1v1 Institutional Counterparty Comparison
A3T vs Admit One: Regulation, 6D Ratings & Safety Audit
Deterministic head-to-head benchmarking of A3T (A3Trading) and Admit One (Admit One) across primary regulatory filings, statutory Tier-1 authorisations, 6-Dimension compliance scores, execution software, and warning exposure.
Coverage: Decentralised trading protocols, NFT marketplaces and Web3 execution venues
A3T and Admit One are statistically tied in composite 6D scoring (2.0 vs 2.0)
On supervisory breadth, A3T holds 0 active regulated licence(s) (0 Tier-1) out of 0 total filings and 0 warning count(s), whereas Admit One holds 0 active regulated licence(s) (0 Tier-1) out of 0 total filings and 0 warning count(s). Allocators should inspect the individual licence numbers and contracting legal entities below before onboarding.
6-Dimension Quantitative Scorecard Comparison
Head-to-head breakdown across all 6 proprietary evaluation dimensions (0.0–10.0 scale).
| Evaluation Dimension | Methodology Weight | A3T | Admit One | Score Delta | Dimension Leader |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Composite 6D Score | 100% Composite | 2.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | Statistical Tie |
| Regulatory & Licensing Integrity (riskScore) | 30% Weight | 2.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | Statistical Tie |
| Execution & Software Infrastructure (industryScore) | 20% Weight | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | Statistical Tie |
| User Reputation & Complaint Telemetry (userScore) | 20% Weight | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | Statistical Tie |
| Institutional Brand Longevity (brandScore) | 15% Weight | 2.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | Statistical Tie |
| Global Market Influence & Footprint (influenceScore) | 15% Weight | 2.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | Statistical Tie |
Visual Architecture Benchmark: A3T vs Admit One
Vector comparison exhibit generated from live supervisory snapshot metrics.
Regulatory Standing, Entity & Platform Comparison
Structural comparison of supervisory authorisations, domicile, execution terminals, and risk telemetry.
| Audit Attribute | A3T | Admit One |
|---|---|---|
| Primary Legal Name | A3Trading | Admit One |
| Source Risk Classification | Risk level not supplied | Risk level not supplied |
| Active Regulated / Total Filings | 0 regulated / 0 total (0 Tier-1) | 0 regulated / 0 total (0 Tier-1) |
| Recorded Certificate Numbers | None on file | None on file |
| Registered Domicile / Address | Wanakena Ltd, 73 Arch。 Makarios III Avenue, Office 301, 1070 Nicosia, Cyprus | International |
| Offered Asset Classes & Services | Cryptocurrencies, Commodities, Indices, Forex, Stocks | NFT |
| Execution Software & Terminals | Proprietary / Web Platform | Proprietary / Web Platform |
| Supported Client Languages | Spanish, Arabic, English | English |
| Warning / Exposure Count | 0 recorded warning(s) | 0 recorded warning(s) |
| Specialized Sub-Page Audits |
Related 1v1 Institutional Comparisons
Compare A3T and Admit One against other regulated peers in our decentralised trading protocols, nft marketplaces and web3 execution venues slice.
Frequently Asked Questions: A3T vs Admit One
Deterministic counterparty comparison answers derived from supervisory records.
Which institution has stronger regulatory oversight: A3T or Admit One?
Both A3T and Admit One hold 0 regulated licence record(s) in our dataset. Specifically, A3T maintains 0 total recorded filing(s) (none on file) with 0 warning flag(s), whereas Admit One maintains 0 recorded filing(s) (none on file) with 0 warning flag(s). Always confirm the specific subsidiary onboarding your account on the official regulator register.
How do the 6D quantitative compliance scores compare between A3T and Admit One?
In NFTVenue Ledger's 6-Dimension scoring matrix (0.0–10.0 scale), A3T records an Overall Score of 2.0 (Risk & Licensing: 2.0, Brand: 2.0, Market Influence: 2.0, User Reputation: 0.0, Execution & Software: 1.0), compared with Admit One at 2.0 Overall (Risk & Licensing: 2.0, Brand: 2.0, Market Influence: 2.0, User Reputation: 0.0, Execution & Software: 1.0).
How do A3T and Admit One differ in trading platforms and asset classes?
A3T lists Cryptocurrencies, Commodities, Indices, Forex, Stocks with execution software [proprietary/web execution], while Admit One lists NFT with execution software [proprietary/web execution]. Counterparties should verify FIX/API connectivity, server routing topology, and negative balance protection per entity.
Which counterparty carries lower regulatory warning and complaint exposure: A3T or Admit One?
A3T carries a "Risk level not supplied" classification with 0 warning/exposure count(s) and 0 user comment(s), while Admit One carries a "Risk level not supplied" classification with 0 warning/exposure count(s) and 0 user comment(s).
Structured against supervisory register snapshots and public regulatory filings. Verify your contracting legal entity and current authorisation status directly on the issuing regulator’s official register before transacting.