1v1 Institutional Counterparty Comparison
DGH vs FUDX: Regulation, 6D Ratings & Safety Audit
Deterministic head-to-head benchmarking of DGH (Draper Goren Holm) and FUDX (FUDX Coin) across primary regulatory filings, statutory Tier-1 authorisations, 6-Dimension compliance scores, execution software, and warning exposure.
Coverage: Selected financial institution and registrant records: United States and Canada
- DGH 6D Score
- 2.0
- FUDX 6D Score
- 3.0
- Regulated Licences
- 0 vs 0
- Warning Flags
- 0 vs 0
FUDX outranks DGH by +1.0 pts in composite 6D scoring (3.0 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 FUDX 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 | DGH | FUDX | Score Delta | Dimension Leader |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Composite 6D Score | 100% Composite | 2.0 | 3.0 | +1.0 | FUDX |
| Regulatory & Licensing Integrity (riskScore) | 30% Weight | 2.0 | 3.0 | +1.0 | FUDX |
| Execution & Software Infrastructure (industryScore) | 20% Weight | 1.0 | 2.0 | +1.0 | FUDX |
| User Reputation & Complaint Telemetry (userScore) | 20% Weight | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | Statistical Tie |
| Institutional Brand Longevity (brandScore) | 15% Weight | 2.0 | 3.0 | +1.0 | FUDX |
| Global Market Influence & Footprint (influenceScore) | 15% Weight | 2.0 | 3.0 | +1.0 | FUDX |
Visual Architecture Benchmark: DGH vs FUDX
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 | FUDX |
|---|---|---|
| Primary Legal Name | Draper Goren Holm | FUDX Coin |
| Source Risk Classification | Risk level not supplied | Risk level not supplied |
| Active Regulated / Total Filings | 0 regulated / 2 total (0 Tier-1) | 0 regulated / 0 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 | None on file |
| Registered Domicile / Address | 1112 Montana Ave, #384, Santa Monica, California 90402, United States. | 1309 Coffeen Ave Ste 1200, Sheridan, WY 82801 |
| Offered Asset Classes & Services | blockchain technology services | Food Delivery, Billing Software, DEX Wallet, Payment Gateway FPay, NFT Marketplace, DeFi, Cryptocurrency |
| Execution Software & Terminals | Proprietary / Web Platform | Proprietary / Web Platform |
| 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 FUDX against other regulated peers in our selected financial institution and registrant records: united states and canada slice.
Frequently Asked Questions: DGH vs FUDX
Deterministic counterparty comparison answers derived from supervisory records.
Which institution has stronger regulatory oversight: DGH or FUDX?
Both DGH and FUDX 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 FUDX 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 DGH and FUDX?
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 FUDX at 3.0 Overall (Risk & Licensing: 3.0, Brand: 3.0, Market Influence: 3.0, User Reputation: 0.0, Execution & Software: 2.0).
How do DGH and FUDX differ in trading platforms and asset classes?
DGH lists blockchain technology services with execution software [proprietary/web execution], while FUDX lists Food Delivery, Billing Software, DEX Wallet, Payment Gateway FPay, NFT Marketplace, DeFi, Cryptocurrency 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: DGH or FUDX?
DGH carries a "Risk level not supplied" classification with 0 warning/exposure count(s) and 0 user comment(s), while FUDX 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.