How we score firms.

1. The headline number

Every firm in the entities directory carries a Beacon Score from 0 to 100, where 100 is cleanest. The score is composed from two independent components:

• Regulator Record (0–100, arithmetic) — public regulator actions against the firm, weighted by severity, recency-decay, and regulator tier.
• Editorial Practices(0–100, structured rubric) — The Beacon’s editorial assessment of how the firm actually operates, across seven dimensions.

The two components are weighted 50/50 and combined into the headline Beacon Score. A small editorial overlay of up to ±10 may be applied where the structured framework misses something specific; this is always accompanied by a published reason.

Formula:
Beacon Score = clamp(0, 100, round(0.5 × Regulator Record + 0.5 × Editorial Practices) + Beacon Adjustment)

If the Editorial Practices Score has not yet been rated for a firm, the Beacon Score falls back to the Regulator Record alone, and the dossier displays “Editorial Practices: not yet rated” so the reader knows the score is incomplete.

2. Regulator Record (the arithmetic part)

Starting from 100, the Regulator Record subtracts points for each public regulator action on the firm’s timeline. The deduction depends on:

• Severity tier per kind: revocation 60, authorisation withdrawal 40, bar 40, criminal proceedings 50, material fine 20, censure 5, AML order 15, client-money breach 18, compensation dispute 10, warning 12.
• Recency decay: half-life per kind. Fines fade over 3 years, AML over 5, bars over 10. Revocations and withdrawals never decay — they are permanent.
• Regulator-tier multiplier: an FCA fine weighs 1.5×; a VFSC fine weighs 0.7×. See the regulator-tiering page for the full tier list.
• Operating-history bonuses: a firm operating ≥10 years with no adverse action for 10 years earns +10. Same with 5-year-clean = +5. Operating less than 2 years = −5 (“too new to judge”).
• Permanent floors: an authorisation revocation caps the final score at 15 (“Severe” band) forever, regardless of decay.

This component is fully reproducible from the firm’s public regulator record. Disagree with a specific event weight? It’s an arithmetic call we can defend on the record.

3. Editorial Practices (the structured rubric)

The Editorial Practices Score covers what the arithmetic can’t: how the firm operates in practice. Seven dimensions, each rated 0–10 with a written reason. The average × 10 is the dimension score; a partially-rated firm shows “N of 7 rated” alongside its score.

Every Editorial Practices rating is the published judgement of The Beacon, accompanied by a written reason visible on the firm’s dossier page. Editor judgements can be disputed via the standard right-of-reply process on the editorial policy page.

4. The Beacon Adjustment (small final overlay)

A small ±10-point overlay, optional, applied where the structured framework misses something. Examples: an unusual demonstration of operational strength (a firm successfully absorbing a distressed peer), or a recent specific incident the rubric doesn’t yet capture. Every Beacon Adjustment is accompanied by a written reason visible on the dossier page.

5. Worked example: how a hypothetical broker might score

• Regulator Record: 88 (one fine 6 years ago, decayed; no other adverse history; 12 years operating clean).
• Editorial Practices: 84 (clean marketing, tight leverage discipline, alignment between licences and target markets, segregated client money, transparent pricing, no withdrawal complaints, strong industry standing — but ratings of 8–9 rather than perfect 10s).
• Beacon Adjustment: 0.
• Beacon Score = round(0.5×88 + 0.5×84) = 86.

A firm that scores a clean 100 in both components plus a +3 adjustment from the editor reaches the score cap. That’s designed to be hard.

6. What the score is not

• Not a credit rating within the meaning of EC Regulation No 1060/2009. The Beacon is not a credit-rating agency.
• Not investment advice or any kind of recommendation.
• Not a guarantee of future solvency or conduct.
• Not a substitute for the reader’s own due diligence on the firm.

The Beacon Score is editorial journalism. The disclaimer states the full position.

7. Disputes and corrections

Firms (or readers) who disagree with a specific score or event may write to info@enon.md. Substantive challenges receive a response within two business days. Right of reply (a formal statement appended to the dossier) is available under the editorial policy.

8. Methodology versioning

This methodology is reviewed continuously. Material changes are reflected here with a new version number at the top of the page. The current version is 2.0 (the addition of the Editorial Practices rubric; previous version 1.0 used only the arithmetic Regulator Record).