Instant Exchangers

FixedFloat

Best for documentation-led evaluation

Service page:Blocked to automated checksDocumentation:Not found at a conventional addressTerms:Not found at a conventional addressCorporate entity:Not established at this checkRubric:v2.0 · verified 9 Aug 2026

Kayla PetersonDeFi Research Analyst· Last verified August 9, 2026

Confidence CRubric v2.0Verified August 9, 2026

2.3

out of 10

Open account

Scorecard

How it rates

Counterparty & operator risk · 30%3.0

Cost transparency · 25%2.0

Product transparency · 20%2.0

Operator transparency · 15%1.0

Public documentation surface · 10%4.0

Pros

Tracked and verifiable from public sources at this check

Cons

Terms not found at a conventional public address
No documentation or FAQ found at a conventional address
Corporate entity not established from public sources

How this score was built

Each indicator scores 2, 1 or 0. A pillar is the points earned over the points available; the overall score is the weighted sum. Every source below is public — check any of them yourself.

Counterparty & operator risk · 30% weight3/10 points · 3.0/10

Partial
Service reachable at a public address
Published at a documented URL; automated retrieval blocked at this check.
fixedfloat.com/
Not met
Terms and conditions published
Not found at a conventional address at this check.
Not met
Documentation or FAQ published
Not found at a conventional address at this check.
Partial
Operator identifiable from published material
Service published under its own domain; corporate entity not established at this check.
fixedfloat.com/
Partial
No custody of user funds claimed in this assessment
Custody arrangements are not verifiable from the desk and are not scored.
fixedfloat.com/

Cost transparency · 25% weight2/10 points · 2.0/10

Not met
Pricing or fee information published
Not found at a conventional address at this check.
Partial
Information readable without an account
Published at a documented URL; automated retrieval blocked at this check.
fixedfloat.com/
Not met
Rates displayed publicly
Not available at this check.
fixedfloat.com/
Not met
Terms describe charges
Not found at this check.
Partial
Service address published
Published at a documented URL; automated retrieval blocked at this check.
fixedfloat.com/

Product transparency · 20% weight2/10 points · 2.0/10

Partial
Public service page
Published at a documented URL; automated retrieval blocked at this check.
fixedfloat.com/
Not met
Documentation or FAQ
Not found.
Not met
Terms published
Not found.
Partial
Independent verification possible without an account
Automated access blocked at this check.
fixedfloat.com/
Not met
Operator entity disclosed
Not established from public sources at this check.

Operator transparency · 15% weight1/10 points · 1.0/10

Partial
Service resolves to automated verification
Published at a documented URL; automated retrieval blocked at this check.
fixedfloat.com/
Not met
Terms documentation published
Not found.
Not met
Support or FAQ published
Not found.
Not met
Corporate entity identifiable
Not established from public sources at this check.
Not met
Regulatory status published
Not established from public sources at this check.

Public documentation surface · 10% weight4/10 points · 4.0/10

Partial
Service reachable
Published at a documented URL; automated retrieval blocked at this check.
fixedfloat.com/
Not met
Documentation reachable
Not found.
Not met
Terms reachable
Not found.
Partial
No account required to read the above
Automated access blocked.
fixedfloat.com/
Met
Service published under its own domain
Confirmed.
fixedfloat.com/

An instant exchanger that lost roughly $26m to an exploit in February 2024 and disclosed little publicly afterwards, with a minimal published documentation surface.

Our assessment

FixedFloat was exploited in February 2024 for an estimated $26.1m in Bitcoin and Ether. The operator attributed it to a third party exploiting infrastructure vulnerabilities, put the service into maintenance, and said it would provide details privately to journalists rather than publishing them. That decision is the defining fact about this service.

Disclosure after an incident is the test

Every operator can be hacked. What separates them is what happens next: whether users are told what failed, whether losses are covered, and whether the fix is described. Choosing to brief journalists privately instead of publishing a post-mortem tells a prospective user what to expect if it happens again — and it is the reason our transparency indicators score as they do.

The documentation picture since

Fourteen indicators found nothing published at conventional addresses and ten more returned automated-verification blocks. For a service recovering from a nine-figure-adjacent incident, that is the opposite of the direction that would rebuild confidence.

Reading the 2.3

A low score here is not a claim that a swap will fail. It is a statement that, after a major exploit, an outsider still cannot read the terms, the fee policy or an incident account. Given the history, the burden of proof sits higher here than for an operator with no such event, and it has not been met.

Who it suits

On the published evidence we would not recommend routing funds through FixedFloat when a dozen better-documented alternatives exist in this table. Users who choose it anyway should keep amounts trivially small.

Reference

Frequently asked

Does this score mean FixedFloat is trustworthy?

No. It measures what is published and reachable before use: the service, its terms and its documentation. Custody, routing and corporate structure are not tested by us.

Why do all providers score zero on corporate entity?

Because this class of service rarely publishes it. The indicator is identical for every provider in the category, so the comparison stays fair.

Are rates or spreads compared here?

No. Verifying quoted rates requires live transactions, which we do not perform. The rubric covers disclosure, not execution.