Editorial Policy
Last updated: June 2025
1. Independence
Crypto Radar operates independently from the exchanges, wallets, projects, and protocols we cover. We do not accept payment in exchange for positive coverage, token shills, or inclusion in any list. We never accept tokens, allocations, or paid “research” from projects. Our editorial decisions are made solely based on merit and reader relevance.
We may have affiliate relationships with some platforms (see our Affiliate Disclosure). These relationships have no influence whatsoever on our assessments. An exchange or protocol we earn commissions from can receive — and has received — critical coverage when warranted.
2. Topic Selection
We decide which topics and projects to cover based on the following criteria:
- Genuine reader demand and search interest
- Relevance to the decisions crypto investors and users actually face
- Relevance to the categories we cover (Bitcoin, Ethereum, altcoins, DeFi, NFTs, and web3)
- Timeliness — market moves, protocol upgrades, regulatory updates, and major launches
We do not accept payment to cover specific tokens or prioritize topics based on commercial relationships. Any project can contact us, but we make no guarantees about coverage or outcome.
3. Research Process
Every article we publish is backed by hands-on research by at least one member of our team. We do not publish content based solely on press releases or marketing materials.
Our research process involves:
- Reading the documentation, whitepaper, and audits of the projects and protocols we cover
- Cross-referencing fees, tokenomics, and on-chain data against official and independent sources
- Evaluating platforms across multiple real user scenarios (buying, swapping, staking, withdrawing)
- Assessing security track record, custody model, and support quality where applicable
- Comparing directly against close alternatives
4. Evaluation Criteria
We evaluate crypto platforms and protocols across five dimensions:
Security
35%
How strong is the custody model, audit history, and track record? Have funds ever been at risk?
Usability
25%
Is it easy to onboard, understand, and use day-to-day — for both beginners and experienced users?
Transparency
20%
Are fees, tokenomics, and risks clearly disclosed? Is the code open and audited? No hidden catches?
Reliability
15%
Is the platform well-funded, liquid, and does it have a strong uptime and support record?
Flexibility
5%
Does it support a range of assets, networks, and use cases as needs change?
5. Content Updates
The crypto landscape changes rapidly. We are committed to keeping our content accurate. Our update policy:
- We re-test platforms and protocols whenever a major upgrade or migration ships
- Guides older than 6 months are flagged for re-evaluation
- Fees, APYs, and market data are checked regularly
- We add an “Updated” date stamp to all substantively revised articles
- If a protocol is exploited, deprecated, or drastically changes, we update the article immediately
6. Corrections Policy
We are committed to accuracy. If we publish an error — factual, technical, or otherwise — we correct it promptly and clearly note the correction at the bottom of the article. We do not silently edit published articles to remove mistakes.
If you spot an error or believe a review is inaccurate, please contact us. We take all feedback seriously.
7. AI-Assisted Content
We occasionally use AI tools to assist with research, outlining, or proofreading. However, all assessments and editorial judgments are made by human writers and editors. We never publish AI-generated content about crypto markets, tokens, or protocols without full human oversight and verification — and nothing we publish is financial advice.