Holder TrustScore and review ratings methodology

Holder TrustScore is an analytical exchange score on a scale up to 5. It helps compare available signals, but is not the average user vote or proof that funds are safe. This page describes cryptocurrency exchanges; currency exchange services may use a different base score.

Inputs to the score

The first source is the exchange Trust Score supplied by CoinGecko. Holder divides it by two: 8 out of 10 becomes 4 out of 5. This is a provider metric, not ten actual reviews.

The second source is numerical signals from published reviews on the relevant language site. The calculation uses top-level reviews with a valid value from 1 to 5. Thread replies, unpublished entries and text without a numerical signal do not add a vote to this calculation.

Each review contributes once. An explicitly submitted author rating takes priority. If there is no author rating, text sentiment analysis may be used; otherwise a retained historical score of unknown origin may contribute. Only the first group represents a numerical choice made by the review's author.

Formula and rounding

TrustScore = (A × N + G × W) / (N + W).

• A is the mean of the review signals, first rounded to one decimal place.
• N is the number of included signals.
• G is the CoinGecko score divided by two.
• W is the weight of the base score. The default is 10; the actual weight is shown in the score explanation on the page.

The result is also rounded to one decimal place. If the CoinGecko input is missing or zero, its weight becomes zero. With no review signals, only the base score remains. With neither a base score of positive weight nor review signals, no TrustScore is calculated.

Illustrative example. An exchange has a CoinGecko score of 8 out of 10, so G = 4. Two signals of 5 and 1 give A = 3. With W = 10, the calculation is (3 × 2 + 4 × 10) / 12 = 3.83, displayed as 3.8. This is a worked example, not the result for a particular exchange.

What AI analysis means

Text without author-selected stars may be assessed by a language model. The current analyzer maps sentiment onto a 2–5 scale in 0.5 increments; standard processing uses a text excerpt of up to 800 characters. It interprets the wording; it does not verify transactions, identity or events. Its output is therefore labeled as text analysis rather than a rating submitted by the user.

This data has a limitation: the analyzer's minimum is 2, while an author can select 1. Irony, ambiguity and a small number of reviews can also distort the picture. Historical scores of unknown origin do not become confirmed user votes merely because a number was retained.

Author stars and TrustScore measure different things

The author-rating average includes only entries identified as user-submitted scores. It excludes CoinGecko, AI analysis and scores of unknown origin. It may therefore differ from the analytical TrustScore. The number of published review texts can also exceed the number of author ratings.

Telegram polls, subscriber counts, affiliate compensation and registration bonuses are not inputs to this formula. Licenses, fees and trading volume are not separate direct terms in it either; TrustScore alone cannot establish these properties. Some factors may be reflected in the provider's base score under its own methodology.

Using the result

Read the composition and number of signals alongside the score, review dates and the venue's primary documents. A high score does not guarantee solvency, permission to operate in your country or a successful withdrawal. Comparing final numbers without their underlying evidence is insufficient.

If a review source or metric appears incorrect, send the page URL through feedback. See the review policy for publication and challenge guidelines.