Advertise on KripZen — put your brand in front of a global crypto audience.Get in touch →

← Back to Safety Scores

How to read these grades: each is derived from published, checkable disclosures — proof-of-reserves attestations, public regulatory registers, disclosed insurance funds and the documented incident record — using the weighted rubric below. Where an exchange does not disclose something, we mark it unverified rather than assume it. These are not audits and not investment advice; they reflect what was published as of our last review.

B-

MEXC

MEXC publishes a proof-of-reserves page stating a reserve-rate methodology and cites a $100m Guardian Fund through a single source; Estonia's financial intelligence unit revoked its VASP licence in November 2023.

3.3/5
Safety grade

BySafety DeskSenior Exchange Safety Editor

Our MEXC review

MEXC scores a B- on a record where almost every item is present in outline and absent in detail. It publishes a proof-of-reserves page with no figures on it, cites a $100m fund nobody else confirms, and holds registrations that are not exchange licences.

What checks out

We found no confirmed major security incident, which on a rubric that weights incident history at 10% is a genuine point in its favour. There is a proof-of-reserves page and it does state a reserve-rate methodology, so the programme exists as a stated commitment rather than as nothing at all.

Where the evidence stops

Almost everywhere else. The reserve page publishes no figures we could extract; a June 2026 Hacken-audited snapshot reported at 114–269% coverage comes from third parties and could not be confirmed against the primary page. The cold/hot storage split is not disclosed. The $100m "Guardian Fund" rests on a single third-party source and is not confirmed by any primary MEXC disclosure — a fund one outlet mentions is not a fund you can rely on. On regulation, the FinCEN MSB, AUSTRAC, Canadian MSB and Swiss VQF entries are anti-money-laundering monitoring obligations, not permissions to run an exchange, and the distinction matters because the first is a filing and the second is supervision. Estonia's Financial Intelligence Unit revoked MEXC Estonia OÜ's licence in November 2023, and a June 2024 blacklist entry surfaced in our research with no clear issuing body or stated consequence, so we record it and do not weigh it.

How to read the grade

The B- is carried by an absence of bad news rather than a presence of evidence. Nothing here has failed; very little here has been shown.

Grade breakdown

Every KripZen grade comes from the same five weighted checks. Here is how MEXC scores on each.

  • Proof of reservesWeight 30%

    The proof-of-reserves page states a reserve-rate methodology but publishes no figures we could extract; a June 2026 Hacken-audited snapshot at 114–269% coverage is reported by third parties and could not be confirmed against the primary page.

    What this means → partial or unverified
  • CustodyWeight 25%

    Cold/hot storage split is not disclosed; we could not confirm it from a primary source.

    What this means → partial or unverified
  • RegulationWeight 20%

    Holds FinCEN MSB, AUSTRAC, Canadian MSB and Swiss VQF registrations — AML monitoring obligations rather than exchange licences. Estonia's Financial Intelligence Unit revoked MEXC Estonia OÜ's licence in November 2023, and a June 2024 blacklist entry surfaced in our research without a clear issuing body or stated consequence.

    What this means → partial or unverified
  • InsuranceWeight 15%

    A $100m 'Guardian Fund' is cited by a single third-party source and is not confirmed by any primary MEXC disclosure.

    partial or unverified
  • Incident historyWeight 10%

    No confirmed major security incident found in our research.

    meets this factor

Other exchanges we've graded

A-KrakenKraken holds a Wyoming SPDI charter, CFTC and SEC registrations and two EU MiCA authorisations, and has published Merkle-tree proof of reserves verified by Armanino LLP since February 2022; it discloses no insurance-fund figure.B-BinanceBinance publishes a self-attested proof-of-reserves page and a $1bn SAFU user-protection fund, which covered the May 2019 hot-wallet theft of about 7,000 BTC in full; it settled U.S. Bank Secrecy Act and sanctions charges for $4.3bn in November 2023 and remains under a five-year DOJ compliance monitorship.B+BitgetBitget publishes a monthly open-source Merkle-tree proof of reserves showing BTC at 138% and ETH at 181%, and cites a protection fund its own sources size differently; ASIC issued an investor alert in July 2025 over unlicensed high-leverage derivatives.B-BybitBybit publishes monthly Merkle-tree proof of reserves audited by Hacken OU and holds a partial EU MiCA licence in Austria; it stayed solvent after the February 2025 theft of roughly $1.46–1.5bn — the largest exchange hack on record — replenishing reserves in full within 72 hours.BCoinbaseCoinbase is a publicly traded, SEC-reporting U.S. company licensed in 45 states and holding a New York BitLicense, and the SEC's 2023 case against it was dismissed with prejudice in February 2025; it runs no crypto-specific proof-of-reserves programme and its last disclosed crime-insurance figure dates from 2019.B-Crypto.comCrypto.com discloses more than $870m of insurance cover, had its SEC investigation closed with no action in March 2025 and holds a Malta MiCA authorisation; its proof-of-reserves position is contested between our sources, and it reimbursed all users after a January 2022 incident that drained about $34–35m from 483 accounts.