How We Rate Gold IRA Companies - Gold Harbor Retirement

I rate gold IRA companies the same way I would want someone to rate a company holding my retirement money: on things I can check, in writing, on the company’s own website. No company pays for a ranking here. No company sees a review before you do. And when a company does not publish a number, I say so — I never fill the gap with a guess from another review site.

The short version

I check every figure against the company’s own website, and I record the page and the date I checked it.
If a figure is not published on the company’s own site, the review says “Not published.” Third-party figures are never presented as the company’s own.
Every pro and con in a review traces back to a verified fact in that same review.
I do not publish star scores of my own. Any ratings shown on this site are verified third-party ratings — BBB grade with complaint count and Trustpilot score with review count — each dated.
When a company contradicts itself, I show the contradiction — all versions, with dates — instead of picking the number that looks best.

The 12 things I verify for every company

For every company review, I verify these 12 data points from the company’s own website, unless the point says otherwise. The rule is the same for all 12: the company’s own site, or “Not published.”

Setup fee. The company’s own site only; otherwise “Not published.”
Annual custodian fee, and the custodian’s name. The company’s own site; I note it when a fee is set by the custodian rather than the dealer.
Annual storage fee, segregated vs. non-segregated. The company’s own site; I name the depository when the company names it.
Wire, transfer, and other fees. The company’s own site. Small fees get checked too — for example, a wire fee is the kind of detail other reviews miss.
Minimum investment, IRA and cash separately. The company’s own site; third-party minimum figures are never presented as fact.
Buyback terms. I quote the company’s exact published wording, or I say “Not published.”
Metals offered. The full list, including whether platinum and palladium are offered or not.
Promotions. The exact qualifying thresholds, from the company’s own offer pages.
Fee-waiver terms. Who qualifies, how long the waiver lasts, and what it covers.
BBB rating and complaint count. Checked on bbb.org at the date of writing, and date-stamped in the review.
Regulatory and legal status. A court and regulator check for every company.
Source URL and date for every figure. Stored with the research and cited in the review’s fees section, so you can check each number yourself.

The fee rule: “Not published” is an answer

In October 2026 I visited the official websites of 10 major gold IRA companies and wrote down every fee figure each company actually publishes. Only 3 of the 10 published a complete, specific fee schedule. Three published zero fee figures anywhere. That finding shapes every review on this site.

The rule I use, from that study: a figure counts only if the company states it on its own website. Where a company states no figure, the review says “Not published” — never an estimate, never a number borrowed from a review blog. If a company contradicts itself across its own pages, the review shows all versions and their dates. That contradiction is part of the story, and it is the reader’s business to know about it before committing.

Read the study: We Compared Published Gold IRA Fees Across 10 Companies — Here’s What We Found

What every review covers

Every company review follows the same template, in the same order, so you can compare two reviews side by side:

Quick verdict — who the company fits, who it doesn’t, and the single most important fact.
At-a-glance table — founded, headquarters, minimum (IRA/cash), setup fee, annual custodian fee, annual storage fee (segregated/non-segregated), first-year total, ongoing annual total, metals offered, custodian partners, depositories, buyback (published terms: yes/no), and the row no competitor prints: Fees published on their own site? YES / PARTIAL / NO.
What the company is — the dealer model explained (dealer is not the custodian, and neither is the depository), history, and ownership, in one paragraph.
Fees — what they publish, and what they don’t. The fee table reproduced only from the company’s own pages, each figure with its source page. Unpublished figures say “Not published.”
The real cost: premiums and spreads. What the company says about pricing, the premium-coin risk, and what I could and could not verify.
Minimums and who gets turned away.
Products — metals, the IRA-eligible range, and what is missing.
Storage and custodians — named partners, segregated vs. commingled, and insurance claims as stated by the company.
Buyback — the exact published wording quoted; if the terms are not published, I say so.
Promotions, decoded — what a free-silver or fee-waiver offer actually requires, and what funds it.
Reputation and complaints — BBB rating and complaint count (checked on bbb.org, dated), Trustpilot/BCA scores with review counts, recurring complaint themes from actual complaint text, and any regulatory actions.
Pros / Cons — every pro traces to a verified fact above; every con does too.
Who it fits / who should look elsewhere — by account size and by preference.
How it compares — short head-to-heads linking to sibling reviews.
FAQ — answers drawn only from verified data.
Bottom line — plus a link to the company’s official site, and the affiliate disclosure at the top and bottom of the review.

Freshness: the stamp under every review title

Directly under the title, above the quick verdict, every review carries a stamp giving the date its figures were checked against that company’s own website for that review or update. The stamp states that every figure links to its source page in the fees section, and that if a company changes its prices, the stamp date is when the figures were last verified.

When a published review is updated, I re-verify the figures, bump the stamp date, and note the update. A stamp date is a promise about when I last checked — not a promise that the company’s prices have not changed since.

What I will not do

I will not assign a star score or a numeric rating without a published method behind it. No method for scores is documented, so no score is published as mine.
I will not present a third-party figure as a company’s own figure. If the company does not publish it, it is “Not published.”
I will not copy another review site’s wording, verdicts, or tables. The research here is original, from primary sources.
I will not use invented credentials, invented testing, or invented testimonials. No author bio on this site claims a certification I do not hold, and no review claims hands-on testing that did not happen.
I will not take a promotion at face value. “Free silver” and “fees waived” offers are checked against their qualifying terms, and the premium that funds them is part of the verdict.

How rankings work — and what they don’t mean

The homepage Top 5 orders companies by fee transparency, minimums stated plainly, buyback terms in writing, and independently verifiable reputation. It is editorial judgment, not a scored result. No company pays for its position. If a company improves its transparency its standing improves; if it stops publishing, its standing falls.

Images in reviews

Each review shows the company’s official logo, taken from its own website, beside the at-a-glance table, for identification only — no badges, laurels, or “best” seals of my own invention. In-article visuals carry information and are built only from the company’s verified published figures (“Not published” shown as a gap, never estimated). No stock photo is ever presented as the company’s office, staff, or products, and no screenshot of a third-party review site is used.

Reader-supported: we may earn a commission if you request a company’s free kit through a link on this site. It never affects our findings. Read how we make money.

This is education, not financial advice. Questions about a review or this method? Leave a comment on the review — I read every note.