1v1 Institutional Counterparty Comparison
DGH vs FBK: Regulation, 6D Ratings & Safety Audit
Deterministic head-to-head benchmarking of DGH (Draper Goren Holm) and FBK (FBK Markets SA (Pty) Ltd) across primary regulatory filings, statutory Tier-1 authorisations, 6-Dimension compliance scores, execution software, and warning exposure.
Coverage: Financial institutions and registrants headquartered in the United States and Canada
- DGH 6D Score
- 2.0
- FBK 6D Score
- 2.0
- Regulated Licences
- 0 vs 0
- Warning Flags
- 0 vs 0
DGH and FBK are statistically tied in composite 6D scoring (2.0 vs 2.0)
On supervisory breadth, DGH holds 0 active regulated licence(s) (0 Tier-1) out of 2 total filings and 0 warning count(s), whereas FBK holds 0 active regulated licence(s) (0 Tier-1) out of 1 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 | DGH | FBK | Score Delta | Dimension Leader |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Composite 6D Score | 100% Composite | 2.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | Statistical Tie |
| Regulatory & Licensing Integrity (riskScore) | 30% Weight | 2.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | Statistical Tie |
| Execution & Software Infrastructure (industryScore) | 20% Weight | 1.0 | 1.0 | 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 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | Statistical Tie |
| Global Market Influence & Footprint (influenceScore) | 15% Weight | 2.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | Statistical Tie |
Visual Architecture Benchmark: DGH vs FBK
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 | DGH | FBK |
|---|---|---|
| Primary Legal Name | Draper Goren Holm | FBK Markets SA (Pty) Ltd |
| Source Risk Classification | Risk level not supplied | Risk level not supplied |
| Active Regulated / Total Filings | 0 regulated / 2 total (0 Tier-1) | 0 regulated / 1 total (0 Tier-1) |
| Recorded Certificate Numbers | California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation (DFPI): Not suppliedU.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC): Not supplied | |
| Registered Domicile / Address | 1112 Montana Ave, #384, Santa Monica, California 90402, United States. | 1 Chadwick Ave, Wynberg, Sandton, 2090 |
| Offered Asset Classes & Services | blockchain technology services | Education, Indices, Forex, Commodities, Bonds |
| Execution Software & Terminals | Proprietary / Web Platform | MT4 |
| Supported Client Languages | English | English |
| Warning / Exposure Count | 0 recorded warning(s) | 0 recorded warning(s) |
| Specialized Sub-Page Audits |
Related 1v1 Institutional Comparisons
Compare DGH and FBK against other regulated peers in our financial institutions and registrants headquartered in the united states and canada slice.
Frequently Asked Questions: DGH vs FBK
Deterministic counterparty comparison answers derived from supervisory records.
Which institution has stronger regulatory oversight: DGH or FBK?
Both DGH and FBK hold 0 regulated licence record(s) in our dataset. Specifically, DGH maintains 2 total recorded filing(s) (California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation (DFPI), U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)) with 0 warning flag(s), whereas FBK maintains 1 recorded filing(s) (FSCA) 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 DGH and FBK?
In Americas Firm Ledger's 6-Dimension scoring matrix (0.0–10.0 scale), DGH records an Overall Score of 2.0 (Risk & Licensing: 2.0, Brand: 2.0, Market Influence: 2.0, User Reputation: 0.0, Execution & Software: 1.0), compared with FBK at 2.0 Overall (Risk & Licensing: 2.0, Brand: 2.0, Market Influence: 2.0, User Reputation: 0.0, Execution & Software: 1.0).
How do DGH and FBK differ in trading platforms and asset classes?
DGH lists blockchain technology services with execution software [proprietary/web execution], while FBK lists Education, Indices, Forex, Commodities, Bonds with execution software [MT4]. Counterparties should verify FIX/API connectivity, server routing topology, and negative balance protection per entity.
Which counterparty carries lower regulatory warning and complaint exposure: DGH or FBK?
DGH carries a "Risk level not supplied" classification with 0 warning/exposure count(s) and 0 user comment(s), while FBK 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.