Contact the Editorial Desk
How to reach the editors of this independent review resource, and what we can and cannot help with.
Sponsor's spreadsPress and Partnership Enquiries
A reader once wrote to ask whether our review of FP Markets could be quoted in a university assignment on comparison sites in Australia. That request went to the editors, was read the same week, and was answered with a short note on how to cite the page. Most messages that reach us look like this: a journalist checking a detail before publication, a researcher asking for context on how we put a review together, or a site owner proposing a link. All of them belong here rather than with the broker.
We are an editorial resource, not a commercial partner of any firm we write about. We consider press requests and partnership proposals on their merits, and we will say plainly when something falls outside what we do. A proposal that assumes paid placement, sponsored ranking or advance sight of a review will be declined. If you are unsure whether your enquiry is editorial or commercial, describe it in the contact form on this site and we will route it internally.
Response Times
We aim to acknowledge messages within three business days. A substantive reply usually follows within ten business days, though corrections and press deadlines are handled ahead of general correspondence. Timelines are targets, not commitments, and they assume the message contains enough detail for us to act on it.
The desk is small and reads everything in the order it arrives. If a matter is time-sensitive, say so in the first line and explain why. We do not operate a telephone line, and we do not discuss editorial matters through social media messages.
Languages We Read
The desk works in English and reads correspondence in that language at full working proficiency. We can also read messages in Italian and Spanish, and we will reply in English in every case so that the record stays consistent.
If you write in another language, send your message anyway. We will do our best to understand it and will tell you honestly if we cannot.
Corrections and Factual Disputes
A broker's representative once queried a sentence about how an account type was described on a product page. The message cited the page, the date it was retrieved and the exact wording, and the review was amended within a week. That is the standard we ask for: identify the article, quote the passage, state what you believe is wrong, and point to a source we can check ourselves.
We correct factual errors when the evidence supports it. We do not remove or soften critical analysis because a firm disagrees with the conclusion. Editorial judgements about tone, emphasis and comparison are ours to make, and we will explain them if asked.
What We Cannot Answer
We cannot help with anything that belongs to your account with the broker. That includes opening or closing an account, verifying identity, deposits and withdrawals, trading platform access, order disputes, fees charged to you, and complaints about how a firm has handled your money or your data. We have no access to client records and no ability to intervene on your behalf.
For all of these matters, use the support channels published on the broker's own website. If your concern is about how a firm has treated you rather than about our review, the appropriate dispute route is the one set out in the firm's own complaints process and, where relevant, the external scheme named there.
What the Editors Do Answer
We answer questions about our own work. That covers how a review was researched, which public sources were used and when a page was last updated. We explain the reasoning behind a comparison, the criteria we apply and the limits of what an editorial review can establish.
We also take suggestions for coverage, notes on broken links or outdated figures, and requests for clarification from readers who found a passage unclear. If your message is about the broker's services rather than our writing, we will point you to the right place and close the thread.
