The paper uses multiple methods, such as rules analyzing, policy value, case study and comparative methods to research the compensation rules of fund for risk compensation of intellectual property pledge to put forward improvement suggestions. The legislation focuses on how to ascertain the scope of compensation and how to facilitate the realization of intellectual property, the fund for risk compensation is account pledge and the platform has double legal status, however, such legislation still has shortcomings. Firstly, the scope of compensation is not accurate, i.e., it lacks definition of nature of the secured debt and lacks reasonable standard of getting compensation for pledger. Secondly, the function of platform does not get the point, including: the legal position of the platform as entrusted assessor is not confirmed, the obligation of the platform is not clear, the legal position of assisting in the disposal of pledge is not clear, and there is a lack of imputation mechanism. The improvement path includes: on the macro level, highlighting the non-monetary creditor's rights attribute of the compensation scope, making clear that the platform has the legal status of both evaluation trustee and intermediary; on the micro level, the scope of risk compensation is the balance between the appraisal price and liquidating price, when not ascertained, legal compensation should be used; the power towards the scope of risk compensation for fund managers should be cancelled, the status of platform as entrusted assessor should be confirmed, and the duties of online platform should be honest and diligence, meanwhile, the platform should be monitored.