The Complete IB Due-Diligence Checklist for Any Financial Partner

As an Introducing Broker, the product you actually sell is not the broker. It is your own credibility. When you put a broker, exchange, or prop firm in front of your audience, you are lending that partner the trust you spent years building. If the partner mistreats your clients, delays their withdrawals, or vanishes overnight, the refund requests and the angry messages land in your inbox, not the broker's. The commission you earned rarely covers the damage.

That is why serious IBs run a repeatable due-diligence process on every partner before promoting it, and re-run it periodically after. This guide is that process: a single, market-agnostic checklist you can apply to a forex broker, a crypto exchange, or a prop firm. It moves from the non-negotiables (regulation and client-fund safety) through the commercial terms that decide whether you get paid, and ends with a scoring method so your decision is documented and auditable. Work through it in order — the early checks are cheap and disqualifying, so you never waste time negotiating a deal with a firm that fails step one.

Why due diligence is an IB's core skill, not a formality

Most IBs learn this the hard way. A high-converting offer with a generous payout looks great in month one. Then a client's withdrawal gets stuck, another client complains about slippage on every trade, and a third discovers the "regulated" broker they trusted is actually a clone firm using someone else's license number. In the year to March 2025, the UK's Financial Conduct Authority alone issued more than 2,240 alerts about unauthorised firms and individuals — a reminder of how many bad actors are actively looking for distribution. Your audience is that distribution.

Due diligence is not paranoia and it is not a one-time gate. Partners change: a firm gets acquired, swaps liquidity providers, tightens its withdrawal policy, or quietly rewrites its affiliate agreement. The IBs who survive treat vetting as an ongoing discipline. If you want the deep version of any single check below, this cluster breaks each one out — start with the fast reputation scan in how to research a broker's reputation in 30 minutes, and keep the 30 red flags a broker will scam its traders open as a companion while you read.

The five layers of partner due diligence

Every check fits into one of five layers. Run them in this order, because each is a filter: a firm that fails an early layer never reaches the next.

1. Regulation and legal status — is the firm authorised, by whom, and for what?
2. Client-fund safety and counterparty model — where does client money sit, and how does the firm make money from your clients?
3. Commercial and deal terms — what does the affiliate agreement actually say about how, when, and whether you get paid?
4. Operational reality — does the platform, support, and withdrawal flow work when you test it yourself?
5. Reputation and history — what do independent sources, past IBs, and the regulatory record say?

The table below is your at-a-glance version. Print it, or keep it as the header of a scoring spreadsheet.

Layer 1: Is the firm actually regulated — and by whom?

Regulation is the first filter because it is cheap to check and absolutely disqualifying when it fails. But "regulated" is not a binary. A regulated broker under a top-tier authority (FCA in the UK, ASIC in Australia, CySEC in the EU, CFTC/NFA in the US) operates under capital, reporting, and client-money rules that an offshore entity simply does not. Many groups run both: a strict onshore entity for the brochure, and an offshore unregulated broker entity where your clients' accounts are actually opened. You must know which entity your referred clients sign with.

Here is the verification sequence:

1. Find the claimed license. Note the exact legal entity name and license/firm reference number from the broker's footer or legal page.
2. Verify it on the regulator's own register — never on the broker's site. Search the FCA Financial Services Register (or the equivalent: ASIC, CySEC, NFA's BrokerCheck) by name and by number, and confirm the address and permissions match.
3. Check the warning lists. Search the regulator's public warning list for the firm name. The FCA, ASIC, and CySEC all publish them.
4. Confirm the permissions cover the service. A firm can be registered for something narrow (payment services) while implying it is authorised to hold client trading funds. Match the permission to what your clients will actually do.

Because clone firms and fake regulation are the single most common way IBs get burned, this deserves its own deep read: see fake regulation and clone firms: verifying a license is real.

Layer 2: Where does client money sit, and how does the firm profit?

A firm can be regulated and still be a poor partner if its economics put it in conflict with your clients. Two questions matter.

First, fund safety. Reputable brokers hold client funds in segregated accounts at a separate bank, ring-fenced from the company's operating money, so client balances survive if the firm hits trouble. Look for an explicit segregation statement, negative-balance protection for retail clients, and, ideally, membership of an investor-compensation scheme. The absence of any segregation statement is itself a warning.

Second, the counterparty model — how the firm makes money. This is not automatically bad, but it changes your risk:

• A-book / STP: the broker passes your clients' trades to real liquidity and earns from spread or commission. Its interest is aligned with client longevity.
• B-book: the broker takes the other side of client trades and profits when clients lose. A pure B-book revenue-share deal can pay you well precisely because your clients are losing — which is short-lived and reputationally toxic.
• Hybrid: most firms run both, routing by client profile.

The conflict gets worse when it bleeds into execution. Brokers with a strong incentive against winning clients are the ones most tempted to widen spreads selectively, delay fills, or quietly shave your commissions. If your commission model is tied to spread or volume, read commission shaving: how to detect it and what to do about it before you sign — it shows you how to audit whether the numbers you are paid match the trades your clients actually made.

Layer 3: Read the deal terms before the commission rate

Every IB reads the headline number first. Reverse that instinct. The clauses that decide whether you keep your earnings live in the fine print, and they are where an otherwise legitimate broker can legally strand you. Before you celebrate a rate, find and read these clauses in the actual agreement:

• Payout structure and the threshold. Is it CPA, revenue share, or hybrid? What is the minimum payout threshold and payout frequency? A high rate with a threshold you will never reach is worth zero.
• Clawback and negative carryover. A clawback clause lets the broker reverse commissions already credited — for chargebacks, early client withdrawals, or bonus abuse. Negative carryover means a losing month for the broker rolls forward against your future earnings. Know exactly what triggers each.
• "Fraud" and bonus-abuse clauses. The broadest clauses let a broker void commissions on any account it unilaterally labels fraudulent or bonus-abusing, with no appeal. This is the most common legal way IBs lose earned money — read bonus-hunter and fraud clauses: how brokers legally void your commissions.
• Unilateral change and termination. Can the broker change your rate, your terms, or terminate the deal at will, and what happens to your existing client tail if it does?
• Attribution rules. Cookie window, sub-ID support, and self-referral rules determine whether you actually get credited. If you do not understand how you are tracked, read how IB tracking actually works.

For the full landscape of how these structures fit together, the complete IB commission model guide is the reference; this checklist is only asking you to confirm the terms are written, specific, and survivable.

Layer 4: Test the operational reality yourself

Everything above can look perfect on paper. Layer 4 is where you stop reading and start doing. Open a real account, fund it with a small amount you can afford to lose, place a few trades, and — most importantly — request a withdrawal. The withdrawal flow is the single most predictive test you can run, because a firm that makes it hard for you to take your own money out will make it hard for your clients.

Run this hands-on checklist:

1. Deposit a small sum and note how quickly funds appear.
2. Trade a few positions and check whether spreads, slippage, and requotes match what the marketing promised.
3. Contact support with a real question and time the response. Judge competence, not just speed.
4. Withdraw your remaining balance in full. Note every fee, every ID request, every day of delay, and any withdrawal penalty that was not disclosed up front.
5. Check the affiliate dashboard. Does it show accurate, granular data — clicks, sub-IDs, deposits, volume — or a single opaque number you cannot verify?

Watch for the tell where deposits clear instantly but withdrawals require escalating identity documents, minimum-volume conditions, or "pending review" limbo. Onboarding friction is normal and healthy; exit friction is a red flag.

Layer 5: Reputation and history — what the record says

The final layer is independent corroboration. You are looking for a clean, consistent track record over at least two years, and for the specific failure patterns that precede an IB getting burned.

• Regulatory record: past fines, warnings, or restrictions on the specific entity your clients use.
• Withdrawal-complaint pattern: isolated complaints are noise; a consistent, dated pattern of withdrawal denials is signal.
• Rebrand and exit-scam history: firms about to vanish often rebrand first. If the entity is new but the people behind it ran a firm that collapsed, that history matters — see broker rebrands and exit scams.
• IB-specific reputation: search for how the firm treats affiliates, not just traders. A broker can be fine for clients and still routinely stiff IBs on payouts.

Do this systematically and it takes half an hour, not a day. The step-by-step method is in how to research a broker's reputation in 30 minutes.

Adapting the checklist per market

The five layers are constant; the specifics shift by market. Use the market-specific guides for the detailed criteria, and this pillar as the frame that holds them together.

Score it, don't feel it

Gut feeling is not a due-diligence method, and it is not defensible when a client asks you why you recommended a firm that failed them. Turn the five layers into a simple scorecard. Weight the non-negotiables so a firm cannot pass on charm alone.

• Regulation (0-5, weight ×3): any score of 0 is an automatic reject, regardless of the total.
• Client-fund safety (0-5, weight ×3): same rule — a 0 rejects the firm outright.
• Deal terms (0-5, weight ×2): written, specific, survivable clauses score high.
• Operations (0-5, weight ×2): based on your own live test, not marketing.
• Reputation (0-5, weight ×1): independent record over 2+ years.

Keep the evidence next to each score — the register screenshot, the agreement PDF, your withdrawal log, the dated source links. Re-run the scorecard every quarter and after any major change (acquisition, terms update, a spike in client complaints). A documented process protects your clients, and it protects you: when something goes wrong, you can show exactly what you knew and when.

Find and compare partners that pass the checklist

Running this process is far easier when you start from partners whose regulation, terms, and reputation are already laid out side by side. That is what Revenika is for: it is a discovery and comparison surface, not an IB, so you can shortlist brokers, exchanges, and prop firms on objective criteria and then run your own due diligence on the finalists. Start by browsing the Revenika Partner Glossary to lock down the vocabulary in this checklist — segregation, clawback, revenue-share models, attribution — so you read every partner's fine print with clear eyes, and move to the market-specific directories from there.

Frequently Asked Questions

How long should due diligence on a new partner take?

The disqualifying checks are fast. Regulation verification and a reputation scan together take under an hour, and either can end the process immediately. The slower part is Layer 4 — funding a test account and completing a full withdrawal — which can take several days because you are deliberately testing the withdrawal timeline. Budget a few days end to end for a partner you are serious about, but spend only minutes on one that fails Layer 1.

Is a B-book broker automatically a bad partner?

No. Most brokers run a hybrid model, and B-booking is a legitimate, regulated practice. The issue is the structural conflict it creates: if your commission is paid from client losses, your interests and your clients' interests diverge. That model can be fine short-term but rarely builds a durable audience. Know the model, model how long your referred clients realistically last under it, and weigh that against your reputation — do not assume B-book means scam, and do not assume it is harmless either.

What is the single most predictive test of a partner?

Withdrawing your own money. Deposits are easy everywhere because firms want your funds in. The withdrawal flow reveals the firm's true posture toward its clients: unexpected fees, escalating document requests, minimum-volume conditions, and "pending review" delays all surface here. A partner that makes it hard for you to withdraw a small test balance will do worse to a client trying to withdraw real profit.

Do I need to re-check a partner I've promoted for years?

Yes. Partners change ownership, liquidity providers, withdrawal policies, and affiliate terms — often quietly. A firm that was excellent two years ago can be a liability today after an acquisition or a terms rewrite. Re-run your scorecard at least quarterly and immediately after any material change or a cluster of new client complaints. Ongoing monitoring is part of due diligence, not a separate task.

How is vetting a partner different from choosing a commission model?

Due diligence asks "can I trust this firm with my audience?" Commission-model selection asks "how do I want to get paid?" They are related but distinct: a firm can offer a great commission structure and still fail Layer 1 on regulation. Always run due diligence first. There is no payout high enough to justify promoting a partner that will damage your clients and your name — and understanding the broader IB business models helps you see which deal structures fit your specific audience once a partner has passed the checklist.

Conclusion

Due diligence is the skill that separates IBs who build a durable business from those who chase one good offer into a reputation they cannot rebuild. The process is not complicated: five layers, run in order, scored and documented. Verify regulation on the regulator's own register. Confirm client funds are segregated and understand how the firm profits from your clients. Read the deal terms before the rate. Test the withdrawal flow with your own money. Corroborate the reputation independently. Then score it, keep the evidence, and re-check on a schedule.

Do this every time and you convert luck into a system. You will still occasionally partner with a firm that later disappoints — but you will have chosen it with open eyes, you will spot the change early, and you will never be the IB explaining to an audience why you sent them somewhere you never actually checked.