The MTA Score Methodology
The MTA Score is Money Transfer Advisor's proprietary provider rating system. Every provider is evaluated using a published framework covering cost, exchange rates, trust, speed, usability, support, and service coverage. Scores are calculated independently and reviewed on a scheduled basis.
What is the MTA Score?
An independent editorial scoring framework
The MTA Score is designed to help users compare money transfer providers consistently, using the same criteria applied to every provider in the same way.
Displayed on a 100-point scale
The higher the score, the stronger the provider performs under the MTA methodology. Scores are not absolute quality claims — they reflect performance under the published framework.
What the score measures
The score evaluates providers across multiple categories that affect real-world customer outcomes:
How the MTA Score Works
11 criteria across 5 groups. Each criterion is weighted by its importance to real-world customer outcomes.
Current Score Weights
Each group is weighted according to its importance to users making real transfer decisions.
| Group | Weight | Visual |
|---|---|---|
| Core Financial Value | 40 pts | |
| Reliability and Trust | 20 pts | |
| Speed and Convenience | 20 pts | |
| User Experience | 10 pts | |
| Support and Flexibility | 10 pts |
Score Normalisation
During launch, Rate Consistency is inactive. Scores are normalised to maintain comparability across providers until sufficient historical data has been collected.
Numerical Scoring Bands
Publishing numerical bands converts the MTA Score from an editorial framework into a rules-based framework. Every score is traceable. No criterion score is based on judgment alone.
Measured as the declared fee as a percentage of a standard $500 send. FX spread is excluded from this criterion and scored separately under Exchange Rate Fairness, eliminating double-counting.
| Declared Fee as % of $500 Send | Score | What This Means |
|---|---|---|
| 0.00% – 0.20% | 10 | No fee or near-zero. Market-leading. |
| 0.21% – 0.40% | 9 | Excellent. Among the lowest fee providers in the market. |
| 0.41% – 0.60% | 8 | Very good. Well below average declared fee. |
| 0.61% – 0.80% | 7 | Good. Below average declared fee. |
| 0.81% – 1.00% | 6 | Average. Around market average declared fee. |
| 1.01% – 1.50% | 5 | Below average. Slightly above market average. |
| 1.51% – 2.00% | 4 | Poor. Noticeably above market average. |
| 2.01% – 2.50% | 3 | Weak. Significantly above average. |
| 2.51% – 3.00% | 2 | Very weak. Among the most expensive in the market. |
| Above 3.00% | 1 | Highest fee tier. |
FX spread measured as the percentage difference between the mid-market rate and the rate offered to the customer on a $500 send. Averaged across the provider's top 3 MTA-monitored corridors. This is the only criterion where FX spread appears.
| FX Spread vs Mid-Market Rate | Score | What This Means |
|---|---|---|
| 0.00% – 0.20% | 10 | Mid-market or near mid-market. Exceptional FX fairness. |
| 0.21% – 0.40% | 9 | Excellent FX rate. Minimal margin above mid-market. |
| 0.41% – 0.60% | 8 | Very good. Low spread, well below industry average. |
| 0.61% – 0.80% | 7 | Good. Below-average spread. |
| 0.81% – 1.00% | 6 | Average. Around typical industry spread. |
| 1.01% – 1.50% | 5 | Below average. Moderately above industry average. |
| 1.51% – 2.00% | 4 | Poor. Noticeably above average spread. |
| 2.01% – 2.50% | 3 | Weak. High spread relative to market. |
| 2.51% – 3.00% | 2 | Very weak. Among the highest spreads in the market. |
| Above 3.00% | 1 | Highest spread tier. Significantly above mid-market. |
Average delivery time across the provider's top 3 MTA-monitored corridors, using the most common payment method to the most common delivery method (bank deposit).
| Delivery Time (average across top 3 corridors) | Score | What This Means |
|---|---|---|
| Instant / under 30 minutes | 10 | Real-time or near-real-time delivery. Best-in-class. |
| Under 2 hours | 9 | Same-hour delivery. Excellent speed. |
| Same day (under 8 hours) | 8 | Same-day delivery. Well above average. |
| Next business day | 7 | Next-day delivery. Above average. |
| 1–2 business days | 6 | Standard speed. Around market average. |
| 2–3 business days | 5 | Slightly below average speed. |
| 3–4 business days | 4 | Below average. Slower than most digital providers. |
| 4–5 business days | 3 | Slow. Significantly below market average. |
| 5–7 business days | 2 | Very slow. Legacy-level transfer times. |
| Over 7 business days | 1 | Slowest tier. |
Composite Criteria
Several criteria evaluate multiple customer-impact factors rather than a single data point. These criteria are assessed using structured sub-rubrics developed by the MTA Research Team.
Composite criteria include:
To preserve methodological integrity and prevent score manipulation, detailed internal weighting models for composite criteria are not published. The structure of what is measured within each composite criterion is applied consistently across all scored providers.
Research Confidence Framework
Every criterion score carries a Research Confidence level, published beside each score on provider profile pages.
Verified
Data sourced directly from official regulators, provider websites, and APIs. No editorial judgment required.
Used for: Regulatory licences, exchange rates, flat fees.
Observed
Data collected through structured manual audits with a defined methodology. Source: website audits, checkout flow walkthroughs, app store data.
Used for: Pricing transparency, delivery methods, fee clarity.
Estimated
Data based on informed analysis where direct measurement is not yet available. Upgraded to Observed as data accumulates.
Used for: Onboarding speed and error handling at launch.
How Often Scores Are Updated
Provider scores are reviewed on a fixed quarterly schedule. Material changes trigger interim reviews outside the regular cycle.
Scheduled Review Cycles
Interim Review Triggers
Rate Consistency — Future Criterion
Phase 2 — Not Active at Launch
Rate Consistency will become an active scored criterion once sufficient historical rate and fee data has been collected across all monitored providers and corridors. MTA does not score criteria it cannot measure accurately.
The full scoring methodology for Rate Consistency will be published on this page no later than 30 days before the criterion is activated.
Correction Requests
Providers who believe their MTA Score contains a factual inaccuracy are invited to submit a documented correction request.
How to submit a correction request
Email contact@moneytransferadvisor.com with the subject line: Score Correction Request — [Provider Name]
Include the specific data points you believe are inaccurate and supporting documentation or evidence.
MTA will review and respond within 30 business days. Score adjustments are made solely on data accuracy grounds.
MTA does not adjust scores in response to commercial pressure or legal threats.
Editorial Independence
MTA Scores are calculated independently by the MTA Research Team.
No provider, advertiser, or commercial partner has any influence over MTA Scores or rankings. Providers without affiliate relationships are scored and ranked on identical criteria to all other providers.
Affiliate relationships are disclosed separately on every relevant page and have no effect on score calculations or ranking positions.
Affiliate relationships have no influence on scores. A provider paying a higher affiliate commission does not receive a higher MTA Score.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why doesn't any provider score above 90?
Because the framework is intentionally rigorous. No provider currently performs at the highest level across all measured criteria simultaneously. The absence of a 90+ score is a credibility signal, not a system flaw.
Can providers pay for a higher score?
No. MTA Scores are calculated independently using published criteria and numerical bands. No provider, advertiser, or commercial partner has any influence over scores or rankings.
Are affiliate partners scored differently from non-affiliate providers?
No. Every provider is scored using identical criteria, identical scoring bands, and identical weights regardless of their commercial relationship with MTA. Affiliate status is disclosed separately and has no effect on score calculations.
Why are some scoring details not published?
To protect the integrity of the methodology and prevent score manipulation. The criteria, weights, and numerical bands for objective criteria are published in full. Internal weighting models for composite criteria are not published so that providers cannot reverse-engineer the system to optimise their score rather than genuinely improve their service.
How do I know the data is accurate?
All data is sourced directly from provider websites, official regulatory registers, and APIs at the time of each quarterly audit. The Research Confidence level published beside each criterion score shows exactly how that data was obtained — Verified, Observed, or Estimated. Users should always verify fees and rates directly with the provider before initiating any transfer.
Full versions of all legal notices applicable to MTA Scores and provider rankings.
Scores-as-Opinion
MTA Scores represent the independent editorial opinion of the MTA Research Team, applied through a published scoring methodology. They do not constitute factual assertions about any provider's absolute quality, safety, or fitness for purpose. Scores reflect data available at the time of the most recent audit and may not reflect subsequent changes to a provider's fees, services, or operations.
Data Currency
All data used in MTA Score calculations is sourced from provider websites, official documentation, and publicly available regulatory records. Data is verified at the time of each quarterly audit. Material provider changes may trigger interim reviews outside the quarterly schedule. A material change is defined as: a regulatory action or licence revocation in any major jurisdiction; a fee increase or decrease exceeding 20% on primary corridors; a merger, acquisition, or change of ownership; sustained composite trust signal deterioration of 0.3 points or more over 30 days; any publicly reported fraud incident or regulatory investigation; or suspension of services on any of MTA's top 20 monitored corridors. MTA makes reasonable efforts to maintain accuracy but cannot guarantee that all information reflects current provider offerings. Users should verify fees, rates, and terms directly with the provider before initiating any transfer.
Independence and Non-Influence
MTA Scores are calculated independently by the MTA Research Team. No provider, advertiser, or commercial partner has any influence over MTA Scores or rankings. Affiliate relationships are disclosed separately and have no effect on score calculations. Providers without affiliate relationships are scored and ranked on identical criteria to all other providers.
No Professional Advice
Content published on moneytransferadvisor.com is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial advice. MTA is not a regulated financial adviser. Users should conduct their own due diligence and verify all information directly with their chosen provider before making any financial decision.
Correction and Dispute Process
Providers who believe their MTA Score contains a factual inaccuracy are invited to submit a documented correction request to contact@moneytransferadvisor.com with the subject line: Score Correction Request — [Provider Name]. Requests must include specific data points disputed and supporting documentation. MTA will review and respond within 30 business days. Score adjustments are made solely on data accuracy grounds. MTA does not adjust scores in response to commercial pressure or legal threats.
Methodology Change Clause
MTA reserves the right to modify scoring criteria, weights, scoring bands, and methodologies as the remittance market evolves, new payment technologies emerge, or improved measurement approaches become available. Any material methodology change will be: (1) disclosed in the methodology document with a clear explanation of the reason for the change, (2) applied consistently and simultaneously across all scored providers, and (3) reflected in a version increment. No methodology change will be applied selectively to favour or penalise any individual provider.
See How Every Provider Scores
The methodology is published. Now see the results — all 40+ providers ranked by their Global MTA Score.