1v1 Institutional Counterparty Comparison
AGL vs CryptoFacilities: Regulation, 6D Ratings & Safety Audit
Deterministic head-to-head benchmarking of AGL (ABans Global Limited) and CryptoFacilities (CryptoFacilities) across primary regulatory filings, statutory Tier-1 authorisations, 6-Dimension compliance scores, execution software, and warning exposure.
Coverage: Selected firm records: UK, Ireland and Gibraltar
- AGL 6D Score
- 5.0
- CryptoFacilities 6D Score
- 5.0
- Regulated Licences
- 1 vs 1
- Warning Flags
- 0 vs 0
AGL and CryptoFacilities are statistically tied in composite 6D scoring (5.0 vs 5.0)
On supervisory breadth, AGL holds 1 active regulated licence(s) (0 Tier-1) out of 1 total filings and 0 warning count(s), whereas CryptoFacilities holds 1 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 | AGL | CryptoFacilities | Score Delta | Dimension Leader |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Composite 6D Score | 100% Composite | 5.0 | 5.0 | 0.0 | Statistical Tie |
| Regulatory & Licensing Integrity (riskScore) | 30% Weight | 5.0 | 5.0 | 0.0 | Statistical Tie |
| Execution & Software Infrastructure (industryScore) | 20% Weight | 3.0 | 1.0 | +2.0 | AGL |
| User Reputation & Complaint Telemetry (userScore) | 20% Weight | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | Statistical Tie |
| Institutional Brand Longevity (brandScore) | 15% Weight | 5.0 | 5.0 | 0.0 | Statistical Tie |
| Global Market Influence & Footprint (influenceScore) | 15% Weight | 5.0 | 5.0 | 0.0 | Statistical Tie |
Visual Architecture Benchmark: AGL vs CryptoFacilities
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 | AGL | CryptoFacilities |
|---|---|---|
| Primary Legal Name | ABans Global Limited | CryptoFacilities |
| Source Risk Classification | Risk level not supplied | Risk level not supplied |
| Active Regulated / Total Filings | 1 regulated / 1 total (0 Tier-1) | 1 regulated / 1 total (0 Tier-1) |
| Recorded Certificate Numbers | ||
| Registered Domicile / Address | 3rd Floor, 19 Gerrard Street, W1D 6JG. London, UK | GB |
| Offered Asset Classes & Services | Multi-asset financial services | Multi-asset financial services |
| Execution Software & Terminals | MT5 | 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 AGL and CryptoFacilities against other regulated peers in our selected firm records: uk, ireland and gibraltar slice.
Frequently Asked Questions: AGL vs CryptoFacilities
Deterministic counterparty comparison answers derived from supervisory records.
Which institution has stronger regulatory oversight: AGL or CryptoFacilities?
Both AGL and CryptoFacilities hold 1 regulated licence record(s) in our dataset. Specifically, AGL maintains 1 total recorded filing(s) (Financial Conduct Authority (UK FCA)) with 0 warning flag(s), whereas CryptoFacilities maintains 1 recorded filing(s) (Financial Conduct Authority) 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 AGL and CryptoFacilities?
In QuantCalc Tools's 6-Dimension scoring matrix (0.0–10.0 scale), AGL records an Overall Score of 5.0 (Risk & Licensing: 5.0, Brand: 5.0, Market Influence: 5.0, User Reputation: 0.0, Execution & Software: 3.0), compared with CryptoFacilities 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 AGL and CryptoFacilities differ in trading platforms and asset classes?
AGL lists general financial services with execution software [MT5], while CryptoFacilities 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: AGL or CryptoFacilities?
AGL carries a "Risk level not supplied" classification with 0 warning/exposure count(s) and 0 user comment(s), while CryptoFacilities 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.