1
3 Comments

I built a broker comparison site with 10K+ pages in 2 week

I was frustrated with broker comparison sites — most are pay-to-play, rankings

  are based on who pays the most, not actual quality.

  So I built BrokerRank (brokerrank.net) — a free, data-driven comparison of 345+

  trading brokers.

  How it works:

  - Every broker is scored by an algorithm: regulation (25%), fees (20%), platforms

   (15%), trust (15%), UX (15%), markets (10%)

  - No paid placements — brokers can't buy higher rankings

  - 10,000+ pages generated programmatically (reviews, comparisons, rankings,

  guides)

  Tech stack:

  - Next.js 16 + TypeScript

  - PostgreSQL (Neon) + Prisma

  - Vercel hosting

  - ISR for SEO (all pages pre-rendered)

  Monetization: affiliate links (commission when users sign up with a broker

  through our links). Revenue: $0 so far — just launched.

  Happy to answer any questions about the build, SEO strategy, or programmatic

  content generation!

posted toAvatar for product BrokerRank
BrokerRank
  1. 1

    This makes a lot of sense — choosing the right broker can be overwhelming, especially for beginners.

    How are you planning to build trust around the data and rankings early on?

    1. 1

      Great question! A few things we're doing:

      1. Open methodology — the scoring algorithm and weights are published on a dedicated "How We Rank" page. Anyone can see exactly how scores are calculated.

      2. No paid rankings — affiliate revenue comes through tracked links, but it never influences scores or positions. A broker paying us $0 and one paying us $500 get scored the same way.

      3. Real data only — every data point (fees, regulation, platforms) comes from the broker's own website or regulator databases. No made-up numbers.

      4. Schema org structured data — we use Review and FAQ schema so search engines can verify our content structure.

      Trust takes time, but transparency is the foundation. If people can see how the rankings work, they can decide for themselves whether to trust them.

      1. 1

        Publishing the methodology is a smart move — transparency probably matters a lot in a space where people assume rankings are biased by affiliates.

        I wonder if over time trust will come more from the data itself or from brand reputation and content. A lot of comparison sites seem to become trusted not just because of methodology, but because they consistently publish useful content and become a known resource in the space.

        Are you focusing more on SEO/content long-term or partnerships/affiliates for growth?