DOCUMENTARY AUDIT · UK RESIDENT OFFERS
See what was checked.
This is an AI-assisted documentary audit of public UK pages, not a customer-service, execution or account-opening test. Desktop page structure was inspected. Mobile usability and keyboard-only journeys have not been completed and are not certified by these scores.
Shared checklist · uk-documentary-1.0
The 40% editorial component uses the four published admin weights. The default split is reviews 30%, navigation 25%, clarity 30%, documents 15%. A checklist score of 100 means the listed checks passed, not that a broker is perfect or safe.
- Review signal: 100 × (Trustpilot score − 1) ÷ 4. This is a brand-level external sentiment proxy, not a UK customer sample or an independently verified complaint-resolution score. Review count does not become statistical confidence. It is scored only here, not in the quantitative data component.
- Navigation structure: four checks worth 25 points each: descriptive cost headings; an identifiable route to legal information; an identifiable support route; product controls exposed as semantic interactive controls, or a direct structured page without such controls.
- Information clarity: four checks worth 25 points: product/account basis distinguishable; trading and other fees distinguished; conditions and exceptions stated; units and charging basis unambiguous in the inspected explanations. These assess disclosure, not whether charges are low.
- Company and documents: four checks worth 25 points: local legal company identified; customer-contract link identified; complaints policy/route identified; execution-policy link identified. This is a discoverability check, not a legal opinion on the terms.
Only confirmed observations are scored. Unchecked items must remain unassessed in future audits; they must not be silently treated as failures. This initial completed checklist is deliberately narrow. Observations are environment-specific and should be rechecked after material website changes.
Scope and calculation
A UK residence assessment applies only to the UK resident view. It is not copied to the regulatory-jurisdiction view, other countries or Overall. An applicable local assessment takes precedence over a brand-level test record. Other views retain their explicitly labelled test inputs until reviewed. Calculation uses full precision and displays one decimal.
IG
Observed 2026-09-12 · review due 2026-10-12
| Brand review signal | UK navigation structure | UK clarity | UK document visibility |
|---|
| 67.5/100 | 75/100 | 75/100 | 100/100 |
Scope: UK resident offers; desktop public-information checklist uk-documentary-1.0, collected with AI assistance on 12 September 2026. No human reviewer, account opening, execution testing or mobile certification is claimed. A 100 checklist score means the named disclosure checks passed, not a perfect broker.
Brand signal: Trustpilot 3.7/5 -> (3.7-1)/4*100 = 67.5. Mixed products/countries; not UK-only feedback. Source: https://www.trustpilot.com/review/ig.com
Navigation: 3/4 checks. Cost headings, legal and support routes identified. Product choices were exposed as list items rather than semantic tabs in the inspected accessibility tree, so the semantic-controls check did not pass. This is a narrow accessibility observation, not a claim that switching is impossible.
Clarity: 3/4 checks. Product basis, fee categories and conditions were distinguishable. The minimum-spread table labels its values bps, creating a unit ambiguity for a reader comparing pip-based FX quotes; the unambiguous-units check did not pass. Source: https://www.ig.com/uk/charges
Documents: 4/4 discoverability checks. Local companies, customer agreements, complaints and execution-policy routes identified. Sources: https://www.ig.com/uk/terms-and-agreements https://www.ig.com/uk/customer-agreement
Limits: cookies can obstruct first access; no support contact was made. Document contents were sampled for identity and scope, not legally audited.
OANDA
Observed 2026-09-12 · review due 2026-10-12
| Brand review signal | UK navigation structure | UK clarity | UK document visibility |
|---|
| 62.5/100 | 100/100 | 100/100 | 100/100 |
Scope: UK resident offers; desktop public-information checklist uk-documentary-1.0, collected with AI assistance on 12 September 2026. No human reviewer, account opening, execution testing or mobile certification is claimed. A 100 checklist score means the named disclosure checks passed, not a perfect broker.
Brand signal: Trustpilot 3.5/5 -> (3.5-1)/4*100 = 62.5. The global profile has country subprofiles; this audit consistently uses the global profile for all three brands. It is not UK-specific sentiment. Source: https://www.trustpilot.com/review/www.oanda.com
Navigation: 4/4 checks. Descriptive fee headings, legal and support routes, and a directly structured cost page without product-tab dependency were observed.
Clarity: 4/4 checks. The inspected page distinguishes fee types, sets out inactivity conditions and conversion basis, identifies v20/v20 MT4 applicability and links financing/spread information. This does not mean the fees are low. Source: https://www.oanda.com/uk-en/trading/our-charges/
Documents: 4/4 discoverability checks. OANDA Europe Limited is identified; contract, complaints and execution-policy links are listed. The sampled terms identify the company and CFD/spread-bet scope. Sources: https://www.oanda.com/uk-en/legal/ https://legal.oanda.com/oel/fxtrade_customer_agreement_oel/en
Limits: no account onboarding, support response or mobile journey was tested. The score measures this checklist, not full usability.
Pepperstone
Observed 2026-09-12 · review due 2026-10-12
| Brand review signal | UK navigation structure | UK clarity | UK document visibility |
|---|
| 80/100 | 100/100 | 75/100 | 100/100 |
Scope: UK resident offers; desktop public-information checklist uk-documentary-1.0, collected with AI assistance on 12 September 2026. No human reviewer, account opening, execution testing or mobile certification is claimed. A 100 checklist score means the named disclosure checks passed, not a perfect broker.
Brand signal: Trustpilot 4.2/5 -> (4.2-1)/4*100 = 80. Global profile, not a UK customer sample. Source: https://www.trustpilot.com/review/pepperstone.com
Navigation: 4/4 checks. Cost headings, legal/support routes and semantic tab controls were exposed. A country prompt was encountered from the audit environment in Italy; this is reported as context, not attributed to all UK visitors.
Clarity: 3/4 checks. Standard/Razor/spread-betting pricing, additional charges and international-withdrawal exceptions were distinguishable. The cTrader explanation uses per unit while adjacent pricing uses lots; the unambiguous-unit-basis check did not pass. Source: https://pepperstone.com/en-gb/trading/costs-and-fees
Documents: 4/4 discoverability checks. Pepperstone Limited, UK contract, complaints and execution policy identified in the legal hub. A costs PDF was also retrieved. Sources: https://pepperstone.com/en-gb/about-us/policies/legal https://eu-assets.contentstack.com/v3/assets/bltd74737b907a31bbb/bltc19314db598b7ab0/UK_Legal_Costs_and_Charges.pdf
Limits: this browser check resolved the earlier full-page research-tool failure. No account onboarding, support response or mobile journey was tested.
Explore the current UK rating calculation →
