100KS Fund Broker Review 2025

100KS Fund markets itself as a global broker with “0% stock spreads,” VIP tiers, and round-the-clock service. Scratch the surface and you find a classic cocktail of offshore registrations, anonymous ownership, non-verifiable “awards,” and a proprietary platform that customers say doesn’t behave like a real market venue. This review connects the dots — corporate structure, website history, platform behavior, user complaints—and maps the risk so you can make an informed decision.

Executive Snapshot

• Status: Unregulated, offshore IBC (St. Vincent & the Grenadines; Mwali/Comoros references)
  
• Public claims vs. facts: Claims “since 2017,” but domains appear 2023–2025
  
• Platform: Proprietary web-trader (closed system), not MT4/MT5
  
• Instruments: CFDs on stocks/indices/crypto/metals (per marketing)
  
• Core risk: Persistent reports of non-payment and “pre-withdrawal fees”

Corporate Identity

100KS Fund Ltd. presents as an offshore IBC in St. Vincent & the Grenadines, while its legal pages casually drop Mwali/Comoros references. That dual-jurisdiction footprint isn’t diversification; it’s a regulatory minimization strategy. SVG’s registrar explicitly does not supervise forex activity; Comoros “authorizations” are paperwork mills. In practice, neither setting forces best execution, capital buffers, or client-fund segregation. For a broker that holds customer money and makes a market against them, that’s… convenient.

There’s no searchable license with CySEC, FCA, ASIC, SEC, or any mainstream authority. That matters for two reasons:

1. No prudential oversight (solvency, audits, conduct rules).
   
2. No complaints pathway (ombudsman, compensation scheme).
   If a dispute escalates, you’re not stepping through a regulated resolution playbook; you’re emailing a support inbox in an offshore time zone.
   

Legitimate brokers showcase named directors, a compliance officer, and a physical office you can actually walk into. Here, you get no executives, no board, no phone lines; the single reliable contact is [email protected]. That’s operationally minimal and litigation-resistant: nameless people are hard to sue, and mailbox entities can disappear overnight.

The “since 2017” storyline vs. the calendar

Brand claims longevity; public internet records show meaningful activity only from 2023 onward, with the flagship domain even younger. That’s not a rounding error; it undercuts the entire credibility pitch (past awards, a seasoned team, “thousands of happy clients”). If the founding myth is soft, you should assume everything layered on top needs proof you’ll never get.

Bottom line: This isn’t a broker with a tidy org chart and a proud regulatory badge. It’s a jurisdiction-hopping shell designed to minimize accountability and maximize extraction.

Website & Domain Timeline: The Clock Doesn’t Lie

Reputable brokers accrue digital sediment: archived pages, press releases, API docs, stable legal libraries. 100KS’s trail shows late arrivers (mid-2023+) and frequent reshuffles. That pattern is common among short-cycle boiler rooms that spin up a clean domain, harvest deposits, then rebrand when search results turn toxic.

Sections like “Trading Services” and “Trading Platform” read as stubs or dead links; the “Legal” area hosts boilerplate PDFs you can find copy-pasted across other offshore sites. What’s notably absent:

• Full fee schedules (spreads, commissions, swaps/overnights).
  
• Execution disclosures (LPs, routing, slippage policy, last-look).
  
• Client-money statement (segregation, banks, trust structure).
  
• P&L tax guidance (how fees/taxes are actually handled).
  

A credible broker over-discloses this stuff. Silence is not a neutral choice; it’s a signal.

Years in market ≠ quality, but in brokerage it correlates with infrastructure (risk controls, ops staff, compliance). A 2023–2025 footprint cannot plausibly backfill a 2017 claims deck. If the story and the timestamp diverge, believe the timestamp.

Regulation & Client Protection

Without EU/UK/US/AU authorization, you lose:

• Segregated client funds under enforceable rules.
  
• Best-execution obligations and audit trails.
  
• Capital adequacy requirements (to survive market stress).
  
• Ombudsman escalation and compensation schemes (e.g., FSCS in the UK).
  

Offshore “authorizations” ≠ regulatory supervision. An offshore certificate may look official, but it generally doesn’t police pricing, custody, or conflicts of interest. If your funds are rehypothecated, if spreads widen on news, if withdrawals stall — there’s no statutory lever you can pull.

If something goes wrong, recovery narrows to: chargeback windows (if card-funded), law enforcement reports, and whatever leverage your bank can bring. Crypto rails? Non-reversible by design. Time works against you.

Product & Conditions

CFDs across equities, indices, crypto, metals; copy-trading, VIP tiers, 24/7 support, “0% stock spreads,” and “fast withdrawals.” It’s the greatest hits album of offshore marketing.

What you actually need (and don’t get).

• Published spreads/commission tables per symbol class, not slogans.
  
• Swap rates and how they’re calculated (tonight, not last quarter).
  
• Account ladders (min deposits, margin stop-out levels, fee perks).
  
• Corporate actions policy on CFDs (dividends, splits, rights issues).
  
• Execution venue & LP list, slippage/latency metrics, rejection codes.
  

Instead you’re nudged to register first, where details can be “personalized.” That’s a polite way of saying opaque and variable.

Leverage & margin — the invisible throttle. Offshore shops often dangle 3–30× crypto or 100–500× FX/indices. High leverage isn’t inherently evil, but in an unregulated b-book, it’s a control dial: the house decides your fate under volatility (requotes, widening, margin events). No public ratios? Assume house advantage.

Platform: Proprietary web-trader

100KS doesn’t offer MT4/MT5 or another third-party terminal with exportable logs, independent plugins, and a vast community scrutinizing fills. Instead, you’re in a closed interface where:

• Price feeds can be delayed or synthesized.
  
• Stops can slip in one direction far more than they ever improve (asymmetric slippage).
  
• Disconnects appear at inconvenient moments (right before stops/rollovers).
  
• Order IDs and audit trails are non-portable (good luck proving abuse).

When the broker is counterparty (b-book) and the platform operator, they control both sides of the screen. Without a regulator checking logs, that’s like playing poker in a casino where the dealer, the camera system, and the rules committee are all the same person.

Funding & Withdrawals

Deposit rails: cards, wires, crypto (spotlight). Crypto is emphasized because it’s fast, borderless, and non-reversible — perfect when the business model values inflow over outflow.

Withdrawal pattern (as reported by users):

1. You request a payout.
   
2. Support cites a new prerequisite: “tax prepayment,” “verification deposit,” “international wire fee,” “AML clearance.”
   
3. You pay (some do).
   
4. Funds still don’t arrive; sometimes the account is locked, sometimes you’re told to pay another fee.
   

Reality check: Legit brokers net fees/taxes from proceeds. They don’t require fresh inbound payments to release your own balance. That’s a bright-red heuristic you can apply everywhere.

Acquisition Engine: Referrals and “Success Coaches” 

Instead of organic brand trust, 100KS leans on referrals/IBs, glossy advertorials, and unsolicited DMs from “mentors” or “investors” flaunting results. Missing is a public IB schedule (payout tiers, criteria, disclosures). That opacity encourages aggressive promises with little accountability.

Brokers with real retention don’t need to pressure deposits via social pitches. When growth depends on new money instead of happy, returning clients, you’ve got a churn-and-burn engine — not a brokerage.

Conclusion on 100KS Fund

100KS Fund positions itself as a global broker offering cutting-edge trading opportunities, but the evidence paints a very different picture. Behind the glossy promises of “0% spreads,” VIP tiers, and “fast withdrawals” lies an unregulated offshore entity with no transparent ownership, no recognized license, and a track record of withdrawal failures.

The company’s corporate identity is stitched together across offshore jurisdictions, its website footprint contradicts its claimed operating history, and its proprietary platform operates as a closed system prone to manipulation. Clients report consistent patterns: deposits are easy, but withdrawals trigger fabricated hurdles such as “tax prepayments” or “verification deposits.”

Coupled with aggressive referral-driven marketing and the absence of client protections, 100KS Fund shows the hallmarks of a boiler-room CFD operation rather than a trustworthy financial intermediary. Investors have little to no recourse if funds are withheld.

Final verdict: 100KS Fund is not a reliable broker but rather a high-risk scheme designed to extract deposits without accountability. Traders and investors are strongly advised to avoid this company and to choose only regulated brokers in recognized jurisdictions where investor protections and legal remedies are real.

Defazz Broker Review 2025

Defazz (operating via domains defaazz.com and deefazz.com) positions itself as a global brokerage platform, claiming to provide access to forex, stocks, CFDs, and cryptocurrencies. The company advertises low entry barriers (minimum deposit from $250), high leverage up to 1:100, and additional perks such as bonuses, “fund insurance,” and personal account managers. On its website, Defazz presents itself as a reliable and innovative broker with an office in London and alleged licences from leading regulators.

A closer examination shows that these statements do not withstand scrutiny. The domain was only registered in June 2025, the UK address is no more than a virtual office, and the licences mentioned on the site are fabricated. Behind the promises of secure trading lies an unregulated and anonymous entity. Numerous client reports confirm the fraudulent nature of the project: blocked withdrawals, invented fees of up to 40%, account freezes, and threats when victims attempted to take legal action.

This review gathers all available facts about Defazz — from its false regulatory claims to user experiences — and demonstrates why the broker should be considered a high-risk scam operation.

Company Profile & Web Footprint

Brand & domains. The operation trades as Defazz and runs via defaazz.com with reported mirrors such as deefazz.com and a cabinet at web.defaazz.com. Multiple domains/subdomains are typical of short-lived schemes that rotate URLs to evade blocks and reputation drag.

“Founded in 2020” claim vs. reality. Marketing copy suggests a 2020 start. Independent checks contradict this: defaazz.com was registered only in June 2025, with no verifiable Defazz activity before that. The “long track record” narrative appears fabricated to manufacture credibility.

Address. The website cites 175 Piccadilly, St James’s, London W1J 9TB—a prestigious serviced-office location. There is no evidence Defazz operates there as a regulated UK firm or maintains a real office presence. Using a glossy address without corporate traceability is a known credibility prop.

Ownership & management. No legal entity name, incorporation number, directors, or beneficial owners are disclosed. WHOIS is privacy-masked. Hosting traces point to offshore infrastructure (Seychelles/Hong Kong mentioned in investigations). This depth of anonymity is incompatible with legitimate brokerage activity.

Contacts. Support is limited to [email protected]; no phone number, no verified social media, and no transparent escalation channels. A legitimate cross-border broker normally maintains staffed phone lines, live chat, and corporate social profiles.

Regulatory Status & Legal Standing

• No valid licence. Checks find no authorisation for Defazz with reputable regulators. The project references a CySEC “No. 3574D” and an FCA-style number “87345”, neither of which reconciles to a genuine licence. (CySEC’s numbering conventions don’t match that “D” suffix format, and a real FCA authorisation would be publicly searchable.)
  
• Not in the Bank of Russia register. Defazz is absent from the official list of forex dealers allowed to service Russian clients—meaning activity targeting that market is illegal there.
  
• Presumed offshore registration. Investigators point to St. Vincent and the Grenadines—a jurisdiction notorious for ease of company formation and lack of investment-services supervision.
  
• Website legal docs. Terms/Policies are generic and omit crucial facts (licence details, legal entity name). Clauses include one-sided powers (e.g., discretionary account blocks) and class-action waivers—language that removes client recourse rather than protecting it.
  

Implication: Client money sits outside any investor-protection regime. Disputes have no regulator-backed pathway.

The Pitch vs. The Product

What Defazz advertises

• Multi-asset CFDs/FX/crypto, leverage up to 1:100
  
• Low entry ($250 minimum), bonuses, “insured funds”, and personal managers
  
• “Modern, innovative” platform promising simple access and high potential returns
  

What users actually report

• Opacity & contradictions: Figures and conditions differ across pages; specifics on spreads, commissions, swaps are absent or non-committal.
  
• Withdrawal traps: Clients asked to pay 15–40% “taxes/fees” upfront to “unlock” withdrawals. After paying, new obstacles appear; payouts don’t materialise.
  
• Platform manipulation:
  
  • Quotes don’t match independent feeds
    
  • Stops ignored, executions delayed up to 24–72 hours
    
  • Balances zeroed right after withdrawal requests, explained away as “technical issues” or sudden “losses”
    
• Account freezes: After top-ups slow or a withdrawal is requested, accounts are suspended under vague “violations” or endless KYC loops.
  

Conclusion: The “offer” is a façade. The real product is a deposit-collection funnel with technical and contractual levers to prevent outflows.

Client Testimonies (Representative Patterns)

• Case A (Moscow): Deposited RUB 2.2M. On requesting a payout, was told to pre-pay RUB 800K as a mandatory fee. On refusal, the account was blocked without funds returned.
  
• Case B (Yaroslavl): Invested RUB 145K after email outreach. “Profits” displayed, but any withdrawal attempt triggered new “taxes/fees” demands; account then frozen.
  
• Case C (Krasnodar): Active trading showed sizeable profits. At withdrawal, balance reset to zero; support cited a “technical failure,” refused compensation.
  
• Case D (Yekaterinburg): After filing a court claim, received threatening emails from a so-called “legal department” demanding to withdraw the lawsuit.
  

Across dozens of similar accounts, the arc is identical: early gains + pressure to top-up → blocked withdrawals → escalating pre-payment demands → silence or threats.

Network Links & Clone Behaviour

• Mirrors & subdomains. Beyond defaazz.com, the project was observed at deefazz.com and web.defaazz.com. Domain churn is standard in serial scams.
  
• Shared operators. Independent investigations group Defazz with SmartTradingCenter and Auros-ai, citing identical funnels, recycled narratives (AI trading, insured funds, dedicated analysts), and even overlapping crypto wallets receiving deposits.
  
• Blacklist presence. Defazz appears across scam trackers and anti-fraud watchlists. The pattern suggests a multi-brand factory that spins up sites for a few months, harvests deposits, then shutters and re-skins.

Red-Flag Checklist

• Unlicensed in any reputable jurisdiction
  
• Fake licence numbers and unverifiable claims
  
• Anonymous ownership; privacy-masked WHOIS; no legal entity disclosed
  
• Serviced-office UK address with no verifiable FCA status
  
• Aggressive marketing (cold outreach/spam), unrealistic returns (hundreds of % p.a.)
  
• Opaque terms, bonus traps, one-sided rules enabling arbitrary blocks
  
• Withdrawal “unlock fees” (15–40%) and moving goalposts
  
• Platform irregularities: mismatched quotes, ignored stops, delayed fills, balance wipes
  
• Account freezes and intimidation when victims push back
  

If a broker ticks even a couple of these boxes, caution is warranted. Defazz ticks all of them.

Conclusion on Defazz

Defazz presents itself as a modern, innovative, and trustworthy broker, but in reality, it demonstrates all the hallmarks of a fraudulent operation. The company does not hold any valid regulatory licence, despite loudly advertising affiliations with CySEC and the FCA. These claims are false—no such licences exist under the numbers Defazz cites. The use of a prestigious London address is also misleading, as there is no evidence the broker operates there or is incorporated in the UK.

The ownership structure is completely hidden: no company name, no directors, no beneficial owners. Domains are freshly registered (2025) and masked under private WHOIS. This anonymity is paired with offshore hosting in jurisdictions known for being used by scam operations.

Trading conditions look attractive at first glance—low minimum deposit, high leverage, bonuses, and dedicated managers. But in practice, the platform is opaque and manipulative. Victims consistently report withdrawal blackmail, where “unlock fees” or “taxes” of 15–40% must be prepaid before funds are released (and still never are). Others describe fake profits wiped out, execution delays, ignored stop-losses, and complete account freezes.

Dozens of complaints reveal the same pattern: friendly onboarding, initial “profits” to build trust, escalating pressure to deposit more, and eventual refusal to release funds. Some clients even reported threats after filing legal claims.

Finally, Defazz is not a standalone entity. It is linked to other scam platforms (SmartTradingCenter, Auros-ai) via shared infrastructure and tactics, suggesting it is part of a broader serial fraud network.

Verdict: Defazz is not a broker but a carefully staged scam. The risk of losing all deposited funds is essentially 100%. Investors have no protection, no regulator to appeal to, and no legal safeguards.

Recommendation: Do not engage with Defazz under any circumstances. If you have already deposited funds, cease further payments, gather documentation, attempt chargeback procedures, and file reports with your local regulator or police. Raising awareness is crucial to prevent others from falling into the same trap.

Raliplen Broker Review 2025

Raliplen is an online trading brand operating primarily via raliplen.com and raliplen.net. The .com domain was registered on 10 February 2025, while the .net domain appeared in late July 2025 — a very short web footprint for a firm that markets itself as experienced and global. The site targets an international audience in English, including the CIS region.

Key takeaways

• Unlicensed: No authorization from FCA, CySEC, ASIC, SEC/CFTC, or any reputable regulator.
  
• Official warnings: Flagged by Canadian provincial regulators (ASC, BCSC, AMF/Québec) and listed by Belgium’s FSMA in July 2025.
  
• Anonymity & inconsistencies: No disclosed legal entity; glossy claims without verifiable evidence.
  
• High-risk terms: 1:500 leverage, vague “VIP” tiers, and a white-label web terminal on a third-party domain.
  
• Complaint pattern: Blocked withdrawals, invented “fees/taxes,” pressure from “personal managers,” and aggressive solicitation.

Claimed corporate profile

• Address (claimed): 54 Fenchurch Street, London EC3M 3JY, UK.
  
• Contacts (claimed): +44 2039617102, +44 2038622925; [email protected].
  
• Social presence: No active, verifiable social media channels identified.
  

The London address is a common office-block location often cited by shell entities. There is no public evidence of genuine operations from this site and no disclosed legal entity name or registration number connected to Raliplen.

Regulation & licenses

A search across major regulatory registers shows no license of any kind for Raliplen. The firm is not authorized by the UK’s FCA or other top-tier regulators (CySEC, ASIC, NFA/CFTC, etc.). 

Conversely, multiple regulators have warned consumers:

• Alberta (ASC): Placed Raliplen on its Investment Caution List on 11 June 2025.
  
• British Columbia (BCSC): Issued a warning on 9 July 2025, stating Raliplen is not registered to trade in securities or derivatives in the province.
  
• Québec (AMF): States Raliplen is not authorized to solicit investors in the province.
  
• Belgium (FSMA): In a consolidated update on 24 July 2025, Raliplen (raliplen.com) is grouped with dozens of illegal online platforms that typically block withdrawals and operate without licenses.
  

Raliplen operates outside any reputable regulatory framework. Client funds receive no statutory protection (no compensation scheme; no recognized dispute resolution).

Trading offer at a glance

Raliplen’s marketing reads like a standard lure for newcomers:

• Minimum deposit: from $250.
  
• Leverage: up to 1:500 (far beyond legal caps in most regulated markets—e.g., 1:30 in the EU/UK for retail clients).
  
• Instruments: broad CFDs menu—crypto, stocks, indices, commodities, metals; even NFTs are mentioned. No credible liquidity providers disclosed.

• Platform: “MetaTrader” is referenced, but access is via a web terminal hosted on a third-party domain: webtrader.aternlyx.tech. This is a white-label environment widely observed among scam clusters; it allows full control over pricing/latency and can simulate fills and P&L internally.
  
• Account tiers / VIP: Multi-level “VIP” statuses with promises of tighter costs, bonuses, and privileged service. No transparent fee schedule or instrument specifications published.
  
• Education & extras: “Personal manager 24/7,” signals, copy-trading, and market “analysis.” These features primarily function as sales tools to nudge larger deposits.

Deposits & withdrawals

• Funding methods: Cards (Visa/Mastercard), bank transfer, crypto, and sometimes Apple/Google Pay intermediaries.
  
• Withdrawal reality: Numerous accounts describe a predictable pattern: small early “test” payouts (to build trust), followed by rejections, delays, or fabricated charges (15–50% “tax/fee/insurance”) once larger sums or profits are requested. These payments do not unlock the funds.
  

User feedback: recurring red flags

While some suspiciously generic five-star blurbs praise “low spreads” and “friendly support,” the overwhelming pattern in independent forums and complaint boards is consistent and damning:

1. Frozen accounts on withdrawal requests. Users report sudden blocks or KYC hurdles appearing only after asking for payouts.
   
2. Pressure from “personal managers.” Call-center “analysts” push clients to top up, promise safe or guaranteed returns (a regulatory red line), then disappear.
   
3. Invented fees. “Taxes,” “clearance fees,” “insurance deposits,” or “liquidity unlock charges” are demanded upfront; paying them rarely results in any release of funds.
   
4. Aggressive solicitation. Cold calls, email spam, lead-gen through social networks and even job sites; scripted tactics with office-noise ambience to simulate legitimacy.
   

Scam-marker checklist

Raliplen exhibits nearly all hallmarks of a boiler-room CFD scam:

• No legal entity disclosed; no company number, no audited accounts, no regulator.
  
• Brand-new domains, rapidly replaced or supplemented (.com → .net) as reputation deteriorates.
  
• White-label webtrader on a third-party host (aternlyx.tech), a telltale of scam networks that recycle the same back-end for many “brands.”
  
• Unrealistic leverage (1:500) and vague “VIP” tiers with marketing bonuses.
  
• Opaque pricing/costs: no detailed instrument specs, swaps, or stable T&Cs.
  
• Withdrawal obstruction: fabricated fees, shifting rules, and unilateral term changes.
  
• Evidence-free claims of global reach, licensing compliance, and round-the-clock expert support.
  
• Regulatory warnings already issued in multiple jurisdictions.
  

Likely links to a wider scheme

The shared infrastructure (the aternlyx.tech web terminal), recycled marketing copy, UK virtual addresses, and +44 20… phone lines strongly suggest Raliplen is one of several interchangeable labels operated by the same boiler-room apparatus. Regulators often publish group warnings, listing Raliplen alongside similarly structured sites that emerged within the same timeframe and exhibit identical behavior patterns.

Conclusion on Raliplen

Raliplen is not a legitimate broker. It is unregulated, publicly warned against by multiple authorities, and displays the full pattern of a high-risk, likely fraudulent operation: anonymity, engineered trading environment, hard-sell deposit tactics, and systematic withdrawal obstruction. There is no client-fund protection, no credible oversight, and no reason to believe profits (or even principal) are ever safely withdrawable.

Do not deposit with Raliplen. If you are researching it for an investment, treat the brand as avoid at all costs.

If you already deposited: immediate steps

1. Stop sending money and cut contact with “managers.”
   
2. Document everything (screenshots, emails, chat logs, call records, transaction receipts).
   
3. Card/bank transfer: Contact your bank immediately to request a chargeback (reason code: fraud/misrepresentation). Provide your documentation.
   
4. Crypto transfers: Record the transaction hashes; engage your local cybercrime unit and consider reputable blockchain-analytics services via law enforcement or your counsel.
   
5. File reports with your national regulator and the authorities that already issued warnings (e.g., ASC, BCSC, AMF, FSMA).
   

Beware “recovery” scams—cold callers or websites promising to get your money back for an upfront fee are almost always secondary fraud.

Brevis Technology Review 2025

Brevis Technology (brevistechnology.co) is a recently launched online trading platform that promotes itself as an innovative global broker. Behind the glossy website and promises of high returns, however, lies a troubling reality. Our investigation reveals a classic case of an unregulated “boiler room” operation, designed to lure unsuspecting investors and prevent them from ever withdrawing their funds.

This review examines the broker’s registration details, trading conditions, reputation, and the clear red flags that categorize Brevis Technology as a fraudulent scheme.

Registration and Legal Information

Brevis Technology’s domain was registered only on June 13, 2025, making it a very young and untested platform. Despite claims of “operating since 2014,” the website’s short history proves otherwise.

The company attempts to present legitimacy by displaying a Legal Entity Identifier (LEI) code belonging to Brevis Premere Capital AB, a Swedish IT consulting firm established in 2014. However, no evidence connects this legitimate Swedish entity with Brevis Technology. In fact, no records in the FCA, CySEC, or other reputable regulators list Brevis Technology as a licensed broker.

Even more concerning, the Bank of Russia officially blacklisted Brevis Technology on August 28, 2025, citing signs of illegal financial activity. The site’s domain is privately registered in the U.S. with no trace of the actual owners, another hallmark of a scam operation.

Ownership and Management

Brevis Technology discloses no information about its owners, executives, or corporate structure. There is no “About Us” section, no team introduction, and no verifiable corporate address.

The supposed connection to Brevis Premere Capital AB is almost certainly fabricated to mislead investors. In reality, the project appears to be run by anonymous offshore operators who deliberately conceal their identities. Promotional articles online even claim that the broker is “licensed and globally recognized”—a direct contradiction to verifiable facts.

Trading Conditions and Platform

Platforms

Brevis Technology advertises a “powerful platform” and mentions WebTrader access. Some promotional content refers to MetaTrader, but no proof exists that MT4/MT5 is supported. In practice, traders are likely given access to a basic web-based simulator designed to imitate real trading.

Assets

The broker claims to offer a wide range of instruments:

• Cryptocurrencies
  
• Stocks
  
• Precious metals
  
• Forex pairs
  
• CFDs on indices
  

However, trade execution and price feeds are entirely controlled by the broker, meaning clients are never connected to real markets.

Account Types

Brevis Technology offers six different account tiers, each tied to progressively larger deposit requirements. The entry-level Bronze account starts at $300 and comes with only basic trading education, while the Silver account at $600 adds weekly market analysis and access to broker-provided signals.

From there, the Gold account requires a $1,000 deposit and includes a 5% cashback, a 10% welcome bonus, and a basic educational course. 

The Platinum account raises the bar to $5,000, promising higher bonuses, additional cashback options, and the services of a personal account manager.

At the upper end, the Diamond account demands a massive $50,000 deposit, offering “advanced training,” direct access to analysts, and claims of “no withdrawal fees.” Finally, the VIP account sits at the top with a staggering $200,000 minimum, marketed as providing personalized service, a 25% welcome bonus, and premium-level perks.

The entire account structure is clearly designed to pressure traders into depositing increasingly larger sums. The so-called “bonuses” act as a trap: once accepted, they impose strict conditions that require traders to generate unrealistic trading volumes before being allowed to withdraw funds.

Deposits and Withdrawals

The broker emphasizes cryptocurrency payments (BTC, ETH), occasionally mentioning cards or bank transfers. In reality, most clients report being forced to deposit via crypto—an irreversible payment method.

Withdrawals are practically impossible. The broker requires a minimum balance of $50,000 before any withdrawal is allowed—an absurd condition. Even then, clients report being asked to pay fake “taxes” or “verification fees” before requests are processed.

Reputation and Client Feedback

Brevis Technology’s reputation is overwhelmingly negative. Dozens of reviews across Trustpilot, Russian-language forums, and personal accounts describe identical scam patterns:

• Blocked accounts and ignored withdrawals – clients can deposit freely, but withdrawal requests result in sudden “verifications” or account freezes.
  
• Surprise fees – victims are asked to pay fabricated taxes, insurance fees, or AML checks. One client was told to open a Swiss bank account to retrieve funds.
  
• Loss through “managers” – traders who allowed “analysts” to trade on their behalf quickly saw their accounts wiped out.
  
• Aggressive sales tactics – initial cold calls convince victims to deposit small sums, after which “retention managers” push for larger deposits, often with promises of doubling the investment.
  

For example:

• A Polish client, Tymon, reported being shown fake profits before being asked to pay multiple fees for withdrawal. Once he refused, communication ceased.
  
• Another client, Marek, dealt with an “analyst” via WhatsApp who showed account growth, but Marek never recovered either profits or principal.
  
• Russian users describe Brevis Technology bluntly: “You can deposit as much as you want, but when you try to withdraw—it’s impossible.”
  

The few positive reviews online appear to be fabricated or paid promotions, as they conflict with the overwhelming majority of scam reports.

Scam Tactics and Red Flags

Brevis Technology exhibits every sign of a fraudulent broker:

• No regulation – blacklisted by the Bank of Russia.
  
• Anonymity – no ownership details, fake LEI used to create legitimacy.
  
• Crypto-only funding – ensures deposits cannot be reversed.
  
• Unrealistic withdrawal rules – $50,000 minimum balance, bonus restrictions.
  
• Aggressive cold-calling – typical boiler-room strategy.
  
• False promises – “guaranteed profits,” large bonuses, “premium” accounts.
  
• Affiliate/referral schemes – recruiting new victims to sustain the scam.
  

These tactics align Brevis Technology with other fraudulent projects, including platforms like Alrakamiya and BigArizonaCo, suggesting a broader organized scam network.

Domain and Technical Details

• Domain: brevistechnology.co
  
• Registered: June 13, 2025 (Porkbun, U.S.)
  
• Hosting: Cloudflare, U.S. servers
  
• Owner details: Hidden by “Private by Design, LLC”
  

The website itself appears to be built on a simple WordPress template, filled with generic marketing text and stock images. The use of a recently issued LEI code from an unrelated Swedish company further highlights the deceptive practices.

Conclusion on Brevis Technology

Brevis Technology is a fraudulent broker. It operates without licenses, hides its true operators, and exploits clients through impossible withdrawal conditions and aggressive deposit schemes.

Key Takeaways:

• No regulatory oversight, already blacklisted in Russia.
  
• Fabricated claims of legitimacy using unrelated companies.
  
• Consistent client complaints of fraud and theft.
  
• Strong indicators of being part of a larger scam network.
  

Verdict: Brevis Technology is a scam broker. Investors should avoid it entirely and treat any contact from its representatives as a red flag. Those who have already deposited funds are advised to gather evidence, contact their banks for chargebacks, and report the fraud to authorities immediately.

TekTicks Broker Review

When researching a broker, the first rule for investors is simple: check the licenses, the registration, and the reputation. In the case of TekTicks (operating via tekticks.com and webtrader.tekticks.com), a deeper examination reveals that behind the glossy website and bold promises lies an offshore entity without proper regulation, questionable practices, and numerous client complaints.

This review will cover the company’s registration details, licensing claims, trading conditions, complaints from clients, and the overall risk of working with this broker.

Company Background and Licensing Status

TekTicks presents itself as an international brokerage offering access to global financial markets. According to its own promotional materials, the company is regulated by both the UK Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) and the Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission (CySEC).

However, investigations into the official registries of both regulators confirm:

• No valid licenses exist under the numbers TekTicks provides.
  
• The company’s actual registration is in the Marshall Islands (number 98765), a jurisdiction widely used by unregulated offshore firms.
  
• Despite marketing itself as a broker with “over a decade of experience,” the domain tekticks.com was registered only recently, suggesting it is a short-term project rather than a long-standing financial institution.
  

Conclusion: TekTicks has no legitimate regulatory oversight, making it impossible for investors to rely on legal protections.

Trading Conditions and Account Types

The TekTicks website advertises access to forex, CFDs, commodities, and cryptocurrencies, though the details of spreads, leverage, and execution quality are vague.

From available information, the company appears to offer several tiers of accounts:

• Basic Account: Lower deposit requirements, minimal features.
  
• Advanced Account: Higher deposits, promises of tighter spreads, and access to a “personal account manager.”
  
• VIP Account: Large minimum deposits (tens of thousands), exclusive “premium opportunities,” and supposed faster withdrawals.
  

These differences seem largely superficial. In practice, conditions are subject to sudden unilateral changes by the broker, as TekTicks’ own agreement gives them the right to modify terms without client consent.

The Platform — More Imitation Than Trading

Clients are directed to trade via TekTicks’ web-based platform (webtrader.tekticks.com). While it looks modern at first glance, numerous complaints highlight serious problems:

• Delayed order execution that does not reflect real market speed.
  
• Price quotes diverging from market data, raising suspicions that prices are manipulated.
  
• Lack of transparency on whether trades are ever executed on external markets — strong evidence that TekTicks is a “bucket shop,” only simulating trades internally.
  

Complaints and Reported Issues

Analysis of user feedback reveals a repeating pattern of misconduct:

1. Withdrawal denial. Almost all complaints involve clients being unable to withdraw any funds.
   
2. Demand for extra payments. Clients are asked to pay “taxes,” “insurance,” or “commissions” before withdrawals, sometimes up to 30% of the requested amount.
   
3. Fake confirmations. The support team provides fabricated screenshots of transactions to reassure clients, though no funds are ever delivered.
   
4. Aggressive sales tactics. Account managers pressure clients to deposit more money, often using emotional manipulation and false promises of guaranteed profit.
   
5. Account blocking. Once clients refuse further deposits, accounts are locked and access to the platform disappears.

Reputation and Market Warnings

• Regulatory status: No official warnings have yet been issued by FCA, CySEC, ASIC, or BaFin, but given the evidence, TekTicks is likely to be flagged in the near future.
  
• Community reputation: On trading forums, TekTicks already appears in blacklists and is widely described as a scam or “bucket shop.”
  
• Fraudulent ecosystem: The design and functionality of the TekTicks site closely mirror other known offshore scams, suggesting it may be part of a larger fraudulent network.
  

Typical Red Flags With TekTicks

1. Claims of regulation by respected authorities without proof.
   
2. Offshore registration in the Marshall Islands.
   
3. Excessive withdrawal fees of up to 30%.
   
4. Contract clauses banning clients from legal action.
   
5. Constant pressure to deposit more funds.
   
6. Numerous unresolved complaints from real investors.
   

Conclusion on TekTicks 

TekTicks is not a legitimate broker but an offshore fraud scheme designed to extract money from unsuspecting clients.

• Licensing: No real regulatory authorization.
  
• Operations: Offshore registration, anonymous ownership, and fake credentials.
  
• Platform: Price manipulation, delayed orders, and no evidence of real trading.
  
• Reputation: Negative across forums and review platforms, with dozens of verified victim stories.
  

Recommendation: Avoid TekTicks at all costs. Do not open an account, transfer funds, or share personal documents. Investors who have already deposited should immediately cease communication, collect evidence, and seek professional assistance in recovering their funds.

ElazarCapital Broker Review 

The financial services industry has no shortage of brokers claiming “years of experience” and “world-class standards.” ElazarCapital, operating via its website elazarcapital.com, fits neatly into this mold. It markets itself as an international broker offering advanced technology, diverse trading instruments, and a team of professional analysts.

But in finance, marketing often tells only half the story. When examining ElazarCapital beyond its own promotional claims, a very different picture emerges — one filled with offshore registrations, missing licenses, restrictive agreements, and repeated complaints from investors who have lost access to their money.

This review provides a comprehensive look at who ElazarCapital really is, how it operates, and why industry watchdogs and clients alike have flagged it as a dangerous broker.

Company Profile

• Name: ElazarCapital
  
• Website: elazarcapital.com
  
• Stated Headquarters: Offshore registration in Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
  
• Claimed Experience: “Years of global market operations” (no proof provided)
  
• Regulatory Status: Unlicensed; flagged by the Bank of Russia as having characteristics of a pyramid scheme
  
• Primary Offerings: Forex, CFDs on stocks and indices, commodities, and cryptocurrencies
  
• Trading Platforms: Proprietary web terminal and mobile application
  

The domain was registered only recently, which contradicts the firm’s claims of “many years” in operation. Offshore jurisdictions such as Saint Vincent and the Grenadines are notorious for requiring minimal documentation to set up a financial services business, making them a favored base for unregulated brokers.

Regulatory and Legal Standing

A legitimate brokerage will hold licensing from recognized regulators such as the FCA (UK), CySEC (Cyprus), ASIC (Australia), or CFTC/NFA (USA). ElazarCapital does not appear in any of these registries.

Instead, the company relies on its offshore incorporation as a veneer of legitimacy. Importantly, the Bank of Russia has issued a public warning, identifying ElazarCapital as a company showing signs of fraudulent activity and pyramid-like behavior.

This lack of oversight means that clients have no third-party protection, no compensation schemes, and no way to legally challenge the broker should funds be withheld.

Trading Platforms

Unlike reputable firms that offer MetaTrader 4, MetaTrader 5, or cTrader, ElazarCapital provides access only through a proprietary web-based platform and a mobile app.

Reported issues include:

• Limited functionality compared to industry-standard platforms.
  
• No third-party verification of price feeds or order execution.
  
• Spreads and quotes that often deviate from real market conditions.
  
• No possibility to integrate automated strategies (EAs).
  

Such “in-house” platforms are commonly used by fraudulent brokers to simulate trades internally without routing them to actual liquidity providers. This allows them to control outcomes, block profits, or manipulate displayed account balances.

Account Types and Deposits

ElazarCapital divides its clients into tiers based on deposit size:

• Basic Account: starting around $250, with limited features.
  
• Mid-Tier Accounts (Silver/Gold): requiring $1,000–$10,000, marketed with “better spreads” and personal account managers.
  
• VIP / Premium Accounts: deposits from $25,000 and above, with promises of exclusive strategies and priority withdrawals.
  

The reality, however, is that no substantive improvements are offered. The tiered system primarily serves as a sales funnel, encouraging clients to keep depositing more under the illusion of unlocking higher-level benefits.

Trading Instruments

According to promotional material, the broker offers a wide range of markets:

• Forex: Major, minor, and some exotic pairs
  
• Stocks (CFDs): Well-known US and European companies
  
• Indices: Including S&P 500, NASDAQ, and DAX
  
• Commodities: Gold, silver, oil, and agricultural goods
  
• Cryptocurrencies: Bitcoin, Ethereum, and select altcoins
  

Without proper regulation or transparency, there is no certainty these instruments are actually tradable. Many unlicensed brokers simply mirror market prices within their platforms without executing real trades.

Trading Conditions and Fees

ElazarCapital advertises “competitive spreads” and “low commissions,” but fails to publish concrete details. Complaints from clients reveal:

• Spreads that widen significantly even during calm market conditions.
  
• Withdrawal fees as high as 25–30% of the requested amount.
  
• Penalties of up to 20% for closing an account within the first year.
  
• Hidden charges introduced retroactively at the withdrawal stage.
  

Such opaque practices make it impossible for traders to calculate their actual costs and reflect the broker’s ability to change rules arbitrarily.

Education and Research Tools

ElazarCapital promotes its “educational support” and “daily analysis,” but these services lack depth:

• Educational materials are generic articles available freely online.
  
• “Market analysis” is often outdated or recycled from public sources.
  
• One-on-one “consultations” with analysts are largely used to push clients to deposit larger sums.
  

This section appears more like a marketing pipeline than a genuine effort to help clients trade responsibly.

Deposits and Withdrawals

• Deposit Methods: bank cards, wire transfers, and select e-wallets.
  
• Withdrawal Policy: officially 3–5 business days, but in reality often delayed indefinitely.
  
• Additional Fees: clients report being asked to pay commissions, taxes, or verification costs before withdrawal requests are processed.
  
• Segregation of Funds: no evidence that client funds are held separately from company accounts.
  

The withdrawal stage is the most problematic area, with numerous reports of accounts being frozen or clients pressured to make additional payments before access is restored.

Connections to Other Fraudulent Entities

Technical analysis of the domain and website structure reveals similarities with other discredited brokers:

• Shared hosting environments and infrastructure.
  
• Identical website layouts and portal designs.
  
• Legal agreements that match, word-for-word, documents from previously blacklisted firms, with only the name replaced.
  

This suggests ElazarCapital may be part of a larger network of fraudulent operators who repeatedly rebrand to evade detection.

Customer Support

While the company claims to offer 24/7 multilingual support, users report that communication quickly deteriorates once withdrawal requests are made. Initial contact is frequent and persuasive (to encourage deposits), but afterward support becomes evasive or unresponsive.

Conclusion on ElazarCapital 

ElazarCapital markets itself as a global broker with cutting-edge tools and premium service. In reality, it is an unregulated offshore entity operating without accountability, manipulating clients through vague contracts, simulated platforms, and aggressive marketing tactics.

With a history of blocked accounts, withheld withdrawals, hidden fees, and regulator warnings, ElazarCapital demonstrates all the hallmarks of a fraudulent brokerage scheme.

Verdict: Investors should avoid ElazarCapital entirely. The combination of offshore registration, no licensing, opaque terms, and numerous client complaints makes this broker a significant financial risk.

Pixocero Broker Review

Pixocero, operating through the domains pixocero.pro and pixocero.online, portrays itself as a next-generation brokerage firm granting investors access to global financial markets. At first glance, the platform appears polished: promises of regulation, a team of “experienced analysts,” and advanced trading tools. However, beneath this façade, investigations reveal a disturbing picture. From non-existent licenses and offshore incorporation to fabricated staff profiles and consistent withdrawal issues, Pixocero demonstrates every hallmark of a scam operation rather than a legitimate broker.

This review examines Pixocero’s background, regulatory claims, trading conditions, customer complaints, and official warnings from regulators, providing a clear assessment of the risks involved.

Company Background and Registration

Pixocero claims to be a regulated international broker. However:

• The CySEC license number (№43211), displayed on their website, does not exist in the official Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission database.
  
• The company hides its ownership structure. Both domains are registered through OffshoreProxy LLC in Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, an offshore zone notorious for unregulated financial activity.
  
• WHOIS data is masked by privacy protection services, preventing identification of the real operators.
  
• Domain registration records show the websites are less than one year old, indicating a short-term project designed to disappear once complaints accumulate.
  

Regulatory and Legal Status

• Not regulated anywhere. Pixocero does not appear in the registers of CySEC (Cyprus), FCA (UK), ASIC (Australia), or AMF (France).
  
• Blacklisted by the Bank of Russia. On August 5, 2025, the Central Bank of Russia officially added Pixocero (pixocero.pro and pixocero.online) to its warning list as a company showing signs of a financial pyramid. This is one of the strongest warnings a regulator can issue, confirming illegal activity.
  
• No protective measures for investors exist, since offshore jurisdictions like Saint Vincent provide no financial oversight or compensation schemes.
  

Trading Platform

Pixocero does not use industry-standard platforms such as MetaTrader 4/5 or cTrader. Instead, clients are forced to trade via a proprietary web-based platform fully controlled by the company. This raises significant concerns:

• Manipulated pricing: quotes can be altered in real time to engineer losses.
  
• Execution delays: trades can be closed with artificial slippage to the client’s disadvantage.
  
• Technical blocks: “system errors” often occur during withdrawal attempts.
  
• Lack of independent verification: clients cannot cross-check prices with external market feeds.
  

In effect, the broker controls not only the client’s deposits but also the trading environment itself, making profitable trading nearly impossible.

Account Types and Trading Conditions

The platform advertises multiple account categories (Standard, Premium, VIP), but none of these accounts are described with transparent specifications. Instead, clients report:

• No published spreads or commissions. Terms are vague and change without notice.
  
• Minimum deposits are presented as “affordable,” but users are pressured into rapidly upgrading to larger balances under promises of access to “exclusive tools” or “expert strategies.”
  
• Withdrawal restrictions: clients are required to provide multi-year income documentation (up to 8 years) and pay fabricated “taxes” or “insurance fees” — sometimes up to 90% of the requested withdrawal amount.
  

Such conditions are incompatible with legitimate brokerage practices.

Marketing and Client Recruitment

Pixocero’s acquisition strategy relies heavily on aggressive and deceptive marketing:

• Social media campaigns on Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, and Telegram featuring “success stories” of supposed investors who doubled their money in weeks.
  
• Fake testimonials with stock images or AI-generated photos.
  
• Cold calls from “financial consultants” urging immediate deposits.
  
• Webinars and presentations using fabricated charts and market data to project professionalism.
  

The focus is not on sustainable trading but on convincing victims to deposit quickly, without due diligence.

Psychological Pressure Tactics

Pixocero employs psychological manipulation to maximize client deposits:

• Urgency: “The market is in the perfect entry point right now.”
  
• Trust-building: allowing small initial withdrawals to build confidence.
  
• Blame-shifting: “You didn’t follow our strategy, that’s why you lost.”
  
• Loss recovery bait: offering to “unlock” accounts or restore funds if clients make additional payments.
  

Such tactics are classic in fraudulent operations, keeping victims emotionally engaged until their money is gone.

Key Red Flags Identified

• Fake CySEC license number.
  
• Offshore registration in Saint Vincent & the Grenadines.
  
• Hidden ownership and young domains.
  
• Blacklisted by the Bank of Russia.
  
• Web-only platform prone to manipulation.
  
• Withdrawal barriers with invented fees and document demands.
  
• Numerous consistent customer complaints of lost funds.
  

Conclusion on Pixocero 

Pixocero is not a regulated broker, but a fraudulent operation posing as an investment platform. Its structure, behavior, and regulatory warnings confirm that it is designed to defraud clients. From fabricated licenses and AI-generated staff photos to manipulated platforms and blocked withdrawals, every aspect of Pixocero signals danger.

Final verdict: Pixocero is a scam broker. Investors should avoid any engagement with this company. Those who have already deposited funds should immediately stop communication, collect evidence, and seek recovery through chargebacks, police reports, and regulator complaints.

Cntly Broker Review 

In the world of online trading, brokers often distinguish themselves by transparency, regulatory compliance, and fair treatment of their clients. Unfortunately, Cntly, operating through cntly.co and m.cntly.co, fails to meet these standards. The company has presented itself as a European-regulated broker with innovative technology, yet closer inspection reveals offshore registration, fictitious licenses, and an association with a much larger network of websites — most notably Pocket Option. This review explores Cntly’s background, regulation, trading conditions, and client experiences to uncover why this broker is considered high risk.

Company Background and Registration

Cntly marketed itself as an international brokerage, claiming oversight from the Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission (CySEC) under license number 34578. However, verification of CySEC’s official database shows no such license exists.

Further research reveals:

• The company does not appear in the registers of respected regulators such as the FCA (UK), ASIC (Australia), or the Central Bank of Russia.
  
• The original registration points to Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, a jurisdiction notorious for hosting unregulated brokers.
  
• The connected brand Pocket Option is legally tied to PO Trade Ltd, incorporated in Saint Lucia, another offshore haven with limited financial supervision.
  

These details confirm that Cntly operates outside the oversight of recognized regulators, leaving clients without protection in case of disputes or insolvency.

Regulatory Warnings

Cntly’s lack of regulation has not gone unnoticed. On September 14, 2021, the Central Bank of Russia added cntly.co and several related domains, including those of Pocket Option, to its official blacklist of companies with signs of illegal financial activity.

Similarly, the French regulator AMF (Autorité des Marchés Financiers) placed Pocket Option on its list of unauthorized brokers, warning that the company offers financial services in France without permission.

These warnings carry weight: when two major regulators independently flag the same network of domains, it signals systemic non-compliance and potential fraud.

Network of Associated Projects

One of the most concerning aspects of Cntly is its link to a broader network of brokers operating under different names. Dozens of domains — such as pocketoption.com, po-trade.xyz, quotex-ru.com, and others — share identical design, functionality, and infrastructure.

The strategy is clear:

• Domain rotation allows the group to bypass government blocks and continue attracting new clients.
  
• Rebranding enables the operation to distance itself from negative reviews.
  
• Uniform platforms make it easier to run the same trading model across multiple sites.
  

This pattern demonstrates that Cntly is not an isolated broker but part of a much larger scheme designed to obscure accountability.

Trading Conditions

At first glance, Cntly advertises attractive opportunities: binary options, CFDs, and access to financial markets through a sleek web and mobile platform. However, the fine print reveals highly unfavorable conditions for traders:

• Withdrawal commissions between 25% and 40%, effectively trapping client funds.
  
• Right to suspend or terminate accounts at the broker’s discretion without explanation.
  
• Prohibition of class-action lawsuits, preventing clients from uniting against the company.
  
• No negative balance protection, exposing traders to debt risks.
  

Such terms heavily favor the broker and are rarely seen in regulated financial institutions.

Account Types

Cntly offered several account tiers differentiated by:

• Minimum deposit requirements,
  
• Bonus structures,
  
• Access to additional tools or services,
  
• Priority in customer support.
  

However, these account conditions were inconsistent. Terms frequently changed without prior notice, creating uncertainty for clients and making long-term planning impossible. This lack of stability further undermines trust in the broker’s reliability.

Platform Analysis

Cntly’s trading platform is a mirror of Pocket Option’s system, underscoring their connection. Key points include:

• Identical user interface and design, down to menu placement and chart layouts.
  
• Web-based platform and mobile applications available for iOS and Android.
  
• Instruments are limited primarily to binary options, supplemented by a small range of CFDs on currencies, stocks, commodities, and cryptocurrencies.
  

Crucially, trading is executed in a closed environment, not on the real market. This means quotes and trade outcomes are controlled entirely by the broker, enabling manipulation of prices, delayed order execution (reported at 12–72 hours), and disregard for stop-loss orders.

Fraud Indicators and Client Complaints

Client feedback paints a consistent picture of malpractice:

• Account freezes without justification after withdrawal attempts.
  
• Delays or outright refusal of withdrawals, often accompanied by demands for additional “taxes” or “fees.”
  
• Manipulation of trades, including altered price quotes and ignored stop-losses.
  
• Aggressive marketing tactics, such as cold calls and promises of 300–500% annual returns.
  
• Intimidation and threats, with some clients reporting menacing letters from the broker’s so-called “legal department” when they attempted legal action.

These cases highlight a clear pattern of systematic fraud.

Offshore Jurisdiction Risks

Operating from Saint Vincent and the Grenadines and Saint Lucia offers Cntly significant protection — for the company, not the client. Offshore regulators in these regions:

• Do not audit brokers’ financials.
  
• Provide no dispute resolution mechanisms.
  
• Do not enforce compensation schemes for defrauded investors.
  

For traders, this means there is virtually no legal recourse once funds are lost.

Conclusion on Cntly 

Cntly is part of a wider offshore operation that includes Pocket Option and dozens of associated domains flagged by international regulators. The broker’s claims of European licensing are false, its terms heavily disadvantage clients, and its track record includes numerous verified complaints of fraud, blocked withdrawals, and intimidation.

Final assessment: Cntly cannot be considered a safe or legitimate broker. The combination of fake regulation, offshore registration, regulatory blacklists, and negative client experiences makes it a high-risk operation best avoided.

For traders seeking reliable brokerage services, the recommendation is clear: work only with brokers licensed by recognized authorities such as the FCA, ASIC, or CySEC, and avoid unregulated offshore schemes like Cntly/Pocket Option.

Unomi Broker Exposed

Unomi (unomi.cc, cabinet.unomi.cc) claims to be a global online trading platform offering forex, commodities, indices, stocks, and crypto trading. According to its website, it has been operating since 2003 and serves clients across Europe and Asia. However, a thorough investigation reveals that Unomi is not a regulated broker, but rather a high-risk offshore operation with multiple signs of fraud.

There is no proof of licensing, the company is registered in a secrecy jurisdiction (Marshall Islands), and its trading platform is widely reported to be a fake simulation tool. Numerous user reviews detail deceptive tactics, blocked withdrawals, fake profits, and pressuring clients into endless deposits. Based on available evidence, Unomi operates a sophisticated scam under the appearance of financial services.

Corporate Background and False Identity

Claimed History vs. Reality

• Website claims: Founded in 2003
  
• Domain registration: December 2022
  
• Declared address: Marshall Islands (offshore location with limited legal oversight)
  
• Legal entity: Not disclosed; no registration number or company name on the site
  
• Management team: Anonymous — no bios, no names, no verifiable credentials
  

Unomi presents itself as a long-standing financial institution, but its entire corporate identity is unverifiable. There are no legal documents, ownership disclosures, or company identifiers. This lack of transparency makes it impossible for users to verify who controls the platform — a red flag in any investment service.

In comparison, legitimate brokers must display the following on their website:

• License numbers
  
• Name of the legal entity
  
• Physical addresses of headquarters
  
• Proof of regulatory compliance
  

Unomi fails to provide any of these.

Regulatory Status: No License, No Protection

Despite offering financial services to clients globally, Unomi is not authorized by any recognized financial regulator. This includes:

• Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) – UK
  
• Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission (CySEC) – Cyprus
  
• Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) – Australia
  
• Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) / NFA – USA
  

Blacklisting and Warnings

Unomi has been officially blacklisted by the Central Bank of Russia, which named it among entities illegally providing financial services. This alone should be a strong warning to any potential investor. Moreover, there is no mention of regulatory approval in any jurisdiction, and the company does not publish a license number or registration certificate.

This lack of regulation means that:

• Client funds are not protected by law
  
• There is no oversight of business practices
  
• No legal recourse exists in case of fraud or disputes

Trading Conditions: No Transparency, No Accountability

Instruments Offered

Unomi promotes a wide selection of instruments, including:

• 40+ currency pairs
  
• Commodities like gold, oil, and silver
  
• Indices such as NASDAQ and DAX
  
• Stocks and shares of popular companies
  
• Cryptocurrencies
  

However, this offer is undermined by a total lack of disclosed trading conditions, including:

• No details on spreads or commissions
  
• No information about leverage or margin requirements
  
• No mention of order execution model (STP/ECN/market maker)
  
• No client agreement or terms of service available before signup
  
• No demo account to test the platform
  

The absence of clear, pre-contractual information violates basic financial standards and raises the possibility that Unomi’s WebTrader platform is not connected to any live market.

WebTrader Platform

Unomi uses a proprietary WebTrader interface, but numerous user reports suggest it is a closed, manipulated environment. This means:

• Trades are executed inside a simulated ecosystem
  
• Price movements are artificially generated
  
• Profits can be created or removed at the company’s discretion
  
• The platform is not linked to a live exchange or liquidity provider
  

This kind of closed-loop “trading” allows the company to show false profits, trigger fake losses, or stall withdrawals — all under the illusion of a real trading platform.

Scam Mechanics: Step-by-Step Deception

Unomi follows a well-documented scam playbook used by many fraudulent offshore brokers:

Phase 1: Initial Contact

• Clients are targeted via social media ads, fake investment websites, or cold calls.
  
• The platform offers guaranteed profits, low risk, and exclusive investment opportunities.
  
• A “personal account manager” is assigned to build rapport and push for the first deposit.
  

Phase 2: First Deposit and Fake Profits

• Clients deposit a small amount (e.g. $250–500).
  
• The platform shows rapid “profits” on the account.
  
• The user may be allowed to withdraw a small amount (e.g. $50–100) to create trust.
  

Phase 3: Aggressive Upselling

• The manager encourages clients to deposit larger sums (often $5,000–$50,000) for “maximum returns.”
  
• Emotional tactics are used: fear of missing out, limited-time offers, or “VIP strategies.”
  

Phase 4: Withdrawal Blockage

• When a client attempts to withdraw, they face endless roadblocks:
  
  • Compliance checks
    
  • Proof of income
    
  • KYC verification (even if already provided)
    
  • Upfront “withdrawal fees” (10–25%)
    
  • “Tax clearance charges”
    
  • “Anti-money laundering audits”
    

Despite making these payments, funds are never released.

Phase 5: Account Suspension

• Communication stops.
  
• Support channels go silent.
  
• The platform may lock the client out or simply delete the account entirely.
  

Client Reviews and Complaint Patterns

User reviews on multiple platforms reveal a consistent pattern of abuse:

• Trustpilot: Dozens of reviews mention impossible withdrawals, harassment by managers, and unfulfilled promises
  
• Forex Peace Army: Reports describe blocked accounts, fake trades, and disappearing funds
  
• Russian-language forums (ru-trade.ru, Вкладер): Clients report being pressured to take loans, max out credit cards, and pay “taxes” that never result in withdrawals
  

Many “positive” reviews lack detail, are written in identical formats, or appear on suspicious websites — a common practice by scam brokers trying to mask reputational damage.

Key Red Flags of Unomi

Unomi exhibits multiple critical warning signs that are commonly associated with fraudulent financial schemes:

• Lack of regulatory oversight:
  The company operates without a license from any recognized financial authority. This means clients have no legal protection, no oversight of how funds are handled, and no channel for complaint or compensation in the event of fraud.
  
• Offshore registration in a secrecy jurisdiction:
  Unomi is registered in the Marshall Islands, a jurisdiction known for minimal financial regulation and virtually no enforcement. This structure is often used to shield fraudulent operations from legal responsibility.
  
• No transparency about ownership or legal entity:
  The website provides no information about the company’s directors, legal name, or management team. This anonymity allows the people behind the scheme to disappear without a trace when issues arise.
  
• Fake trading environment:
  The WebTrader platform used by Unomi is reported to be a closed, simulated environment. It allows the company to artificially generate profits or losses, manipulate prices, and block real withdrawals.
  
• Withdrawal manipulation and fabricated fees:
  Clients consistently report being asked to pay arbitrary fees — including withdrawal commissions, taxes, and compliance charges — in order to access their own funds. These fees often increase over time and are never followed by successful withdrawals.
  
• High-pressure sales tactics:
  Assigned “account managers” aggressively push clients to invest more money using psychological manipulation, false urgency, and misleading financial projections.
  
• Official blacklisting:
  The Central Bank of Russia has formally warned against Unomi, placing it on the list of entities illegally providing financial services to citizens — confirming the platform’s noncompliance and risk to investors.
  

These red flags collectively indicate that Unomi does not operate as a genuine brokerage firm, but as a vehicle for financial exploitation.

Final Verdict on Unomi 

Unomi presents itself as a reputable trading platform, but in reality, it is an unlicensed, offshore scheme structured to extract funds from unsuspecting clients. It offers no regulatory safeguards, no financial transparency, and no functional trading infrastructure.

Every aspect of the operation — from its falsified company history and unverified trading terminal to its manipulative practices and blacklisting by authorities — signals that Unomi is not a legitimate broker, but a sophisticated scam.

Investors should avoid this platform entirely.
If you have already deposited money with Unomi, it is crucial to:

• Cease further communication with the company,
  
• Preserve all correspondence and transaction records,
  
• Report the incident to your national financial regulator, fraud investigation agency, or law enforcement.
  

The best defense against fraud is due diligence. Always verify a broker’s regulatory status, legal documentation, and reputation before investing — especially when dealing with offshore entities promising high returns and low risk.

AirMarkets Broker Review

AirMarkets, operating through the domains airmarkets.ac and airmarkets.pw, presents itself as a global brokerage offering a wide range of financial instruments. The platform claims to be regulated within the European Union, providing clients with a safe and high-yield trading environment. However, upon investigation, these claims appear to be unsupported, and multiple red flags indicate that AirMarkets operates more like a financial scam than a legitimate broker.

Regulation and Legal Status

AirMarkets claims regulatory oversight from an entity called the European Trading Compliance Authority. However:

• This organization does not exist in any official registry of EU or international financial regulators.
  
• There is no mention of AirMarkets in the databases of FCA (UK), CySEC (Cyprus), ASIC (Australia), or ESMA (EU).
  
• The listed operating entity, Fynara LTD, is registered in the Marshall Islands, a jurisdiction widely used for offshore operations with no investor protection or regulatory oversight.
  
• Attempts to verify this company within the Marshall Islands Financial Services Authority database yield no results.
  

Additionally, AirMarkets mentions a license from IFMRRC, a private and unrecognized “regulator” that offers paid certificates without legal authority. This is often used by fraudulent platforms to falsely appear legitimate.

Conclusion: AirMarkets is not regulated by any credible financial authority and operates under a false sense of legitimacy.

Account Types

AirMarkets offers five tiers of accounts, each requiring progressively larger minimum deposits:

• Mini – from $500
  
• Silver – from $2,500
  
• Standard – from $5,000
  
• Gold – from $10,000
  
• Platinum – from $35,000
  

Each level offers additional features such as access to more instruments, priority customer service, and personal trading managers. However, no demo account is provided, meaning traders must invest real funds from the start — a clear departure from the practices of regulated brokers.

Trading Conditions

According to the website, AirMarkets provides access to over 200 financial instruments, including:

• Forex currency pairs
  
• Stocks and indices
  
• Cryptocurrencies
  
• Commodities
  
• ETFs
  

The platform uses xCritical, a web-based terminal known for being customizable but not regulated. Unlike MetaTrader (MT4/MT5), xCritical does not guarantee order execution integrity or data accuracy.

Key issues:

• The broker does not disclose spreads, commissions, or leverage ratios.
  
• There is no information on order execution policies, slippage, or risk management.
  
• Deposit and withdrawal details are vague, with no information on fees, processing times, or limits.
  

Additionally, AirMarkets falsely promotes guaranteed monthly returns of up to 55%, a claim that violates financial advertising standards and indicates deceptive marketing.

Fraud Indicators and Manipulative Practices

Several patterns suggest that AirMarkets follows a classic investment scam structure:

• Cold calling and aggressive sales tactics promising unrealistic profits with minimal risk.
  
• Fabricated regulation and non-transparent ownership structure.
  
• Use of unregulated trading platforms with potential for chart manipulation and delayed execution.
  
• Fake profits on demo accounts to lure deposits.
  
• Sudden account blocks or forced loss of funds shortly after deposits.
  
• Clients are asked to pay additional “taxes” or “technical audits” (15–30%) to release withdrawals.
  
• Fake legal notices from bogus firms like EuroLegal Services are sent to pressure clients into paying further.
  

Client Complaints and User Experiences

Numerous verified complaints from traders on platforms like Trustpilot, Reddit, and financial forums outline the same cycle:

• Users deposit between $500 and $2,500.
  
• Initial trades appear profitable under manager guidance.
  
• After requesting a withdrawal, the account is either frozen or subjected to new payment demands.
  
• Communication is cut off or redirected to aggressive “legal” threats.
  

Here are just a few examples:

“After my first successful trade, they locked my account claiming suspicious activity. That trade was made based on their instructions.”

“They demanded a $300 audit fee to process my withdrawal. Once paid, they stopped responding.”

“Received a letter from EuroLegal Services threatening legal action unless I paid a settlement. No mention of this during account setup.”

Conclusion on AirMarkets 

AirMarkets is a high-risk, unregulated broker operating behind a facade of professionalism. The company uses fake credentials, offshore registration, and aggressive psychological pressure to extract as much money from clients as possible.

Key risks:

• No regulatory oversight
  
• False claims of legitimacy
  
• Unverifiable legal entity
  
• Manipulated platform and hidden fees
  
• Dozens of verified complaints
  

Recommendation: Avoid AirMarkets entirely. Do not deposit any funds. If you have already done so, contact your bank immediately to initiate a chargeback and report the incident to financial authorities in your country.