Compare firms
Rankings / Prifinance
10 Band 3

Prifinance

Tbilisi, Georgia · Founded 2014 · 20-30 team
CLBR index score
59/100

Cost-led founders mapping a multi-jurisdiction EU-plus-offshore path who want one provider across licensing, corporate and tax.

Score breakdown · CLBR v1.0

Seven pillars, one score.

Licensing specialisation 11/22

Crypto is one of six licensing verticals — forex, iGaming, banking and trust services sit alongside it. That financial-services spread costs roughly 9 points against pure-crypto specialists, holding specialisation at 11 of 22.

Jurisdictional coverage 14/18

Nine EU member states plus nine non-EU markets, including real offshore depth in Saint Vincent, Belize, Mauritius and Vanuatu. This breadth is the firm's defining trait and its highest pillar at 14 of 18.

Licences secured 8/15

Volume is claimed in the low hundreds across all licensing categories combined; the crypto subset isn't isolated. Anonymised case studies and undisclosed refusal rates put the grant pillar at 8.

AML / DORA depth 5/13

Ex-regulator credentials are limited in public materials and AML, DORA or Travel-Rule execution isn't a headline focus; iGB and SiGMA appearances are documented but sit on the commercial side. Weakest pillar at 5 of 13.

Transparency 7/12

Indicative pricing appears in jurisdiction guides and process steps are described, but the recommendation methodology is thinner than the leaders'. Transparency lands at 7 of 12.

Post-licence support 8/10

End-to-end cover from incorporation through ongoing compliance, tied to a broader accounting-and-tax corporate-services offering. Full-lifecycle credit at 8 of 10.

E-E-A-T 6/10

Named practitioners, client testimonials and multi-language content give a moderate authority signal, but without named-author whitepapers or a visible ex-regulator bench it reads mid-band. Against the CLBR E-E-A-T bar, that's 6 of 10.

Where Prifinance fits

Prifinance is a coverage-first pick — a Tbilisi firm whose real draw is footprint, spanning nine EU and nine non-EU markets, not depth in any single one. For a founder mapping a multi-jurisdiction path — file in Lithuania or Cyprus, register in Saint Vincent for offshore exposure, add an Abu Dhabi licence later — most of the relevant jurisdictions sit under one roof.

The offshore depth is genuine and rare. Few firms here publish operational cover across Saint Vincent, Belize, Mauritius and Vanuatu, and crypto operators with non-EU customer bases sometimes need exactly that alongside their EU MiCA position. The bundled corporate stack — licensing, accounting, tax, ongoing maintenance — suits cost-led operators who’d rather not coordinate four separate providers.

Where the score is bounded

Crypto is one of six verticals — forex, iGaming, banking and trust services sit next to it — so the pure-CASP signal is diluted, and the crypto-specific track record is hard to isolate from the wider licensing portfolio. The volume figures aggregate across all categories.

Regulator-side depth is the weakest area. The team page leads with practice breadth rather than named ex-NCA personnel, and AML or DORA execution isn’t a headline. For Class 3 platform files or substantive supervisors like BaFin or CSSF, the specialist benches fit better.

Prifinance by jurisdiction

Lithuania and the Czech Republic anchor the EU work: the team files MiCA CASP applications with the Bank of Lithuania and the CNB, bundled with corporate and tax setup. Where an operator needs non-EU reach, it handles offshore registration in Saint Vincent through the local FSA alongside the EU position.

Reviewed by Editorial team · Last updated 2026-07-14 · Scored on the CLBR rubric. Placement is editorial and never sold — see disclosure.