especially self-custody and security.
The Four Criteria
100 points total, weighted by what matters most to Bitcoin holders.
Security
30 pts- Non-custodial or full self-custody options
- Open-source code or third-party audits
- Two-factor authentication and account protections
- Track record - no major hacks or key compromises
- Insurance or proof of reserves (exchanges)
Fees
25 pts- Trading or spread fees vs competitors
- Withdrawal and network fee handling
- Hidden fees or unfavorable exchange rates
- One-time purchase cost (hardware wallets)
- Annual or subscription fees (IRAs, tax software)
Community Score
25 pts- Reddit sentiment across r/Bitcoin and product-specific subreddits
- Expert reviews from Bitcoin-focused publications
- App store ratings and common complaint patterns
- Forum discussions and long-term user experience reports
- Overall reputation trend - improving or declining
Trust
20 pts- Company history and regulatory compliance
- Customer support quality and responsiveness
- Transparency about team and operations
- Reputation in the Bitcoin community
- Complaints and resolution track record
Grading Scale
Scores convert to letter grades. The grade is the first thing you see in every review.
ETF-Specific Criteria
Bitcoin ETFs are fundamentally different from wallets and exchanges. You cannot self-custody - you are permanently trusting a fund manager and custodian. Our ETF scoring reflects this: same 100-point scale, but the four dimensions are tailored to what actually matters for ETF investors.
The weights stay the same (30/25/25/20) but the labels and evaluation criteria change. Custodian quality replaces security. AUM and liquidity replace community score. Expense ratio replaces general fee analysis. Issuer trust remains, evaluated through the lens of asset management track record rather than Bitcoin-community reputation.
Custodian & Transparency
30 pts- Who holds the Bitcoin - self-custody (Fidelity) vs third-party (Coinbase)
- SOC 1 and SOC 2 audit compliance
- On-chain verifiability of holdings (Bitwise publishes wallet addresses)
- Custodial concentration risk across the ETF ecosystem
- Insurance coverage and cold storage practices
Fees (Expense Ratio)
25 pts- Ongoing annual expense ratio - the primary cost of holding an ETF
- Fee waivers - temporary or permanent, and what happens when they expire
- Comparison to category average (0.20-0.25% for major funds)
- Impact of fee compounding over multi-year holding periods
AUM & Liquidity
25 pts- Total assets under management - larger funds have lower closure risk
- Average daily trading volume and bid-ask spread width
- Institutional adoption and financial advisor availability
- Net flow trends - is the fund growing or hemorrhaging assets
Issuer Trust
20 pts- Asset manager track record and scale (BlackRock, Fidelity, etc.)
- Regulatory standing and compliance history
- Bitcoin-specific expertise and conviction
- Transparency about fund operations and Bitcoin custody arrangements
- Community alignment - donations to Bitcoin open-source development
How We Research
Each review aggregates real community experience, not a single tester's opinion.
Community sentiment analysis
We read hundreds of Reddit threads across r/Bitcoin, product-specific subreddits, and Bitcoin Talk forums. We track recurring praise and complaint patterns - not just what people say, but how consistently they say it.
Expert review compilation
We aggregate coverage from Bitcoin-focused publications, security researchers, and industry analysts. For ETFs, this includes Bloomberg ETF analysts, Morningstar, and crypto-native research teams.
Fee and security analysis
We map every fee structure and evaluate custody models, audit history, code transparency, and incident track records. For ETFs, we analyze expense ratios, custodial arrangements, and on-chain verifiability.
App store and market data
We check app store ratings and common complaint patterns. For ETFs, we analyze AUM trends, daily volume, bid-ask spreads, and net flow data to assess market confidence.
Scoring and grade
Each criterion is scored against the rubric, totaled, and converted to a letter grade. Every source is cited in the review so you can verify our reasoning. Scores are updated when products change significantly.