Good potential but many internal problems - Anonymous employee Crypto.com Employee Review

2.0
11 Jun 2022
Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Successful. Interesting crypto plans and projects. Growth potential. Ambitious. Ok starting salary. Strong brand. Remote working. Some teams are good. Many nice people especially junior to mid rank. Made good friends.

Cons

Start up culture. Stressful and constant changes. Some teams very overstaffed but some important teams very understaffed. No management transparency and very secret top-down management style. Management decisions only informed to chosen team heads . Management hide behind chosen heads only and dont know or care who are the real key employees. Some heads are very famous for lacking competency and experience but somehow promoted to senior because joined early , interest in crypto or good talker. Unclear work scope and overlap between teams. Politics between teams because no structure. Famous 90 day email record policy, everyone knows this is so obviously ridiculous and wont happen in any other company. Financial decisions dont make sense, even customers complain about this. Spend millions for marketing, deals and try to add rockstars but no care to existing employees,. Management good at lip service answering questions for employees in big meetings but no actions. No automatic compensation or promotion reviews. Limited career chances unless early joiner. No one knows where are the shares in the employees share plan, even asked HR when leaving but they have no idea about anything.

Explore other reviews about Crypto.com

5.0
29 Jan 2026
Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

they have a lot of jobs

Cons

they are one of the best

2.0
19 Mar 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Work From Home Decent Salary

Cons

In a compliance role, leadership should be willing to listen when analysts/associates raise concerns about regulatory risk, process weaknesses, or policy gaps. In my experience, that was not the culture here. Too often, valid concerns were dismissed instead of taken seriously, even when they involved issues that could affect the firm from a compliance and control perspective. What made the experience especially frustrating was the leadership style within parts of compliance. Rather than encouraging open dialogue, managers came across as defensive, dismissive, and more focused on protecting their own authority than addressing the substance of the issue and creating a toxic environment where raising concerns did not feel safe or productive. Instead of approaching issues in a professional and solution-oriented way, interactions could become personal, degrading, and hostile. This became even more concerning when the NAM compliance department later failed several items in an internal audit, including areas that had already been flagged by analysts as process or policy gaps. That, to me, reflected a broader problem: important concerns were being raised internally, but not handled with the seriousness or humility they required. There was also very little transparency or accountability when it came to employee development, feedback, or career progression. Communication with subordinates was poor, and employees were not given meaningful support or clarity around growth opportunities. HR was equally disappointing. From my perspective, there did not appear to be a reliable or well-structured path for employees to raise concerns and expect a fair resolution. Overall, my experience was that parts of the compliance culture operated more like an insular power structure than a healthy control function. For a company in a heavily regulated space, that is a serious leadership and culture problem.

2
See reviews by: Helpful|Rating|Date|All