1v1 Institutional Counterparty Comparison
Atomic Wallet vs Bitsgap: Regulation, 6D Ratings & Safety Audit
Deterministic head-to-head benchmarking of Atomic Wallet (Atomic Wallet) and Bitsgap (Bitsgap Holding OÜ) across primary regulatory filings, statutory Tier-1 authorisations, 6-Dimension compliance scores, execution software, and warning exposure.
Coverage: Forex and CFD brokers authorised in Europe
- Atomic Wallet 6D Score
- 5.0
- Bitsgap 6D Score
- 3.0
- Regulated Licences
- 0 vs 0
- Warning Flags
- 0 vs 0
Atomic Wallet outranks Bitsgap by +2.0 pts in composite 6D scoring (5.0 vs 3.0)
On supervisory breadth, Atomic Wallet holds 0 active regulated licence(s) (0 Tier-1) out of 0 total filings and 0 warning count(s), whereas Bitsgap 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 | Atomic Wallet | Bitsgap | Score Delta | Dimension Leader |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Composite 6D Score | 100% Composite | 5.0 | 3.0 | +2.0 | Atomic Wallet |
| Regulatory & Licensing Integrity (riskScore) | 30% Weight | 5.0 | 3.0 | +2.0 | Atomic Wallet |
| Execution & Software Infrastructure (industryScore) | 20% Weight | 1.0 | 2.0 | +1.0 | Bitsgap |
| User Reputation & Complaint Telemetry (userScore) | 20% Weight | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | Statistical Tie |
| Institutional Brand Longevity (brandScore) | 15% Weight | 5.0 | 3.0 | +2.0 | Atomic Wallet |
| Global Market Influence & Footprint (influenceScore) | 15% Weight | 5.0 | 3.0 | +2.0 | Atomic Wallet |
Visual Architecture Benchmark: Atomic Wallet vs Bitsgap
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 | Atomic Wallet | Bitsgap |
|---|---|---|
| Primary Legal Name | Atomic Wallet | Bitsgap Holding OÜ |
| Source Risk Classification | Risk level not supplied | Risk level not supplied |
| Active Regulated / Total Filings | 0 regulated / 0 total (0 Tier-1) | 0 regulated / 0 total (0 Tier-1) |
| Recorded Certificate Numbers | None on file | None on file |
| Registered Domicile / Address | Harju maakond, Tallinn, Kesklinna linnaosa, Viru väljak 2, 10111, | Luminori maja, Liivalaia 45, Tallinn, Harjumaa, Estonia |
| Offered Asset Classes & Services | Transfer, cryptocurrency, support multiple blockchain assets | Multi-asset financial services |
| Execution Software & Terminals | Proprietary / Web Platform | Proprietary / Web Platform |
| Supported Client Languages | Spanish, Portuguese, Italian, Turkish, English, French, German, Russian | English |
| Warning / Exposure Count | 0 recorded warning(s) | 0 recorded warning(s) |
| Specialized Sub-Page Audits |
Related 1v1 Institutional Comparisons
Compare Atomic Wallet and Bitsgap against other regulated peers in our forex and cfd brokers authorised in europe slice.
Frequently Asked Questions: Atomic Wallet vs Bitsgap
Deterministic counterparty comparison answers derived from supervisory records.
Which institution has stronger regulatory oversight: Atomic Wallet or Bitsgap?
Both Atomic Wallet and Bitsgap hold 0 regulated licence record(s) in our dataset. Specifically, Atomic Wallet maintains 0 total recorded filing(s) (none on file) with 0 warning flag(s), whereas Bitsgap 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 Atomic Wallet and Bitsgap?
In FXMacro Wire's 6-Dimension scoring matrix (0.0–10.0 scale), Atomic Wallet records an Overall Score of 5.0 (Risk & Licensing: 5.0, Brand: 5.0, Market Influence: 5.0, User Reputation: 0.0, Execution & Software: 1.0), compared with Bitsgap at 3.0 Overall (Risk & Licensing: 3.0, Brand: 3.0, Market Influence: 3.0, User Reputation: 0.0, Execution & Software: 2.0).
How do Atomic Wallet and Bitsgap differ in trading platforms and asset classes?
Atomic Wallet lists Transfer, cryptocurrency, support multiple blockchain assets with execution software [proprietary/web execution], while Bitsgap 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: Atomic Wallet or Bitsgap?
Atomic Wallet carries a "Risk level not supplied" classification with 0 warning/exposure count(s) and 0 user comment(s), while Bitsgap 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.