Original first-party dataset research
Crypto Signal Provider Transparency Research
16 canonical research pages analyze 3,200 candidate provider records without converting directory coverage into endorsements, rankings, or unsupported market claims.
Read the 2026 transparency reportNo signup, payment, wallet connection, or credentials are required.
One unique CSR slug per inventory record.
Binary public status for every unresolved record in the frozen snapshot.
No candidate is presented as CSR Verified in the 2026-07-05 snapshot. Frozen value; see the <a href="/how-csr-verifies-results/">current verification status</a>.
What this research can answer
It can quantify the source mix, source-registry reconciliation, platform-label concentration, platform-route field gaps, binary public verification, historical internal workflow classes by source family, field completeness, metadata co-occurrence, country-language label source bias, name collision queues, alias-field construction, route-comparison sensitivity, explicit dedupe-key field coverage, exact discovery-source concentration, source-family collection signatures, subscriber-observation distribution, and the reviewer denominators and derived activity fields in the Cornix cohort. The raw 2,517-record review queue and 683-record quality-quarantine cohort are archived historical internal workflow partitions; both map to CSR Unverified. This research cannot estimate the whole provider market, prove a provider safe, establish identity or jurisdiction from metadata alone, turn a source URL into independent corroboration, convert marketplace stars into CSR ratings, or establish performance.
16 focused research pages
Core findings
Original analysis of 3,200 crypto signal provider candidate records: platform concentration, binary verification, historical workflow, sources, and missing evidence.
Analyze why 3,150 of 3,200 CryptoSignalsReview candidate records mention Telegram, what that concentration means, and what it cannot prove.
Why the 3,200-record CSR inventory contains zero verified providers and zero reviewed result sheets, and what evidence would change those statuses.
Analyze CSR’s 683-record historical internal quality-quarantine cohort, including project communities, airdrop groups, weak names, and non-signal candidates.
Entity resolution
First-party analysis of repeated provider names across 3,200 records, with exact and Unicode-normalized counts, source context, and identity limits.
Audit alias-field coverage across 3,200 provider records, including importer patterns, shared values, source-family gaps, and display-name matches.
Analyze exact and canonical route reuse plus explicit dedupe-key field coverage across 3,200 provider records, with source and method sensitivity.
A practical beginner and advanced workflow for resolving provider names, aliases, routes, operators, payments, and continuity without unsupported merges.
Source and measurement
Source-family and field-completeness analysis for the 3,200-record CSR provider inventory, including TGStat, RealTelegram, Cornix, manual seeds, and gaps.
Original distribution analysis of 1,244 stored subscriber observations across 3,200 CSR provider records, including quantiles, source coverage, skew, and non-claims.
Cross-tab analysis of direct routes, aliases, subscriber observations, and explicit keys across 3,200 provider records, with seven observed field patterns.
Audit country and language labels across 3,200 crypto signal provider records, including source defaults, non-global coverage, and jurisdiction limits.
Original audit of 85 frozen Cornix marketplace records: reviewer denominators, star summaries, derived weekly activity, offer flags, and exchange compatibility limits.
Method and action
Reproducible methodology, denominators, field definitions, source limits, and non-claims behind the CSR crypto signal provider transparency report.
Aggregate counts, percentages, source families, platform labels, field coverage, binary public verification, and historical internal workflow behind the 2026 CSR report.
A beginner and advanced due-diligence workflow derived from the evidence gaps in 3,200 crypto signal provider candidate records.
Cite and download this release
Use the canonical dataset landing page, snapshot date 2026-07-05, source commit 5dcd30b2b1a0da9bacbaeec08244190dae19a49f, and the metric’s stated denominator. The aggregate files below are frozen in public release 91c6a4d3f781fce63acd8b9689a8511b60269370; repository commit 60368e8bdc778678738af1b1534253bdcbd3bd27 preserves the matching internal build.
Historical-field note: the immutable aggregate JSON and CSV retain the original 2026-07-05 raw workflow enum strings solely for byte-for-byte reproducibility. Those archived fields are historical internal workflow data, not current or alternative public verification labels; public verification uses only CSR Verified or CSR Unverified.
- Download aggregate JSON
54,745 bytes. SHA-256
0d133d3a394c4c3e4d2f405e8dc6632209e216ea6a73a89360e101335f9375b3. - Download aggregate CSV
7,057 bytes. SHA-256
e64f109cd3379bf514946bb6b038031d97a3fb5257cda2d4dfc405a990db6230.
CryptoSignalsReview Evidence Desk. CryptoSignalsReview Provider Transparency Snapshot 2026-07-05. Published 2026-07-10. https://cryptosignalsreview.com/crypto-signal-provider-transparency-evidence-library/
Aggregate reuse terms: CSR permits quotation and reuse of the aggregate JSON and CSV with attribution to CryptoSignalsReview, the canonical landing page, snapshot date, and frozen source commit. This permission covers CSR’s aggregate analysis only; it does not grant rights in third-party names, marks, routes, or source-catalog content. Reuse must preserve the non-representative, non-verification, and non-performance boundaries.
Dataset boundary
This is a census of records in the CryptoSignalsReview candidate inventory at snapshot 2026-07-05, not a representative survey of every crypto signal provider or every messaging channel. Directory inclusion is discovery evidence only. Missing fields stay missing, platform labels can overlap, and no count proves provider quality, legality, profitability, or safety.
Public verification vocabulary: CSR Verified or CSR Unverified only. In this frozen snapshot, 0 records were CSR Verified and 3,200 were CSR Unverified. “Listed for review” and “quarantined” are retained only as historical internal workflow fields from 2026-07-05; neither is a third public verification status.
Frozen source: 5dcd30b2b1a0da9bacbaeec08244190dae19a49f. Unit: one unique CSR provider slug. Position: coverage is not endorsement.
Official context sources
These sources explain why identity, disclosure, complete performance evidence, and resistance to urgency matter. They do not validate any record in the CSR dataset.
- FCA: cryptoasset firms marketing to UK consumers
Current social-media promotion, risk-warning, and fair-clear-not-misleading context.
- ESMA: finfluencer factsheet
Transparency, accuracy, paid-promotion disclosure, and recommendation boundaries.
- Investor.gov: social media and investment fraud
Identity verification, impersonation, testimonials, urgency, and social-media limitations.
- CFTC: commodity trading systems sold on the internet
Hypothetical results, fees, slippage, loss capacity, and performance-claim limitations.
- CFTC: virtual-currency pump-and-dump advisory
Messaging-app tips, anonymity, urgency, thin liquidity, and market-manipulation risk.