Imagine a $1-2K safety fund — enough to cover average users. A scammer wouldn’t balk at losing that sum; they’d wait for a few large transactions exceeding the fund’s size, then disappear. Victims would split a pittance ($300 for a $2K loss? Would that satisfy anyone?).
If we are talking about a potential scam by exchangers, the guaranteed amount means just that. You would cover the potential trade exclusively in the amount specified in advance. The average user would have to keep such things in mind. At least these are some of the basics of the 'escrow' service
But why debate this when outright fraud is virtually extinct? Such cases occurred once every 2-3 years historically — and we’ve had zero incidents in recent years. A guarantee fund solves an overstated problem with negligible relevance today.
We cannot say that there were no incidents, certainly your fault is the least, because you have very little influence on the transaction process itself. As an independent user, I would like to have an additional guarantee from the aggregator, if possible. I understand if this is an additional complication that you don't want to have, but I noticed that similar services offer something like that.