Skip to content
ETFYield Lab
Directory

1v1 Institutional Counterparty Comparison

FUTU vs Trilt: Regulation, 6D Ratings & Safety Audit

Deterministic head-to-head benchmarking of FUTU (Futu Holding Limited) and Trilt (Trilt Limited) 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
Trilt 6D Score
1.5
Regulated Licences
1 vs 0
Warning Flags
0 vs 0
DETERMINISTIC QUANTITATIVE VERDICTCanonical Pair: futu-vs-trilt

FUTU outranks Trilt by +6.2 pts in composite 6D scoring (7.7 vs 1.5)

On supervisory breadth, FUTU holds 1 active regulated licence(s) (0 Tier-1) out of 1 total filings and 0 warning count(s), whereas Trilt holds 0 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 DimensionMethodology WeightFUTUTriltScore DeltaDimension Leader
Overall Composite 6D Score100% Composite7.71.5+6.2FUTU
Regulatory & Licensing Integrity (riskScore)30% Weight7.71.5+6.2FUTU
Execution & Software Infrastructure (industryScore)20% Weight5.01.0+4.0FUTU
User Reputation & Complaint Telemetry (userScore)20% Weight0.00.00.0Statistical Tie
Institutional Brand Longevity (brandScore)15% Weight7.51.5+6.0FUTU
Global Market Influence & Footprint (influenceScore)15% Weight7.91.5+6.4FUTU

Visual Architecture Benchmark: FUTU vs Trilt

Vector comparison exhibit generated from live supervisory snapshot metrics.

1v1 Institutional Counterparty Benchmark: FUTU vs Trilt
Exhibit: Side-by-side regulatory and 6D quantitative comparison between FUTU and Trilt.

Regulatory Standing, Entity & Platform Comparison

Structural comparison of supervisory authorisations, domicile, execution terminals, and risk telemetry.

Audit AttributeFUTUTrilt
Primary Legal NameFutu Holding LimitedTrilt Limited
Source Risk ClassificationRisk level not suppliedRisk level not supplied
Active Regulated / Total Filings1 regulated / 1 total (0 Tier-1)0 regulated / 4 total (0 Tier-1)
Recorded Certificate Numbers
Registered Domicile / AddressG/F, 96 Nathan Road, Tsim Sha Tsui, Kowloon (go right from Exit B1 of Tsim Sha Tsui MTR Station, opposite The ONE).Omonoias 51, office 201-202,3052 Limassol, Cyprus
Offered Asset Classes & ServicesStocksCurrency pairs, CFD products
Execution Software & TerminalsProprietary / Web PlatformMT4
Supported Client LanguagesChinese (Simplified), Chinese (Traditional), EnglishArabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian
Warning / Exposure Count0 recorded warning(s)0 recorded warning(s)
Specialized Sub-Page Audits

Compare FUTU and Trilt against other regulated peers in our stock brokers, investment platforms and wealth managers slice.

Frequently Asked Questions: FUTU vs Trilt

Deterministic counterparty comparison answers derived from supervisory records.

Which institution has stronger regulatory oversight: FUTU or Trilt?

FUTU holds more active regulated filings (1 vs 0). Specifically, FUTU maintains 1 total recorded filing(s) (SFC) with 0 warning flag(s), whereas Trilt maintains 4 recorded filing(s) (CYSEC, CNMV, Financial Conduct Authority (UK FCA), FSA) 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 Trilt?

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 Trilt at 1.5 Overall (Risk & Licensing: 1.5, Brand: 1.5, Market Influence: 1.5, User Reputation: 0.0, Execution & Software: 1.0).

How do FUTU and Trilt differ in trading platforms and asset classes?

FUTU lists Stocks with execution software [proprietary/web execution], while Trilt lists Currency pairs, CFD products with execution software [MT4]. 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 Trilt?

FUTU carries a "Risk level not supplied" classification with 0 warning/exposure count(s) and 0 user comment(s), while Trilt 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.

FUTU vs Trilt (2026) — Regulation, 6D Score, Safety & Fee Comparison | ETFYield Lab