An auditor is paid to ask what is behind the number.

I am a trained internal auditor, and I run a consulting firm in Vienna for internal audit and risk. A figure arrives looking final; my job is to establish how it was produced and what it leaves out. Not because anyone lied. Because a number can be entirely correct and still not be the number that matters.

Crypto is full of those. A venue advertises 0% fees; the fee really is zero — the spread at your size is not, and the network and withdrawal costs sit somewhere else entirely. A portfolio screen reports market value, not what an exit would leave you. A withdrawal box shows the amount you typed, not what arrives. Every one is defensible on its own terms. Not one is the number you keep.

Nobody hides the second number. Nobody computes it either: it takes live order books, published fee schedules, network costs and one consistent currency — work nobody had reason to do for the retail side.

So Skontro computes it, and puts the result where the flattering number usually sits: on a trade, on a move between an exchange and a wallet, and across a whole portfolio. It reads; it never trades — a construction decision, not a promise, and why the product needs no crypto licence to operate. Every figure carries its provenance: how old the data is, where a fee was published, what is measured and what is an estimate. Where we do not know, the page says so instead of rounding the gap away.

One unfashionable goal: make this market transparent enough that the person reading the screen is the one who decides.