1v1 Institutional Counterparty Comparison
Evest vs ICM: Regulation, 6D Ratings & Safety Audit
Deterministic head-to-head benchmarking of Evest (Evest) and ICM (ICM Capital Limited) across primary regulatory filings, statutory Tier-1 authorisations, 6-Dimension compliance scores, execution software, and warning exposure.
Coverage: Firms with licence warnings, enforcement flags or complaints
ICM outranks Evest by +2.0 pts in composite 6D scoring (7.0 vs 5.0)
On supervisory breadth, Evest holds 1 active regulated licence(s) (0 Tier-1) out of 2 total filings and 2 warning count(s), whereas ICM holds 3 active regulated licence(s) (0 Tier-1) out of 4 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 | Evest | ICM | Score Delta | Dimension Leader |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Composite 6D Score | 100% Composite | 5.0 | 7.0 | +2.0 | ICM |
| Regulatory & Licensing Integrity (riskScore) | 30% Weight | 5.0 | 7.0 | +2.0 | ICM |
| Execution & Software Infrastructure (industryScore) | 20% Weight | 3.0 | 5.0 | +2.0 | ICM |
| User Reputation & Complaint Telemetry (userScore) | 20% Weight | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | Statistical Tie |
| Institutional Brand Longevity (brandScore) | 15% Weight | 5.0 | 7.0 | +2.0 | ICM |
| Global Market Influence & Footprint (influenceScore) | 15% Weight | 4.0 | 8.0 | +4.0 | ICM |
Visual Architecture Benchmark: Evest vs ICM
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 | Evest | ICM |
|---|---|---|
| Primary Legal Name | Evest | ICM Capital Limited |
| Source Risk Classification | Risk level not supplied | Risk level not supplied |
| Active Regulated / Total Filings | 1 regulated / 2 total (0 Tier-1) | 3 regulated / 4 total (0 Tier-1) |
| Recorded Certificate Numbers | ||
| Registered Domicile / Address | 11 Blackheath Village London, United Kingdom SE3 9LA | ICM Capital Limited, Level 30, 122 Leadenhall Street, London EC3V 4AB, United Kingdom |
| Offered Asset Classes & Services | Multi-asset financial services | CFDs, Commodities, Precious metals, Forex, Stocks, Futures |
| Execution Software & Terminals | Trade, Invest, Online, evest, MT5 | MT4, MT5 |
| Supported Client Languages | English | Chinese (Simplified), Spanish, Arabic, English, Russian |
| Warning / Exposure Count | 2 recorded warning(s) | 0 recorded warning(s) |
| Specialized Sub-Page Audits |
Related 1v1 Institutional Comparisons
Compare Evest and ICM against other regulated peers in our firms with licence warnings, enforcement flags or complaints slice.
Frequently Asked Questions: Evest vs ICM
Deterministic counterparty comparison answers derived from supervisory records.
Which institution has stronger regulatory oversight: Evest or ICM?
ICM holds more active regulated filings (3 vs 1). Specifically, Evest maintains 2 total recorded filing(s) (FSCA, VFSC) with 2 warning flag(s), whereas ICM maintains 4 recorded filing(s) (Financial Conduct Authority, FSRA, Labuan FSA, 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 Evest and ICM?
In RegTech Codex's 6-Dimension scoring matrix (0.0–10.0 scale), Evest records an Overall Score of 5.0 (Risk & Licensing: 5.0, Brand: 5.0, Market Influence: 4.0, User Reputation: 0.0, Execution & Software: 3.0), compared with ICM at 7.0 Overall (Risk & Licensing: 7.0, Brand: 7.0, Market Influence: 8.0, User Reputation: 0.0, Execution & Software: 5.0).
How do Evest and ICM differ in trading platforms and asset classes?
Evest lists general financial services with execution software [Trade, Invest, Online, evest, MT5], while ICM lists CFDs, Commodities, Precious metals, Forex, Stocks, Futures with execution software [MT4, MT5]. Counterparties should verify FIX/API connectivity, server routing topology, and negative balance protection per entity.
Which counterparty carries lower regulatory warning and complaint exposure: Evest or ICM?
Evest carries a "Risk level not supplied" classification with 2 warning/exposure count(s) and 0 user comment(s), while ICM 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.