The Kripzen Safety Center
Every exchange should have to earn its grade.
One page, five checks: how we'd grade any exchange, the failures that made those checks non-negotiable, and the rubric behind every score.
The core question
Safest exchanges right now
Ranked A to F on proof-of-reserves, custody, regulation, insurance and incident history β tap any row for the full breakdown.
1A-Exchange AlphaTap to see the full breakdownβββββ
Sets the bar most exchanges don't reach: verifiable reserves, disclosed custody, and real licensing instead of a registration filing.
- Proof of reserves β Independently attested proof-of-reserves, refreshed quarterly (meets this factor)
- Custody β About 95% of customer assets in cold, multi-signature storage (meets this factor)
- Regulation β Licensed β not just registered β in three major jurisdictions (meets this factor)
- Insurance β Maintains a third-party-audited insurance fund (meets this factor)
- Incident history β No major security incidents on record (meets this factor)
2BExchange BetaTap to see the full breakdown!β!ββ
Good custody hygiene and a clean record, but stops short of full independent verification.
- Proof of reserves β Reserves published, but self-attested rather than independently audited (partial or unverified)
- Custody β Cold-storage majority disclosed with a public breakdown (meets this factor)
- Regulation β Registered as a money-services business, not licensed as an exchange (partial or unverified)
- Insurance β Carries a disclosed insurance fund (meets this factor)
- Incident history β No major security incidents on record (meets this factor)
3C+Exchange GammaTap to see the full breakdown!!!ββ
The grade an average exchange earns: reasonable marketing, thin disclosure. This is also the sample profile shown in our homepage safety-grade explainer.
- Proof of reserves β Self-reported only β no independent attestation (partial or unverified)
- Custody β No public breakdown of hot vs. cold storage (partial or unverified)
- Regulation β Registered, not licensed (partial or unverified)
- Insurance β No disclosed insurance fund (does not meet this factor)
- Incident history β No major security incidents on record (meets this factor)
4C-Exchange DeltaTap to see the full breakdownβ!!β!
Transparent about a past incident, but reserves remain a black box.
- Proof of reserves β No reserves disclosure of any kind (does not meet this factor)
- Custody β Claims a cold-storage majority with no supporting detail (partial or unverified)
- Regulation β Registered in one market only (partial or unverified)
- Insurance β No disclosed insurance fund (does not meet this factor)
- Incident history β One minor incident in the past 3 years, disclosed promptly and reimbursed (partial or unverified)
5DExchange EpsilonTap to see the full breakdownββββ!
The profile of an exchange that's cutting corners on custody, not just disclosure.
- Proof of reserves β No reserves disclosure of any kind (does not meet this factor)
- Custody β Majority of funds reported as hot-wallet, no public breakdown (does not meet this factor)
- Regulation β Operating without registration in most markets it serves (does not meet this factor)
- Insurance β No disclosed insurance fund (does not meet this factor)
- Incident history β Unresolved user reports of delayed withdrawals (partial or unverified)
6FExchange ZetaTap to see the full breakdownβββββ
Multiple structural red flags at once β the profile we'd tell a reader to avoid.
- Proof of reserves β No reserves disclosure of any kind (does not meet this factor)
- Custody β No public custody information at all (does not meet this factor)
- Regulation β Unregulated in every market it serves (does not meet this factor)
- Insurance β No disclosed insurance fund (does not meet this factor)
- Incident history β A major security incident in the past 24 months with slow, incomplete user communication (does not meet this factor)
The five checks
What we actually check
Every grade on this site β sample or real β comes down to these five factors. No hidden criteria.
Proof of reserves
Can the exchange show β not just claim β that it holds what it owes customers, ideally with independent attestation?
Custody
Is the majority of customer funds held offline in cold storage, with the split disclosed publicly?
Regulation
Is it licensed by a recognized regulator in the markets it serves, or only registered as a money-services business?
Insurance
Is there a disclosed insurance fund or third-party coverage against theft and hacks?
Incident history
Has it avoided major security incidents β or handled one transparently and made customers whole?
The record
Lessons from crypto's worst exchange failures
Six of the most consequential exchange collapses on record, in the order they happened.
Dates and figures are widely reported public estimates from coverage at the time, not Kripzen's own audited data.
- 2014
Mt. Gox
HackFebruary 2014Once the exchange handling the large majority of the world's Bitcoin trades, Mt. Gox abruptly halted withdrawals and filed for bankruptcy in Japan after disclosing that hundreds of thousands of customer and company bitcoins were gone β later attributed to theft that went undetected for years.
The lesson β Trading volume and market dominance are not safety signals. An exchange can look like the industry's center of gravity and still be hollowed out inside.
~850,000 BTC reported missing (publicly reported estimate)
- 2016
Bitfinex
HackAugust 2016A security breach in Bitfinex's multi-signature wallet setup let attackers drain a large share of customer bitcoin in a single incident. The exchange spread the loss across all users' balances and later repaid affected customers over several years.
The lesson β Even a widely used, multi-signature custody setup is only as strong as the systems and partners it depends on β 'multi-sig' alone isn't a safety guarantee.
~120,000 BTC stolen (publicly reported estimate)
- 2018
Coincheck
HackJanuary 2018The Japanese exchange kept a large pool of a single token in an internet-connected hot wallet without a multi-signature setup. Attackers stole hundreds of millions of dollars' worth in one of the largest exchange hacks by value at the time.
The lesson β Hot-wallet convenience has a price. The safest exchanges keep the large majority of customer funds offline, precisely so one breach can't drain everything.
~$530M in NEM (XEM) stolen (publicly reported estimate)
- 2019
QuadrigaCX
FraudEarly 2019Canada's largest exchange at the time told customers it could no longer access roughly CA$190M in funds after its founder died while allegedly holding sole control of the cold-wallet keys. A later court-appointed investigation found many of the wallets had been empty long before his death, pointing to mismanagement and likely fraud rather than a pure accident.
The lesson β Single-person key control is a structural failure waiting to happen β deliberate or not. A credible custodian never lets access depend on one individual.
~CA$190M in customer funds inaccessible (publicly reported estimate)
- 2022
Celsius Network
InsolvencyJune 2022The crypto lending platform froze all customer withdrawals during a market downturn and filed for bankruptcy weeks later. Its founder was subsequently charged with, and later pleaded guilty to, fraud for misrepresenting the platform's risk to depositors.
The lesson β A platform paying yield on deposits is taking risk with your money somewhere. 'Where' and 'how much' are the questions a safety review has to ask before the good times end.
Withdrawals frozen for roughly $4.7B in customer assets (publicly reported estimate)
- 2022
FTX
FraudNovember 2022One of the largest exchanges globally collapsed within days after reporting revealed customer deposits had been comingled with, and lent to, a sister trading firm. Its founder was later convicted on multiple counts of fraud.
The lesson β Scale, celebrity endorsements and slick branding say nothing about whether customer funds are actually segregated from the company's own trading book.
Billions of dollars in customer funds misused (publicly reported estimate)
No pay-to-play
How we grade
The rubric behind every Safety Grade on this site, and why a paid partnership can't buy a better one.
Every exchange we ever cover β sponsor or not β is scored against the same five factors, weighted the same way. A paid partnership can get an exchange listed faster. It cannot buy a better grade.
- Proof of reserves
- 30%
- Custody
- 25%
- Regulation
- 20%
- Insurance
- 15%
- Incident history
- 10%
This Safety Grade is a narrower, faster read than our full exchange review, which also covers fees, coins and support. Read our full editorial policy β
The AβF scale
- A
Meets every factor at a high bar: independently verified reserves, disclosed cold-storage custody, real licensing, insurance, and a clean record.
- B
Strong on most factors, with at least one gap β usually self-attested reserves or registration instead of full licensing.
- C
Average. Some disclosure, but several factors are thin, self-reported, or unverifiable.
- D
Multiple real gaps β undisclosed custody, no regulation, no insurance β even without a known incident.
- F
Either a confirmed history of major incidents, or enough structural red flags that we can't responsibly recommend it.
Beyond exchanges
Coin guides
Plain-English risk levels for the assets people ask about most β not investment advice, just what to know before you buy.
Bitcoin
Store of value
The original cryptocurrency and still the largest by market value, with over fifteen years of continuous operation and no successful attack on its core network.
Why this risk level
- Longest track record of any crypto asset by a wide margin
- Most decentralized and battle-tested validator (miner) set
- Still far more volatile than traditional stores of value like gold or bonds
Ethereum
Smart-contract platform
The leading platform for smart contracts and decentralized apps β most of DeFi, NFTs and stablecoin activity runs on it or a network derived from it.
Why this risk level
- Large, active developer ecosystem and the deepest liquidity outside Bitcoin
- Moved to proof-of-stake in 2022, cutting its energy use by well over 99%
- Network fees can spike sharply during congestion, and smart-contract bugs are a real risk for anything built on top
Stablecoins
Stablecoin
Tokens designed to track the value of a fiat currency, usually the US dollar β useful for moving value without crypto's usual price swings, but you're trusting the issuer's reserves.
Why this risk level
- Value is only as solid as the issuer's reserve backing and how often it's audited
- Major issuers publish reserve attestations at different frequencies and levels of detail β read them before relying on one
- A stable price is not the same as a risk-free asset; issuer or regulatory problems can still break the peg
Solana
Smart-contract platform
A high-throughput blockchain built for speed and low transaction fees, popular for trading apps and consumer-facing crypto products.
Why this risk level
- Has suffered multiple network outages over its history, some lasting hours
- Price has historically swung more sharply than Bitcoin or Ethereum across market cycles
- Faster and growing, but with a more concentrated validator set than Ethereum today
XRP
Payments
Designed for fast, low-cost cross-border settlement, and closely tied to Ripple, the company most associated with promoting it.
Why this risk level
- Years of US regulatory uncertainty preceded a 2023 court ruling that clarified some β not all β aspects of its legal status
- Price and trading volume are heavily influenced by the issuing company's own actions and announcements
- Real-world payment adoption claims are easy to overstate β read past the headlines
Dogecoin
Meme coin
Started in 2013 as a joke based on an internet meme, with no roadmap or scarcity mechanism comparable to Bitcoin's β its price is driven almost entirely by sentiment.
Why this risk level
- Unlimited supply β there is no maximum cap, unlike Bitcoin's fixed 21 million
- Price history is dominated by social-media-driven spikes and crashes
- Treat it as pure speculation on attention and sentiment, not an investment thesis