1v1 Institutional Counterparty Comparison
capital.com vs GFA: Regulation, 6D Ratings & Safety Audit
Deterministic head-to-head benchmarking of capital.com (Capital Com SV Investments Ltd) and GFA (GFA Capital Markets LTD) across primary regulatory filings, statutory Tier-1 authorisations, 6-Dimension compliance scores, execution software, and warning exposure.
Coverage: Selected financial house and brokerage records: United Kingdom, Ireland and Gibraltar
GFA outranks capital.com by +4.0 pts in composite 6D scoring (6.0 vs 2.0)
On supervisory breadth, capital.com holds 4 active regulated licence(s) (0 Tier-1) out of 5 total filings and 0 warning count(s), whereas GFA 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 Dimension | Methodology Weight | capital.com | GFA | Score Delta | Dimension Leader |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Composite 6D Score | 100% Composite | 2.0 | 6.0 | +4.0 | GFA |
| Regulatory & Licensing Integrity (riskScore) | 30% Weight | 2.0 | 6.0 | +4.0 | GFA |
| Execution & Software Infrastructure (industryScore) | 20% Weight | 1.0 | 3.0 | +2.0 | GFA |
| User Reputation & Complaint Telemetry (userScore) | 20% Weight | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | Statistical Tie |
| Institutional Brand Longevity (brandScore) | 15% Weight | 2.0 | 5.0 | +3.0 | GFA |
| Global Market Influence & Footprint (influenceScore) | 15% Weight | 2.0 | 5.0 | +3.0 | GFA |
Visual Architecture Benchmark: capital.com vs GFA
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 | capital.com | GFA |
|---|---|---|
| Primary Legal Name | Capital Com SV Investments Ltd | GFA Capital Markets LTD |
| Source Risk Classification | Risk level not supplied | Risk level not supplied |
| Active Regulated / Total Filings | 4 regulated / 5 total (0 Tier-1) | 0 regulated / 1 total (0 Tier-1) |
| Recorded Certificate Numbers | ||
| Registered Domicile / Address | GB | Suite 201 Level 2, 46 Market Street, Sydney NSW 2000 |
| Offered Asset Classes & Services | Multi-asset financial services | FX CFDs (CFD) products and precious metals CFDs |
| Execution Software & Terminals | MT4 | i-Wise |
| Supported Client Languages | English | Chinese (Simplified), Chinese (Traditional), Spanish, Portuguese, Filipino, Vietnamese, Khmer, English, Thai |
| Warning / Exposure Count | 0 recorded warning(s) | 0 recorded warning(s) |
| Specialized Sub-Page Audits |
Related 1v1 Institutional Comparisons
Compare capital.com and GFA against other regulated peers in our selected financial house and brokerage records: united kingdom, ireland and gibraltar slice.
Frequently Asked Questions: capital.com vs GFA
Deterministic counterparty comparison answers derived from supervisory records.
Which institution has stronger regulatory oversight: capital.com or GFA?
capital.com holds more active regulated filings (4 vs 0). Specifically, capital.com maintains 5 total recorded filing(s) (Financial Conduct Authority, NBRB, Financial Services Authority Seychelles, CyFO) with 0 warning flag(s), whereas GFA maintains 1 recorded filing(s) (ASIC) 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 capital.com and GFA?
In London Firm Ledger's 6-Dimension scoring matrix (0.0–10.0 scale), capital.com 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 GFA at 6.0 Overall (Risk & Licensing: 6.0, Brand: 5.0, Market Influence: 5.0, User Reputation: 0.0, Execution & Software: 3.0).
How do capital.com and GFA differ in trading platforms and asset classes?
capital.com lists general financial services with execution software [MT4], while GFA lists FX CFDs (CFD) products and precious metals CFDs with execution software [i-Wise]. Counterparties should verify FIX/API connectivity, server routing topology, and negative balance protection per entity.
Which counterparty carries lower regulatory warning and complaint exposure: capital.com or GFA?
capital.com carries a "Risk level not supplied" classification with 0 warning/exposure count(s) and 0 user comment(s), while GFA 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.