Provider at a glance
- Category
- OTC Desks
- Entity
- Not verified
- Official website
- wintermute.com
Independent rankingchecked How it works
Details
Scored 48 out of 100 under methodology 2026.10.18, from the evidence read in September 2026.
Wintermute OTC
Principal market maker
OTC Desks
#9 Overall
Ranked #9 of 9 OTC desks in the published ranking
48
ChainChoice Score
The ChainChoice Score, shown against 100: published scores run from 41 to 99.- High evidence confidence
Is Wintermute OTC right for you?
Look elsewhere if these come first
- Published minimum ticket3/10 here; Bitfinex OTC scores 6
- Counterparty footing and asset segregation3/10 here; FalconX scores 7
- Documented settlement mechanics2/10 here; Cumberland (DRW) scores 9
- Published price transparency1/10 here; Cumberland (DRW) scores 5
Not yet tested for your country. Markets it lists: Global.
to test where you can use it.
The rank above is the published one, the same for every reader. Find my best OTC desk shows where it lands for you.
What will Wintermute OTC cost you?
Not priced on this basis
- Your monthly volume
- $1k
How safe is Wintermute OTC?
- Evidence: verified4 of 4 criteria rest on quoted, sourced receipts. Read September 2026.
- LicenceMiCA (EU): no register record on file here.
Alternatives to Wintermute OTC
Compare all 4- 6Bitfinex OTC13 points above · stronger on documented settlement mechanics (7 against 2)61
- 7Cumberland (DRW)13 points above · stronger on documented settlement mechanics (9 against 2)61
- 8FalconX7 points above · stronger on counterparty and client asset footing (7 against 3)55
For your setup
Find out if Wintermute OTC fits you
The rank above is the published one — the same for every visitor. Answer the category's questions and this section shows where Wintermute OTC lands for you, which criteria your answers weight up, and which stated needs the record does or does not meet. The published rank stays beside it.
- A few questions
- No account required
- Ranking-blind: no commercial input
- Personalised in under 60 seconds
Find my best OTC deskNothing is inferred from clicks, popularity or commercial value.
Why this rank
Why Wintermute OTC ranks #9
Each strength is read from evidence on a 0–10 ladder and weighted as the published methodology states. The 32 objective points these produce (7.7 here) sit inside the score; availability, friction, trust record and measured data add the rest.
4 published criteria · Σ weight 100
CriterionWeightStrength · 0–10ScoreContrib.MedianBestRankEvidence
303+2.885.010#6/9Loading evidence…
303+2.887.09#8/9Loading evidence…
222+1.416.09#9/9Loading evidence…
181+0.583.05#7/9Loading evidence…
Hairline = best in this ranking · tick = its median · a missing bar is "not scored", never zero
Margin−7behind FalconX, #8
RobustnessHoldsacross a one-point change to each of its 4 criterion scores, the re-run scores 46–50 and stays #9
Evidence4 of 4 scored4 quoted, 4 with a source link
What would move the rank
Each line is the ranking run again with one of Wintermute OTC’s criterion scores changed and every other value held: the smallest whole-point change on that criterion that moves its rank, and where the re-run puts it. Up to 4 climbs and 3 falls are listed, smallest change first. Nothing here is a forecast.
Published minimum ticket 3 → 7 on its ladder · passes FalconX+456#9 → #8
Counterparty footing and asset segregation 3 → 7 on its ladder · passes FalconX+456#9 → #8
Documented settlement mechanics 2 → 7 on its ladder · passes FalconX+555#9 → #8
Published price transparency 1 → 7 on its ladder · passes FalconX+655#9 → #8
Smallest climb: published minimum ticket 3 → 7 passes FalconX, #8.
Strengths
0 from the score dataWhere it leads
No scored criterion is at or within one point of the category best, so no strength can be stated from the data.
Tradeoffs
4 from the score dataWhere it trails
Not for readers who put first
- Published minimum ticket — 3/10 against a category best of 10/10
- Counterparty footing and asset segregation — 3/10 against a category best of 9/10
- Documented settlement mechanics — 2/10 against a category best of 9/10
- Published price transparency — 1/10 against a category best of 5/10
Record watch-outs
- The sentence that matters most is the one no buyer reads: "Neither Wintermute Entity is authorised or regulated by any regulatory authority." The FCA reference elsewhere on the same page is a money-laundering registration, not a trading permission, and the two are easy to conflate — FRN 928764 confers no conduct protection, no compensation scheme and no ombudsman route. If a trade goes wrong there is no supervisor to complain to, and Wintermute says so itself before you ask.
Competitive position
Where Wintermute OTC leads and where it trails
Rank on every objective dimension among the rows scored on it. A criterion in the top third of its pool is listed as a lead, the bottom third as a trail; the middle is neither. Popularity, size and commercial terms are not dimensions.
Availability#1 / 914.0 of 20 · constant here
Published criteria#9 / 95.8 of 30 · best 18.0
Friction#1 / 92.7 of 10 · constant here
Trust record#1 / 93.2 of 8 · constant here
Measured data#1 / 98.3 of 18 · constant here
Where Wintermute OTC leadsNo criterion in the top third of its pool.
Where it trails
- Counterparty footing and asset segregation#8 / 9
- Documented settlement mechanics#9 / 9
- Published price transparency#7 / 9
Closest alternatives
The 3 nearest rows by score
Nearest by published score in either direction. Each card states the criteria on which the two rows differ and the cost difference under the same scenario inputs; the compare arithmetic below shows why the higher one ranks higher.
FalconX#8 of 9 · score 55 · 7.0 points ahead
Wintermute OTC leads on
- Published minimum ticket3 vs 1
FalconX leads on
- Counterparty footing and asset segregation7 vs 3
- Documented settlement mechanics4 vs 2
Largest single reason FalconX is ahead: published criteria (+6.5 display points).Scenario cost: FalconX has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Cumberland (DRW)#7 of 9 · score 61 · 13.0 points ahead
Wintermute OTC leads on
- Published minimum ticket3 vs 1
Cumberland (DRW) leads on
- Counterparty footing and asset segregation4 vs 3
- Documented settlement mechanics9 vs 2
- Published price transparency5 vs 1
Largest single reason Cumberland (DRW) is ahead: published criteria (+12.2 display points).Scenario cost: Cumberland (DRW) has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Bitfinex OTC#6 of 9 · score 61 · 13.0 points ahead
Wintermute OTC leads on
- Counterparty footing and asset segregation3 vs 2
Bitfinex OTC leads on
- Published minimum ticket6 vs 3
- Documented settlement mechanics7 vs 2
- Published price transparency3 vs 1
Largest single reason Bitfinex OTC is ahead: published criteria (+13.0 display points).Scenario cost: Bitfinex OTC has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Against the leader
80 vs 48 · gap 32.0Why Gemini eOTC ranks above Wintermute OTC
The compare workspace's arithmetic applied to these two rows. Each dimension's share of the gap is its weight × the difference, on the displayed scale — it reproduces the displayed gap of 32.0 to within rounding.
DimensionThisGemini eOTCGap share
Availability · 23% weight · constant here14.014.0same
Published criteria · 35% weight5.818.0−31.7, worse
Friction · 12% weight · constant here2.72.7same
Trust record · 9% weight · constant here3.23.2same
Measured data · 21% weight · constant here8.38.3same
Published criterionThisGemini eOTCPoints
Published minimum ticket · w30310−6.72, worse
Counterparty footing and asset segregation · w3038−4.80, worse
Documented settlement mechanics · w2228−4.22, worse
Published price transparency · w1812−0.58, worse
Net4880−32.0
Your scenario
Wintermute OTC is not priced for this scenario
Taker fee on your volume for a year. Excludes network gas and any withdrawal fee. Change an input and every figure recomputes from the published rate; the published rank does not move.
your cost/yr · default scenario — set your own
Your monthly volume · your input$1k
Rate read from the provider’s published pricing ↗ on 24 September 2026.
your cost/yrCost is stated as your cost/yr in USD; it is never a yield, never annualised, and it does not enter the score.
Not priced on this basis
Under the default inputs · USDCategory medianNot priced0 of 9 rows priced
Cheapest pricedNone pricedDifference not stated · availability not applied — set your country to filter
9 of 9 rows in this ranking have no verified rate for this scenario and are absent from the median, not counted as free.
Evidence
Evidence read 24 September 2026
One row per published criterion: the page each strength was read from, its source type by domain, the reading date and whether the file and the published table agree. Open a row for the quote and the receipt.
4 of 4 cells scored
Score evidenceVerified4 of 4 criteria reconstruct from receipts
4 of 4 criteria reconstruct from a quoted, sourced receipt equal to the published strength.Public receiptsReading…4 quoted with a source URL
The receipt file has not been read yet.Evidence confidenceHighcoverage and corroboration, never freshness
4/4 criteria scored, with 4 dated sources quoted.RobustnessHoldsrank #9 across every one-point re-run
Whether the position holds when one criterion score is changed by one point and the ranking is run again. It is always a re-run of the ranking, never an estimate.The newest evidence read on the platform is 3 November 2026; this category's reading is older. The scores stand as read on 24 September 2026.
Reading the evidence ledger…
CriterionSourceTypeReadFreshnessStatusReceipt
Published minimum ticketstrength 3 · weight 30Report an error—24 September 2026*
Unknown
No reading date is recorded for this cell or its category.No receipt
A strength is published but no quote or source page is on file for it.Counterparty footing and asset segregationstrength 3 · weight 30Report an error—24 September 2026*
Unknown
No reading date is recorded for this cell or its category.No receipt
A strength is published but no quote or source page is on file for it.Documented settlement mechanicsstrength 2 · weight 22Report an error—24 September 2026*
Unknown
No reading date is recorded for this cell or its category.No receipt
A strength is published but no quote or source page is on file for it.Published price transparencystrength 1 · weight 18Report an error—24 September 2026*
Unknown
No reading date is recorded for this cell or its category.No receipt
A strength is published but no quote or source page is on file for it.How you can lose money here, and what the ranking scores
- Insolvency failure (Wintermute OTC 3/10): the firm or issuer that owes you cannot pay.Scored by Counterparty footing and asset segregation · 30%
- Execution failure: you get a worse price, later, or nothing.Scored by Documented settlement mechanics · 22% (Wintermute OTC 2/10)Scored by Published price transparency · 18% (Wintermute OTC 1/10)
Not assessed by this ranking: Control failure, Liveness failure, Custody failure, Regulatory failure, Exit failure, Information failure. A high place says nothing about these; the Methodology tab says what each means. Also scored, as cost, quality or a summary of several families: Published minimum ticket (30%).
Facts
facts, not scoresWhat the record publishes
- Pricing
- "Trade with Wintermute Tightest spreads, no fees or commission" — quoted from https://
www .wintermute .com /otc, fetched 24 September 2026. This is the entirety of Wintermute's published pricing: a superlative and a denial, with no figure, benchmark, schedule or mechanism anywhere on the page. The same site carries an explicit warranty disclaimer covering exactly that claim: "Neither Wintermute Entity provides any warranty, whether express or implied, as to any results, including, but not limited to, in relation to prices and the timing, speed or likelihood of any transactions with Wintermute."Wintermute OTC — official pricing page ↗ · 24 September 2026 - Prices published in
- USDWintermute OTC — official pricing page ↗ · 24 September 2026
- Licences held
- Not published
- Compliance level
- partial
- Regulatory note
- Not published
- Supported chains
- Multi-chain
- Markets served
- global
- Primary markets
- Not published
- Restricted markets
- Not published
- Operating limits
- Not published
- Availability note
- Not published
No confirmed legal entity is on file for this record. Nothing is inferred from the brand name.
If something goes wrong with Wintermute OTC: where to complain, and where to report a scam
Loading the routes for your country.
How this page is reviewed
Reviewed means this product in this category was read against its sources on or after that date; every ranked category is re-read at least every 45 days. Models research, extract and parse. A deterministic engine ranks. Every quote passes an adversarial refute pass.
Accountable for this review: Mathias Siemonsmeier, Founder.
How we review · Review calendar · Corrections log · How we make money
History
What the record carries
Changes to published ranks are recorded in a ledger; every step and its cause is listed on the rank-history page. The entries below begin with the current verified snapshot, then the methodology versions whose changes applied to this category, newest first.
8 methodology entries
- 24 September 2026Current verified snapshot · methodology 2026.10.18Score 48, #9 of 9. 4 of 4 criteria scored. History starts here; earlier values are not interpolated.
- 10 October 2026
2026.10.8When nothing serves your country, the list shown for reference is the published ranking · platform-wide- fixed The reference list shown when nothing serves your country is the published order with the published scores, and a build check now fails any such list out of that order or with a score the ranking does not publish.
- fixed The explorer prints an overall rank only for a row the published ranking holds; a country entrant such as Coinbase Commerce for US merchants shows no overall rank.
- changed Published orders do not move. Country results change only where nothing serves the country: in India bill pay keeps Bitcoin Well first and now shows Strike second, as published; 35 such runs across all categories and countries now match the published list exactly.
- 10 October 2026
2026.10.6A criterion you require re-scores the rows that meet it · platform-wide- changed The explorer sends each criterion you require, at any band, as fit_required with your other answers; region, licence, chain and fact filters stay filters. On /best, a required criterion joins For you as a marked preference does, which needs your country; Overall stays the published ranking, filtered.
- added Every published criterion has a golden case as the explorer sends it (require:<criterion>), so the order a requirement gives is replayed and gated as the published order is, and a change to it needs an entry here.
- 16 September 2026
2026.09.15Dimension scores carry tenths, and eleven more categories are re-read from primary sources · platform-wide- changed Dimension scores resolve to tenths of a point (O-04b), and weightedTotal is rounded to six decimal places before the order is read. 518 published scores move across 107 categories that were not re-read; none of them moves by more than 4 points, and most move by 1.
- fixed 66 published scores change in the eleven re-read categories, against a verbatim source each. The largest moves are Reflexer RAI (−16), Beefy and Unrekt (−11), Aztec (−10) and Golem (+9) — all of them rows whose sources had moved since their last read.
- changed Published order moves in 38 of 119 categories and three #1s change: smart_contract_audits (Zellic → Certora) and travel_rule_compliance (Sumsub Travel Rule → CodeVASP) on the finer resolution, kyc_compliance (Veriff → Sumsub) on the re-read.
- added availabilitySource (O-04g): for a reader who states a country, a row whose availability in that country rests on a region tag its record gives no source for sorts below every sourced row. It is inert in every order published here, which states no country.
Methodology 2026.10.18, the same published run every visitor sees · receipt otc_desks:wintermute_otc:2026.10.18:a9fe754b7f1f
Are you Wintermute OTC? Reply to this verdict, or send evidence, ask for a correction or claim the listing. Every message gets a public ticket number; none of it changes a rank unless a public page or a signed statement supports it.