WhatsApp and Telegram +44 7563 115980
[email protected]
An independent annual ranking of the places where payment, e-money and crypto firms apply for a licence, scored only from what each regulator publishes. 10 jurisdictions, six criteria, nothing paid for.
Scores out of 100. Each segment weights the criteria differently; the method is below. Facts read on 26 October 2026 from the providers' own pages.
The mean of the 3 segment scores.
| Rank and provider | Score /100 | Status | Strongest for |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. United Kingdom (FCA) | 83 | Payment, e-money and cryptoasset registration | Payment and e-money firms wanting published capital, fees and a three-month standard |
| 2. Ireland (Central Bank of Ireland) | 81 | Payment, e-money and MiCA crypto-asset licences | Payment, e-money and crypto firms wanting EU passporting with published service standards |
| 3. Singapore (MAS) | 61 | Payment institution and digital payment token licences | Payment and crypto firms wanting published capital and fees in Asia |
| 4. Cyprus (CBC and CySEC) | 60 | Payment, e-money and MiCA crypto-asset licences | Payment and e-money firms seeking an EU licence with a structured pre-application stage |
| 5. Hong Kong (HKMA and SFC) | 54 | Stored value, stablecoin and virtual asset trading platform licences | Crypto exchanges and stablecoin issuers wanting a dedicated licence in Asia |
| 6. Dubai (VARA) | 48 | Virtual asset service provider licence | Crypto firms wanting a dedicated licence with every fee published |
| 7. Switzerland (FINMA) | 44 | FinTech licence and DLT trading facility licence | Payment-style and crypto custody firms wanting a lighter licence in Switzerland |
| 8. United States: Texas (DOB) with FinCEN | 44 | State money transmission licence and federal MSB registration | US money transmitters wanting published net worth, bond and fee figures |
| 9. Luxembourg (CSSF) | 44 | Payment, e-money and MiCA crypto-asset licences | Payment, e-money and crypto firms wanting an EU regulator with a meeting-led process |
| 10. Abu Dhabi (ADGM FSRA) | 39 | Financial services permission for virtual asset activities | Institutional crypto exchanges, brokers and custodians in the UAE |
Weighted to market access, published timelines and a clear process: one licence that reaches the widest market, decided on a known timetable.
| Rank and provider | Score /100 | Status | Strongest for |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. United Kingdom (FCA) | 83 | Payment, e-money and cryptoasset registration | Payment and e-money firms wanting published capital, fees and a three-month standard |
| 2. Ireland (Central Bank of Ireland) | 82 | Payment, e-money and MiCA crypto-asset licences | Payment, e-money and crypto firms wanting EU passporting with published service standards |
| 3. Cyprus (CBC and CySEC) | 58 | Payment, e-money and MiCA crypto-asset licences | Payment and e-money firms seeking an EU licence with a structured pre-application stage |
| 4. Singapore (MAS) | 56 | Payment institution and digital payment token licences | Payment and crypto firms wanting published capital and fees in Asia |
| 5. Hong Kong (HKMA and SFC) | 49 | Stored value, stablecoin and virtual asset trading platform licences | Crypto exchanges and stablecoin issuers wanting a dedicated licence in Asia |
| 6. Switzerland (FINMA) | 42 | FinTech licence and DLT trading facility licence | Payment-style and crypto custody firms wanting a lighter licence in Switzerland |
| 7. Luxembourg (CSSF) | 40 | Payment, e-money and MiCA crypto-asset licences | Payment, e-money and crypto firms wanting an EU regulator with a meeting-led process |
| 8. Dubai (VARA) | 40 | Virtual asset service provider licence | Crypto firms wanting a dedicated licence with every fee published |
| 9. United States: Texas (DOB) with FinCEN | 40 | State money transmission licence and federal MSB registration | US money transmitters wanting published net worth, bond and fee figures |
| 10. Abu Dhabi (ADGM FSRA) | 33 | Financial services permission for virtual asset activities | Institutional crypto exchanges, brokers and custodians in the UAE |
Weighted to a dedicated crypto regime and market access: a licence written for crypto services that can be used across borders.
| Rank and provider | Score /100 | Status | Strongest for |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Ireland (Central Bank of Ireland) | 86 | Payment, e-money and MiCA crypto-asset licences | Payment, e-money and crypto firms wanting EU passporting with published service standards |
| 2. United Kingdom (FCA) | 80 | Payment, e-money and cryptoasset registration | Payment and e-money firms wanting published capital, fees and a three-month standard |
| 3. Cyprus (CBC and CySEC) | 70 | Payment, e-money and MiCA crypto-asset licences | Payment and e-money firms seeking an EU licence with a structured pre-application stage |
| 4. Singapore (MAS) | 70 | Payment institution and digital payment token licences | Payment and crypto firms wanting published capital and fees in Asia |
| 5. Hong Kong (HKMA and SFC) | 66 | Stored value, stablecoin and virtual asset trading platform licences | Crypto exchanges and stablecoin issuers wanting a dedicated licence in Asia |
| 6. Dubai (VARA) | 60 | Virtual asset service provider licence | Crypto firms wanting a dedicated licence with every fee published |
| 7. Luxembourg (CSSF) | 57 | Payment, e-money and MiCA crypto-asset licences | Payment, e-money and crypto firms wanting an EU regulator with a meeting-led process |
| 8. Switzerland (FINMA) | 54 | FinTech licence and DLT trading facility licence | Payment-style and crypto custody firms wanting a lighter licence in Switzerland |
| 9. Abu Dhabi (ADGM FSRA) | 52 | Financial services permission for virtual asset activities | Institutional crypto exchanges, brokers and custodians in the UAE |
| 10. United States: Texas (DOB) with FinCEN | 47 | State money transmission licence and federal MSB registration | US money transmitters wanting published net worth, bond and fee figures |
Weighted to published capital, fees, timelines and process: knowing the cost and the timetable before starting.
| Rank and provider | Score /100 | Status | Strongest for |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. United Kingdom (FCA) | 85 | Payment, e-money and cryptoasset registration | Payment and e-money firms wanting published capital, fees and a three-month standard |
| 2. Ireland (Central Bank of Ireland) | 76 | Payment, e-money and MiCA crypto-asset licences | Payment, e-money and crypto firms wanting EU passporting with published service standards |
| 3. Singapore (MAS) | 58 | Payment institution and digital payment token licences | Payment and crypto firms wanting published capital and fees in Asia |
| 4. Cyprus (CBC and CySEC) | 53 | Payment, e-money and MiCA crypto-asset licences | Payment and e-money firms seeking an EU licence with a structured pre-application stage |
| 5. Hong Kong (HKMA and SFC) | 46 | Stored value, stablecoin and virtual asset trading platform licences | Crypto exchanges and stablecoin issuers wanting a dedicated licence in Asia |
| 6. United States: Texas (DOB) with FinCEN | 46 | State money transmission licence and federal MSB registration | US money transmitters wanting published net worth, bond and fee figures |
| 7. Dubai (VARA) | 44 | Virtual asset service provider licence | Crypto firms wanting a dedicated licence with every fee published |
| 8. Switzerland (FINMA) | 37 | FinTech licence and DLT trading facility licence | Payment-style and crypto custody firms wanting a lighter licence in Switzerland |
| 9. Luxembourg (CSSF) | 34 | Payment, e-money and MiCA crypto-asset licences | Payment, e-money and crypto firms wanting an EU regulator with a meeting-led process |
| 10. Abu Dhabi (ADGM FSRA) | 32 | Financial services permission for virtual asset activities | Institutional crypto exchanges, brokers and custodians in the UAE |
Each criterion is scored 0 to 5 against the best published offer in this edition. 0 means not offered or not published.
| Provider | Market access | Published capital | Published fees | Published timeline | Crypto regime | Application process |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom (FCA) | 3 | 5 | 3 | 5 | 4 | 5 |
| Ireland (Central Bank of Ireland) | 5 | 1 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Singapore (MAS) | 3 | 5 | 3 | 0 | 5 | 3 |
| Cyprus (CBC and CySEC) | 4 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 3 |
| Hong Kong (HKMA and SFC) | 3 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 5 | 5 |
| Dubai (VARA) | 1 | 1 | 5 | 0 | 5 | 3 |
| Switzerland (FINMA) | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 5 |
| United States: Texas (DOB) with FinCEN | 1 | 5 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 2 |
| Luxembourg (CSSF) | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 5 |
| Abu Dhabi (ADGM FSRA) | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 5 | 5 |
6 criteria, scored only from what each provider publishes.
How far the licence reaches, as published by the regulator. Passporting (using one licence to serve other countries, such as the member states of the European Union) scores highest, one national market next, and a single free zone or state lowest.
The minimum capital (money the firm must hold as a buffer against losses) stated in figures on the regulator's own pages, for each licence type.
Application and annual fees stated in figures on the regulator's own pages. A reference to a fee rulebook without figures scores low.
A legal deadline or published service standard for deciding an application, stated in days or months.
Whether the regulator runs a dedicated licensing regime for crypto firms that is in force and open to applications. Registration only for anti-money laundering purposes scores lower.
Published application forms or checklists, a pre-application meeting, and an online portal for submitting the application.
| Criterion | Payment and e-money firms | Crypto firms | First-time applicants |
|---|---|---|---|
| Market access | 25 | 20 | 15 |
| Published capital | 15 | 10 | 20 |
| Published fees | 15 | 15 | 20 |
| Published timeline | 20 | 10 | 20 |
| Crypto regime | 5 | 30 | 5 |
| Application process | 20 | 15 | 20 |
| Criterion | 5 | 3 | 0 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Market access | Passporting to other countries published | Licence covers one national market | Not published |
| Published capital | Minimum capital in figures for each licence type | Figures for one licence type | Not published |
| Published fees | Application and annual fees in figures | Application fee in figures only | Not published |
| Published timeline | Decision deadline or service standard in days or months | Deadline for part of the process only | Not published |
| Crypto regime | Dedicated crypto licensing regime in force | Registration only, or crypto rules inside another licence | Not published |
| Application process | Forms or checklist, pre-application meeting and online portal | Two of the three published | Not published |
Score out of 100 is the sum of each criterion score divided by five and multiplied by its weight. The overall ranking is the mean of the segment scores. Ties are broken by market access, then published timeline. A provider that does not publish a price is scored as though the price were high, because a business cannot plan on an unpublished price. Prices are scored on the standard published rate, never an introductory, promotional or "from" rate, and a figure counts only when it appears on a pricing, fee or terms page rather than in a marketing line. A provider that serves one country only is scored on access for that country, and the limitation is printed in its profile.
What each provider publishes, criterion by criterion, with the date read and the source.
The Financial Conduct Authority authorises and registers payment and e-money institutions and registers cryptoasset firms under the money laundering rules. It publishes capital figures, application fees by category, a three-month standard for complete payments applications and a pre-application support service. A full cryptoasset authorisation regime has final rules published but crypto firms currently register.
| Market access | Authorisation covers the UK; the pages read do not describe passporting to other countries. |
| Capital | FCA Approach document: "The initial capital requirement for authorised EMIs is €350,000"; authorised PIs "€20,000, €50,000 or €125,000 depending on the business activities". |
| Fees | Small PI and small EMI: Category 3, £1,130; authorised PI: Category 4 or 5, £2,820 or £5,640; authorised EMI: Category 5, £5,640; cryptoasset registration: Category 6, £11,260. Annual fees not on the pages read. |
| Timeline | "If your application is complete, we'll usually assess it within ... 3 months if you're a payments or e-money firm"; "If your application isn't complete, it could take up to 12 months." |
| Crypto | "You must register with us if you want to provide crypto services that come within scope of the money laundering regulations"; final rules published for "all cryptoasset firms that will need to be authorised and regulated by us". |
| Process | Applications through Connect; pre-application support service (PASS) offering "pre-application meetings"; application forms and video guides. |
| Date read | Read 26 October 2026 |
Facts read on 26 October 2026 from: www.fca.org.uk, www.fca.org.uk, www.fca.org.uk, www.fca.org.uk, www.fca.org.uk.
The Central Bank of Ireland authorises payment and e-money institutions and crypto-asset service providers under MiCA, the EU crypto rules. It publishes passporting notification forms, service standards in business days, a required pre-application meeting and no application fee. It does not publish minimum capital figures on the pages read.
| Market access | Passporting page: an Irish payment institution "wishing to establish a branch in another Member State or appoint an agent to operate in another Member State" notifies the Central Bank using published forms. |
| Capital | The "Minded to Authorise" letter sets out "the proposed level of capital to be held"; no capital figures on the pages read. |
| Fees | "There is currently no fee for submitting an application. Once authorised, a firm is subject to an annual Industry Funding levy." |
| Timeline | Service standards: key information check "95% within 10 business days"; assessment "90% within 90 business days of commencement of the assessment phase"; legal deadline of "3 months of the receipt of the application" once complete. |
| Crypto | MiCAR "applicable to Crypto-Asset Service Providers (CASPs) on 30 December 2024"; the Central Bank authorises CASPs and issuers of e-money tokens. |
| Process | Pre-Application Key Facts Document and initial meeting required; application submitted "via the Central Bank of Ireland Portal". |
| Date read | Read 26 October 2026 |
Facts read on 26 October 2026 from: www.centralbank.ie, www.centralbank.ie, www.centralbank.ie, www.centralbank.ie.
The Monetary Authority of Singapore licenses payment firms and digital payment token (crypto) service providers under one law, the Payment Services Act 2019. It publishes base capital and application fees in figures, an online application and self-check tools. It does not publish a decision timeline on the pages read.
| Market access | Licences to "provide specified payment services under the Payment Services Act 2019" in Singapore. |
| Capital | Standard payment institution: "minimum base capital of S$100,000"; major payment institution: "minimum base capital of S$250,000". |
| Fees | Application fee: money-changing S$500; standard payment institution "S$1,000 or the sum of the amounts below"; major payment institution "S$1,500 or the sum"; digital payment token service S$1,000 (standard) or S$1,500 (major). Annual fees not on the pages read. |
| Crypto | Digital payment token service, covering "Buying or selling digital payment tokens (DPTs) (commonly known as cryptocurrencies)", exchange platforms, transfers and custody, is a licensed payment service; new applicants need an external auditor's AML/CFT assessment. |
| Process | "please submit the application online"; Licensing Self-Check Tools; published document list and licensing guidelines. |
| Timeline | Not published on the regulator pages read. |
| Date read | Read 26 October 2026 |
Facts read on 26 October 2026 from: www.mas.gov.sg, www.mas.gov.sg, www.mas.gov.sg.
The Central Bank of Cyprus licenses payment and e-money institutions and, from 3 August 2026, requires a paid pre-application stage. CySEC authorises crypto-asset service providers under MiCA. The pages read publish the pre-application fee and deadline but not capital or full decision timelines.
| Market access | "The licence granted by the CBC constitutes the first fundamental milestone for an Institution entering the Cypriot and European financial markets." |
| Fees | "A non-refundable fee of €5.000 will be payable for the pre-application exploratory stage." CySEC crypto fees are set in Directive DI 73-2009-04 (Charges and Fees) of 2024, linked from its fees page. |
| Timeline | Preliminary assessment "must be completed within 30 working days from the date of submission of the Pre-Application Document, or extended to 50 working days" where an enhanced due diligence report is requested. |
| Crypto | CySEC runs a MiCAR CASPs authorisation route with an application form; the CBC handles notifications by e-money institutions providing crypto-asset services. |
| Process | Pre-Application Document, then an "initial meeting with the interested entity" before a full application. |
| Capital | Not published on the regulator pages read. |
| Date read | Read 26 October 2026 |
Facts read on 26 October 2026 from: www.centralbank.cy, www.centralbank.cy, www.centralbank.cy, www.cysec.gov.cy.
The HKMA licenses stored value facilities (e-wallets and prepaid cards) and, since August 2025, stablecoin issuers; the SFC licenses virtual asset trading platforms. The SFC publishes its application fee and an online portal, and the HKMA invites early discussion for stablecoin licences. Capital and timelines are not published on the pages read.
| Market access | Licences cover Hong Kong; trading platforms "carrying on their businesses in Hong Kong, or actively marketing their services to Hong Kong investors" must be licensed. |
| Fees | SFC application fee: "$4,740 per regulated activity" for a licensed corporation and "$4,740 for a VA service" under AMLO. Stored value and stablecoin licence fees not on the pages read. |
| Crypto | Virtual asset trading platforms licensed under the SFO and AMLO; "Following the implementation of the regulatory regime for stablecoin issuers under the Stablecoins Ordinance on 1 August 2025 ... a licence is required." |
| Process | "Please submit the licensing application to the SFC through WINGS"; VATP Licensing Handbook; HKMA encourages stablecoin applicants "to reach out to the HKMA for early discussion". |
| Capital | Not published on the regulator pages read. |
| Timeline | Not published on the regulator pages read. |
| Date read | Read 26 October 2026 |
Facts read on 26 October 2026 from: www.sfc.hk, www.hkma.gov.hk, www.hkma.gov.hk.
Dubai's Virtual Assets Regulatory Authority licenses virtual asset activities in Dubai outside the DIFC financial centre. It publishes every application and annual supervision fee in figures and a two-stage process. Capital is set in its Company Rulebook and no decision timeline is published on the pages read. VARA licenses virtual asset activities only.
| Market access | "Any firm seeking to carry on Virtual Asset activities in or from Dubai [excluding DIFC] has a legal obligation to be licensed by VARA". |
| Capital | "Details of VARA's Capital Requirements can be found in Part IV of the Company Rulebook." No figures on the licence applications page. |
| Fees | Licence application fee: AED 40,000 (advisory; transfer and settlement) or AED 100,000 (broker-dealer, custody, exchange, lending and borrowing, management and investment, Category 1 issuance); annual supervision fee AED 80,000 or AED 200,000 per activity. |
| Crypto | VASP Licence for "eight distinct virtual asset activities", with four compulsory rulebooks plus activity rulebooks. |
| Process | Two stages: Initial Disclosure Questionnaire and Approval to Incorporate, then the full VASP Licence; published document list; feedback "may include meetings, interviews"; submissions through Dubai Economy and Tourism or a free zone. |
| Timeline | Not published on the regulator pages read. |
| Date read | Read 26 October 2026 |
Facts read on 26 October 2026 from: www.vara.ae, rulebooks.vara.ae.
FINMA grants a FinTech licence for firms that accept public deposits up to CHF 100 million or crypto-based assets without investing them or paying interest, and a separate DLT trading facility licence. It publishes guidelines, a pre-submission presentation and an online submission platform. Capital, fee figures and timelines are not published on the pages read.
| Market access | The FinTech institution "must have its registered office and conduct its business activities in Switzerland". |
| Fees | "The authorisation process is subject to fees. These are set out in the Fees and Levies Ordinance." No figures on the page. |
| Timeline | "The duration of the licensing procedure depends on the complexity of the project and the quality and completeness of the application." |
| Crypto | "The FinTech licence allows institutions to accept public deposits of up to CHF 100 million or cryptobased assets"; separate licensing "as a DLT trading facility". |
| Process | "FINMA has published guidelines"; "Interested parties can also present their project to FINMA prior to submitting the application"; forms on the FINMA survey and application platform (EHP). |
| Capital | Not published on the regulator pages read. |
| Date read | Read 26 October 2026 |
Facts read on 26 October 2026 from: www.finma.ch, www.finma.ch.
In the United States a money transmitter registers with FinCEN, the federal financial crimes agency, and holds a licence in each state where it operates. Texas publishes its application fee, net worth and bond requirements in figures and rules for digital asset firms holding a money transmission licence. It does not publish a decision timeline, and the licence covers Texas only.
| Market access | Texas licence covers Texas; separately, each money services business "must register with the Department of the Treasury" by filing FinCEN Form 107 "within 180 days after the date on which the MSB is established", renewed "every two years". |
| Capital | Net worth of "The greater of $100,000 or 3 % of the value of the licensee's total assets" for assets under $100 million, rising by tier; surety bond "$100,000 to $500,000". |
| Fees | Application fee (nonrefundable): $10,000 for money transmission, $5,000 for currency exchange; investigation time charged at "$75 per hour" beyond sixteen hours. Annual fees not on the pages read. |
| Crypto | Digital asset service providers holding a Texas money transmitter licence and serving "more than 500 digital asset customers in Texas or have at least $10 million in customer funds" must not commingle customer funds (HB 1666). |
| Process | General application requirements, application forms and FAQs published; FinCEN registration filed electronically through BSA E-Filing. |
| Timeline | Not published on the regulator pages read. |
| Date read | Read 26 October 2026 |
Facts read on 26 October 2026 from: www.dob.texas.gov, www.dob.texas.gov, www.dob.texas.gov, www.fincen.gov.
The CSSF authorises payment and e-money institutions and crypto-asset service providers under MiCA. It publishes application forms, an opening meeting and electronic submission. It does not publish capital, fees or timelines on the pages read.
| Market access | Authorised firms are entered in "the national public register maintained by the CSSF and the electronic central register maintained by the European Banking Authority (EBA)"; passporting not described on the pages read. |
| Crypto | "CASPs are subject to an authorisation regime involving notably prudential and organisational requirements" supervised by the CSSF. |
| Process | "The initial contact generally starts with a meeting at the CSSF"; application forms for payment and e-money institutions; files submitted "exclusively ... in an electronic form via the MFT (Managed File Transfer) system". |
| Capital | Not published on the regulator pages read. |
| Fees | Not published on the regulator pages read. |
| Timeline | Not published on the regulator pages read. |
| Date read | Read 26 October 2026 |
Facts read on 26 October 2026 from: www.cssf.lu, www.cssf.lu, www.cssf.lu.
The Financial Services Regulatory Authority of Abu Dhabi Global Market grants financial services permissions for virtual asset activities, including trading platforms, brokers and custodians. It publishes a step-by-step process with an initial meeting and links to forms and fee rules. Capital, fee figures and timelines are not published on the page read.
| Market access | Permissions for activities carried on "in ADGM", the Abu Dhabi financial free zone. |
| Fees | "For information on applicable fees click here", linking to the FSRA Fees Rules; no figures on the page. |
| Crypto | "the first jurisdiction in the region to introduce a comprehensive and bespoke regulatory framework for the regulation of spot virtual asset activities"; Accepted Fiat-Referenced Tokens list. |
| Process | "Call or meet with one of our FSRA Authorisation Team for an initial discussion"; application forms to download; review, interviews and in-principle approval; FSRA Connect e-service. |
| Capital | After in-principle approval the applicant proceeds "with capitalisation"; no capital figures on the page. |
| Timeline | Not published on the regulator pages read. |
| Date read | Read 26 October 2026 |
Facts read on 26 October 2026 from: www.adgm.com, www.adgm.com.
The index is paid for by nobody.
No provider pays to be assessed, listed or ranked, and there are no sponsored places. Providers do not apply: BCC selects the providers a business is likely to consider and scores them from their own pages. Any provider may ask to be assessed; the request changes nothing about the score.
Every figure is read from the provider's own pricing, product, legal or help page on the date shown. Providers may send corrections to [email protected]; a correction changes the page only where the provider's own page supports it. Every provider is re-read monthly and a new edition is published each October.
Only jurisdictions whose regulator publishes its own licensing pages in English are assessed, and every fact comes from those pages, not from law firms, consultants or press reports. Lithuania, Malta, the Netherlands, Germany, Canada, Australia and New York are not assessed in this edition because their regulators' licensing pages could not be read for this edition; they will be added once they have been. Where a regulator sets a figure in a separate rulebook, ordinance or guidance document and not on its licensing pages, the figure is treated as not published on the page and scored low.
Ranked providers may show the index badge on their own site.
The badge is free. The one condition is that it links to this page, so that a reader can check the score and the method behind it. It is withdrawn if the link is removed or the provider leaves the index.
Embed: <a href="https://www.buckinghamcapitalconsulting.com/licensing-jurisdictions-index"><img src="https://www.buckinghamcapitalconsulting.com/assets/bcc-licensing-jurisdictions-index-2026.svg" alt="Ranked in the Buckingham Capital Consulting Licensing Jurisdictions Index 2026" width="300"></a>
Nobody. No regulator, firm or adviser pays to be assessed, listed or ranked.
Because the regulator is the only source that is binding. Figures repeated by third parties are often out of date, so this index uses only what each regulator publishes itself.
Passporting lets a firm licensed in one country of the European Union or European Economic Area serve customers in the others by notifying its home regulator, without applying for a second licence in each country.
The index scores whether costs and timelines are published, not whether they are low. A jurisdiction that publishes its fees, capital and timeline lets a firm plan; one that does not leaves the firm to find out during the application.
No. Regulators' deadlines usually start only once an application is complete, and most say incomplete applications take longer.
No. The index compares published facts and is not a recommendation to apply in a particular jurisdiction.
Tell us what you need and where you operate.