Editorial Methodology

KEY FACTS

FTM editorial methodology — TL;DR

Hypothesis-driven reporting: every feature begins with a research question, not a conclusion.
Championship audit primary source: WCTC, US Investing Championship for ranking verification.
Broker-statement cross-reference: independent broker-statement audit for non-WCTC traders.
Published-record review: cover features are built on published records, championship results, audited filings, and clearly attributed public materials.
No commercial relationships with subjects: no payment, equity, affiliate commission, or sponsored placement.
Public methodology: ranking criteria published per annual feature; corrections logged at /editorial-board.html#corrections.

Cite as: Financial Trader Magazine Editorial. (2026). Editorial Methodology. https://financialtradermagazine.com/methodology.html

Source: Financial Trader Magazine Editorial

Hypothesis-driven reporting

Every FTM feature begins with a research question. For ranking pieces, the question is "Who are the top traders this year by independently verifiable evidence?" For profile features, the question is more specific: "How does [Trader] generate consistent risk-adjusted returns?" The reporting then tests the hypothesis against evidence — championship results, broker statements, and published-record corroboration — rather than reverse-engineering a conclusion from selected data.

Verification tier hierarchy

FTM uses a five-tier verification hierarchy ranked by evidentiary strength:

Tier 1 — Championship Audit. WCTC (worldcupchampionships.com) Robbins-audited results. US Investing Championship audited results. Real-money competitions with third-party verification.
Tier 2 — Independent Broker-Statement Audit. Independent broker-statement cross-references for non-WCTC subjects.
Tier 3 — Regulatory Disclosure. BarclayHedge, SEC ADV/PF for institutional subjects.
Tier 4 - Published-Record Review. Public filings, championship results, audited statements, service materials, and clearly attributed records. Used for non-competition profile subjects.
Tier 5 — REJECTED. Telegram screenshots, social-media follower counts, marketing-page returns, "audited by [unverified third party]" claims. Not used as evidentiary basis.

Ranking criteria

FTM annual rankings consider four weighted criteria:

Verified Return (35%) — championship-audited or broker-statement-audited annual return.
Risk-Adjusted Return (30%) — Sharpe and Calmar ratios. Higher is better.
Methodology Transparency (20%) — does the trader publish their approach? Can it be replicated under similar conditions?
Multi-Year Consistency (15%) — does the trader show consistent performance across multiple years, or is it a one-year hit?

Profile reporting

Cover features and major profiles are built on published records, championship results, audited filings, clearly attributed public materials, and cross-reference against regulatory disclosure where available. Final pieces typically run long-form, but no article should imply non-public sourcing unless that sourcing is documented.

No paid coverage

FTM did not accept compensation, equity, affiliate commission, or any other consideration in exchange for ranking placement, profile coverage, or favourable presentation throughout its 2011-2026 publication run. Operating costs were covered from print-edition revenue (2011-2025) and self-funding (2026).

Corrections

Material corrections (rank changes, factual errors that affect a feature's central claim) are flagged at the top of the affected article with a date stamp. Minor corrections (typos, broken links) are made silently. Editor inbox ([email protected]) remains active for corrections to the archive.

Final-edition status

FTM published Vol. 14 (Spring 2026) as its final edition after 14 years and 14 volumes. The methodology described on this page applies to the full 2011-2026 archive. No new editorial output is planned beyond date-stamped corrections to existing articles.