Editorial Policy

The Binary Options Guru is a personal editorial site, not an anonymous corporate newsroom. I’m George Garuf, and I publish broker reviews, consumer warnings, broker-status information, and practical research for readers deciding whether to risk real money. My first obligation is simple: put the material facts and risks where you can see them.

Editorial principles

• Safety before promotion: I put risk, legal status, and material restrictions before a commercial call to action.
• Evidence before claims: for important factual claims, I prefer primary or authoritative sources when they are available.
• Clear context: my own observations, third-party research, reported allegations, and confirmed facts are not the same thing. I try to make the difference clear in the surrounding text without attaching a formal label to every sentence.
• No guaranteed outcomes: I don’t promise profits, easy returns, or risk-free trading.
• Independence: the commission does not change the standards I use to evaluate a broker. My goal is to keep reviews and verdicts 100% objective, whether an affiliate relationship exists or not.

Sources

I start with regulator registers and warnings, legislation, official terms, company filings, and direct platform documentation. Secondary reporting can add context. It cannot replace primary evidence for legal status, licences, or enforcement action.

Reviews and first-person claims

First-person descriptions reflect what I remember doing or observing at the time. I may not keep or publish records for every routine test, interface impression, or platform interaction. When screenshots, transaction records, or measurements are available, they can strengthen a more consequential claim. A personal observation still describes one test, not a permanent guarantee for every reader, device, or account.

Commercial relationships

If compensated links are introduced, I plan to identify the relationship on affected reviews. The commission does not change the standards I use to evaluate a broker. The affiliate disclosure explains the current position.

Updates and corrections

When I notice a material factual change, I try to update the article and its review date where appropriate. If I get something wrong, the corrections policy explains how to challenge it and how confirmed errors are handled.

Automation and AI-assisted tools

AI-assisted tools may help with research, drafting, summaries, comparisons, and technical work. They are useful, but they can misunderstand a source, invent a detail, or introduce factual and wording errors. I review and edit the material, but that process is not infallible, and some published mistakes may originate in AI-assisted work. An AI output is not treated as a source; important information should be checked against linked evidence and current official records.

Read the review methodology and fact-checking policy for the practical checks behind these standards. Questions can be sent through the contact page.

Last reviewed: 22 September 2026.