What matters
- Maximum leverage is not a quality metric.
- Margin model and mark price determine liquidation behavior.
- Funding and financing can change long-horizon economics.
- Risk controls should be compared alongside leverage limits.
The number is easy to market and hard to interpret
A headline such as 10x, 50x or 100x is simple, but it says little about the product without the margin model. Position size, maintenance requirements, mark price and collateral mode determine how the position behaves under stress.
Higher leverage reduces the market move needed to produce a large change relative to posted margin.
Liquidation is a system, not a single threshold
Platforms may use mark prices, maintenance tiers, insurance funds or automatic deleveraging. Cross and isolated margin can produce different account-level exposure.
A comparison should explain which controls exist and link to the operator's current documentation instead of calculating one universal liquidation rule.
Cost continues after the trade opens
Perpetual products can include funding payments; brokers can include financing or overnight charges. A short-term trade and a multi-day position can therefore have different cost priorities.
This is another reason not to rank leveraged products only by headline commission.
Better product cards make risk legible
A partner-ready directory can store maximum leverage by product, but display it next to margin mode, liquidation documentation and a clear risk notice. The value is context, not a bigger-number badge.
Where the platform or market does not permit a leveraged product, the record should show it as unavailable rather than quietly substituting a different product.
Primary reading
Official source material used for background and risk framing. Platform-specific claims should be verified against current operator documentation and local rules.