Skip to content
Americas Firm Ledger
Directory

1v1 Institutional Counterparty Comparison

DGH vs FUNDSLINK: Regulation, 6D Ratings & Safety Audit

Deterministic head-to-head benchmarking of DGH (Draper Goren Holm) and FUNDSLINK (FUNDSLINK) 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
FUNDSLINK 6D Score
5.0
Regulated Licences
0 vs 0
Warning Flags
0 vs 0
DETERMINISTIC QUANTITATIVE VERDICTCanonical Pair: dgh-vs-fundslink

FUNDSLINK outranks DGH by +3.0 pts in composite 6D scoring (5.0 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 FUNDSLINK 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 DimensionMethodology WeightDGHFUNDSLINKScore DeltaDimension Leader
Overall Composite 6D Score100% Composite2.05.0+3.0FUNDSLINK
Regulatory & Licensing Integrity (riskScore)30% Weight2.05.0+3.0FUNDSLINK
Execution & Software Infrastructure (industryScore)20% Weight1.01.00.0Statistical Tie
User Reputation & Complaint Telemetry (userScore)20% Weight0.00.00.0Statistical Tie
Institutional Brand Longevity (brandScore)15% Weight2.05.0+3.0FUNDSLINK
Global Market Influence & Footprint (influenceScore)15% Weight2.05.0+3.0FUNDSLINK

Visual Architecture Benchmark: DGH vs FUNDSLINK

Vector comparison exhibit generated from live supervisory snapshot metrics.

1v1 Institutional Counterparty Benchmark: DGH vs FUNDSLINK
Exhibit: Side-by-side regulatory and 6D quantitative comparison between DGH and FUNDSLINK.

Regulatory Standing, Entity & Platform Comparison

Structural comparison of supervisory authorisations, domicile, execution terminals, and risk telemetry.

Audit AttributeDGHFUNDSLINK
Primary Legal NameDraper Goren HolmFUNDSLINK
Source Risk ClassificationRisk level not suppliedRisk level not supplied
Active Regulated / Total Filings0 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
CNMV: Not supplied
Registered Domicile / Address1112 Montana Ave, #384, Santa Monica, California 90402, United States.ES
Offered Asset Classes & Servicesblockchain technology servicesMulti-asset financial services
Execution Software & TerminalsProprietary / Web PlatformProprietary / Web Platform
Supported Client LanguagesEnglishEnglish
Warning / Exposure Count0 recorded warning(s)0 recorded warning(s)
Specialized Sub-Page Audits

Compare DGH and FUNDSLINK against other regulated peers in our financial institutions and registrants headquartered in the united states and canada slice.

Frequently Asked Questions: DGH vs FUNDSLINK

Deterministic counterparty comparison answers derived from supervisory records.

Which institution has stronger regulatory oversight: DGH or FUNDSLINK?

Both DGH and FUNDSLINK 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 FUNDSLINK maintains 1 recorded filing(s) (CNMV) 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 FUNDSLINK?

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 FUNDSLINK at 5.0 Overall (Risk & Licensing: 5.0, Brand: 5.0, Market Influence: 5.0, User Reputation: 0.0, Execution & Software: 1.0).

How do DGH and FUNDSLINK differ in trading platforms and asset classes?

DGH lists blockchain technology services with execution software [proprietary/web execution], while FUNDSLINK lists general financial services 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 FUNDSLINK?

DGH carries a "Risk level not supplied" classification with 0 warning/exposure count(s) and 0 user comment(s), while FUNDSLINK 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.

DGH vs FUNDSLINK (2026) — Regulation, 6D Score, Safety & Fee Comparison | Americas Firm Ledger