1v1 Institutional Counterparty Comparison
Fxcess vs Shadow Exchange: Regulation, 6D Ratings & Safety Audit
Deterministic head-to-head benchmarking of Fxcess (Fxcess) and Shadow Exchange (Shadow Exchange) across primary regulatory filings, statutory Tier-1 authorisations, 6-Dimension compliance scores, execution software, and warning exposure.
Coverage: Global foreign exchange, CFD and currency-pair dealers outside regional registers
- Fxcess 6D Score
- 3.0
- Shadow Exchange 6D Score
- 2.3
- Regulated Licences
- 0 vs 0
- Warning Flags
- 0 vs 0
Fxcess outranks Shadow Exchange by +0.7 pts in composite 6D scoring (3.0 vs 2.3)
On supervisory breadth, Fxcess holds 0 active regulated licence(s) (0 Tier-1) out of 0 total filings and 0 warning count(s), whereas Shadow Exchange holds 0 active regulated licence(s) (0 Tier-1) out of 0 total filings and 0 warning count(s). Allocators should inspect the individual licence numbers and contracting legal entities below before onboarding.
6-Dimension Quantitative Scorecard Comparison
Head-to-head breakdown across all 6 proprietary evaluation dimensions (0.0–10.0 scale).
| Evaluation Dimension | Methodology Weight | Fxcess | Shadow Exchange | Score Delta | Dimension Leader |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Composite 6D Score | 100% Composite | 3.0 | 2.3 | +0.7 | Fxcess |
| Regulatory & Licensing Integrity (riskScore) | 30% Weight | 3.0 | 2.3 | +0.7 | Fxcess |
| Execution & Software Infrastructure (industryScore) | 20% Weight | 2.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | Statistical Tie |
| User Reputation & Complaint Telemetry (userScore) | 20% Weight | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | Statistical Tie |
| Institutional Brand Longevity (brandScore) | 15% Weight | 3.0 | 2.3 | +0.7 | Fxcess |
| Global Market Influence & Footprint (influenceScore) | 15% Weight | 3.0 | 2.3 | +0.7 | Fxcess |
Visual Architecture Benchmark: Fxcess vs Shadow Exchange
Vector comparison exhibit generated from live supervisory snapshot metrics.
Regulatory Standing, Entity & Platform Comparison
Structural comparison of supervisory authorisations, domicile, execution terminals, and risk telemetry.
| Audit Attribute | Fxcess | Shadow Exchange |
|---|---|---|
| Primary Legal Name | Fxcess | Shadow Exchange |
| Source Risk Classification | Risk level not supplied | Risk level not supplied |
| Active Regulated / Total Filings | 0 regulated / 0 total (0 Tier-1) | 0 regulated / 0 total (0 Tier-1) |
| Recorded Certificate Numbers | None on file | None on file |
| Registered Domicile / Address | The Valley, AI2640, Cosely Drive, 1338, AI | International |
| Offered Asset Classes & Services | Commodities, Precious metals, Indices, Forex | Trading |
| Execution Software & Terminals | MT4 | Proprietary / Web Platform |
| Supported Client Languages | Indonesian, Spanish, Dutch, Vietnamese, Chinese, English, Japanese, Korean, French, Thai | English |
| Warning / Exposure Count | 0 recorded warning(s) | 0 recorded warning(s) |
| Specialized Sub-Page Audits |
Related 1v1 Institutional Comparisons
Compare Fxcess and Shadow Exchange against other regulated peers in our global foreign exchange, cfd and currency-pair dealers outside regional registers slice.
Frequently Asked Questions: Fxcess vs Shadow Exchange
Deterministic counterparty comparison answers derived from supervisory records.
Which institution has stronger regulatory oversight: Fxcess or Shadow Exchange?
Both Fxcess and Shadow Exchange hold 0 regulated licence record(s) in our dataset. Specifically, Fxcess maintains 0 total recorded filing(s) (none on file) with 0 warning flag(s), whereas Shadow Exchange maintains 0 recorded filing(s) (none on file) with 0 warning flag(s). Always confirm the specific subsidiary onboarding your account on the official regulator register.
How do the 6D quantitative compliance scores compare between Fxcess and Shadow Exchange?
In FXOpen Ledger's 6-Dimension scoring matrix (0.0–10.0 scale), Fxcess records an Overall Score of 3.0 (Risk & Licensing: 3.0, Brand: 3.0, Market Influence: 3.0, User Reputation: 0.0, Execution & Software: 2.0), compared with Shadow Exchange at 2.3 Overall (Risk & Licensing: 2.3, Brand: 2.3, Market Influence: 2.3, User Reputation: 0.0, Execution & Software: 2.0).
How do Fxcess and Shadow Exchange differ in trading platforms and asset classes?
Fxcess lists Commodities, Precious metals, Indices, Forex with execution software [MT4], while Shadow Exchange lists Trading with execution software [proprietary/web execution]. Counterparties should verify FIX/API connectivity, server routing topology, and negative balance protection per entity.
Which counterparty carries lower regulatory warning and complaint exposure: Fxcess or Shadow Exchange?
Fxcess carries a "Risk level not supplied" classification with 0 warning/exposure count(s) and 0 user comment(s), while Shadow Exchange carries a "Risk level not supplied" classification with 0 warning/exposure count(s) and 0 user comment(s).
Structured against supervisory register snapshots and public regulatory filings. Verify your contracting legal entity and current authorisation status directly on the issuing regulator’s official register before transacting.