1v1 Institutional Counterparty Comparison
FUTU vs Glassnode: Regulation, 6D Ratings & Safety Audit
Deterministic head-to-head benchmarking of FUTU (Futu Holding Limited) and Glassnode (Glassnode) across primary regulatory filings, statutory Tier-1 authorisations, 6-Dimension compliance scores, execution software, and warning exposure.
Coverage: Stock brokers, investment platforms and wealth managers
- FUTU 6D Score
- 7.7
- Glassnode 6D Score
- 2.0
- Regulated Licences
- 1 vs 0
- Warning Flags
- 0 vs 0
FUTU outranks Glassnode by +5.7 pts in composite 6D scoring (7.7 vs 2.0)
On supervisory breadth, FUTU holds 1 active regulated licence(s) (0 Tier-1) out of 1 total filings and 0 warning count(s), whereas Glassnode holds 0 active regulated licence(s) (0 Tier-1) out of 0 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 | FUTU | Glassnode | Score Delta | Dimension Leader |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Composite 6D Score | 100% Composite | 7.7 | 2.0 | +5.7 | FUTU |
| Regulatory & Licensing Integrity (riskScore) | 30% Weight | 7.7 | 2.0 | +5.7 | FUTU |
| Execution & Software Infrastructure (industryScore) | 20% Weight | 5.0 | 1.0 | +4.0 | FUTU |
| User Reputation & Complaint Telemetry (userScore) | 20% Weight | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | Statistical Tie |
| Institutional Brand Longevity (brandScore) | 15% Weight | 7.5 | 2.0 | +5.5 | FUTU |
| Global Market Influence & Footprint (influenceScore) | 15% Weight | 7.9 | 2.0 | +5.9 | FUTU |
Visual Architecture Benchmark: FUTU vs Glassnode
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 | FUTU | Glassnode |
|---|---|---|
| Primary Legal Name | Futu Holding Limited | Glassnode |
| Source Risk Classification | Risk level not supplied | Risk level not supplied |
| Active Regulated / Total Filings | 1 regulated / 1 total (0 Tier-1) | 0 regulated / 0 total (0 Tier-1) |
| Recorded Certificate Numbers | None on file | |
| Registered Domicile / Address | G/F, 96 Nathan Road, Tsim Sha Tsui, Kowloon (go right from Exit B1 of Tsim Sha Tsui MTR Station, opposite The ONE). | CH |
| Offered Asset Classes & Services | Stocks | Multi-asset financial services |
| Execution Software & Terminals | Proprietary / Web Platform | Proprietary / Web Platform |
| Supported Client Languages | Chinese (Simplified), Chinese (Traditional), English | English |
| Warning / Exposure Count | 0 recorded warning(s) | 0 recorded warning(s) |
| Specialized Sub-Page Audits |
Related 1v1 Institutional Comparisons
Compare FUTU and Glassnode against other regulated peers in our stock brokers, investment platforms and wealth managers slice.
Frequently Asked Questions: FUTU vs Glassnode
Deterministic counterparty comparison answers derived from supervisory records.
Which institution has stronger regulatory oversight: FUTU or Glassnode?
FUTU holds more active regulated filings (1 vs 0). Specifically, FUTU maintains 1 total recorded filing(s) (SFC) with 0 warning flag(s), whereas Glassnode maintains 0 recorded filing(s) (none on file) 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 FUTU and Glassnode?
In ETFYield Lab's 6-Dimension scoring matrix (0.0–10.0 scale), FUTU records an Overall Score of 7.7 (Risk & Licensing: 7.7, Brand: 7.5, Market Influence: 7.9, User Reputation: 0.0, Execution & Software: 5.0), compared with Glassnode at 2.0 Overall (Risk & Licensing: 2.0, Brand: 2.0, Market Influence: 2.0, User Reputation: 0.0, Execution & Software: 1.0).
How do FUTU and Glassnode differ in trading platforms and asset classes?
FUTU lists Stocks with execution software [proprietary/web execution], while Glassnode 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: FUTU or Glassnode?
FUTU carries a "Risk level not supplied" classification with 0 warning/exposure count(s) and 0 user comment(s), while Glassnode 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.