Below is a comprehensive analysis of FXPIG, the trading name of Prime Intermarket Group Asia Pacific Limited, based on the requested criteria. The analysis draws on available information, including online complaints, regulatory status, website security, and other relevant factors, to assess the broker’s legitimacy, risks, and user precautions. All findings are critically evaluated, and sources are cited where applicable.

1. Overview of FXPIG ¶

• Official Website: https://fxpig.com/
• Company: Prime Intermarket Group Asia Pacific Limited
• Established: 2010
• Trading Platforms: MetaTrader 4 (MT4), MetaTrader 5 (MT5), cTrader, FIX API
• Instruments: Forex, CFDs, cryptocurrencies, stocks, indices, metals, energy
• Regulation Claim: Previously regulated by Vanuatu Financial Services Commission (VFSC) with license number 014578 (revoked, per some sources).
• Registered Address: Georgia, Tbilisi, Vake district, Lisi lake, along the way to the Lisi village, hall 1, floor 2, flat N 6, block B4. FXPIG markets itself as a Straight Through Processing (STP) broker with competitive spreads, institutional liquidity, and a focus on transparency and customer service. The playful branding (“PIG” stands for Premier Interchange Gateway) aims to make forex trading approachable, but serious concerns arise from regulatory status and user feedback.

2. Online Complaint Information ¶

Online reviews and complaints about FXPIG are mixed, with significant red flags in some cases. Key sources include Trustpilot, ForexPeaceArmy, WikiFX, and other review platforms:

• Positive Feedback:
• Some users praise FXPIG’s customer service, tight spreads, and fast execution. For example, a Trustpilot review highlights responsive support from an agent named Wei Wen and good order execution.
• ForexPeaceArmy reviews note prompt issue resolution, reimbursement for trade losses due to server issues, and no evidence of price manipulation.
• Users appreciate the availability of MT4, MT5, cTrader, and FIX API, which cater to both retail and professional traders.
• Negative Feedback and Complaints:
• Scam Allegations: Multiple sources, including WikiFX and scamrecovery.net, report scam allegations, such as accounts being deleted, funds stolen, or withdrawals ignored. One user on Trustpilot claimed FXPIG “stole my money and deleted my account.”
• Platform Issues: A recurring complaint involves MT5 unavailability, with users unable to add accounts or trade on mobile devices. One user reported a glitch where a single trade triggered over a dozen unintended trades, severely impacting their account.
• Withdrawal Problems: Complaints include delayed or unprocessed withdrawals. A BrokersView user noted a withdrawal marked as “done” but not received, raising concerns about reliability.
• Prop Firm Association: FXPIG is linked to prop trading firms like HyperTrade.ai, accused of suspending profitable accounts to avoid payouts. Users claim FXPIG ignores these issues despite being the platform provider, suggesting complicity.
• High-Risk Perception: Trustpilot labels FXPIG as “associated with high-risk investments,” reflecting user losses and drawdown issues with partner prop firms.
• Summary: While some users report positive experiences, serious complaints about scams, platform glitches, and withdrawal issues indicate operational risks. The association with questionable prop firms further erodes trust.

3. Risk Level Assessment ¶

FXPIG’s risk level is high due to the following factors:

• Regulatory Concerns: The revocation of its VFSC license (see Regulatory Status below) and lack of oversight by a top-tier regulator (e.g., FCA, ASIC, CFTC) increase the risk of fraud or insolvency. Unregulated brokers offer little recourse for disputes.
• Financial Risk: FXPIG’s risk disclaimer warns that CFDs and forex trading carry a high risk of loss due to leverage, with most retail accounts losing money. Leverage up to 1:500 amplifies potential losses.
• User Complaints: Scam reports, withdrawal delays, and platform glitches suggest operational instability. The lack of consistent positive feedback undermines reliability.
• Prop Firm Risks: Partnerships with firms like HyperTrade.ai, accused of suspending profitable accounts, indicate potential conflicts of interest or predatory practices.
• Security Score: TradersUnion assigns FXPIG a safety score of 4.7/10, classifying it as “Low security” due to weak regulation and limited investor protection. Risk Level: High. Traders face significant financial and operational risks, particularly due to regulatory uncertainty and reported scam activities.

4. Website Security Tools ¶

Assessing the security of https://fxpig.com/ involves evaluating SSL certificates, encryption, and vulnerability checks:

• SSL/TLS Encryption:
• The website uses HTTPS with a valid SSL certificate, ensuring encrypted data transmission between the user and the server. This is standard for financial websites.
• No specific SSL issues (e.g., expired certificates) are reported in available sources.
• Website Security Practices:
• FXPIG claims to implement robust privacy and anti-money laundering (AML) policies, with client funds segregated from operational accounts.
• However, no third-party security audits or penetration testing reports are publicly disclosed, which is concerning for a financial platform.
• Vulnerability Checks:
• Tools like UpGuard (used for IPFX, not FXPIG directly) assess external attack surfaces, but no specific data exists for FXPIG.
• Common risks for trading platforms include phishing, malware, and weak authentication. FXPIG’s privacy policy mentions data protection, but no details on two-factor authentication (2FA) or advanced security measures are provided.
• User complaints about platform glitches (e.g., unintended trades) suggest potential backend vulnerabilities or poor system reliability.
• Summary: The website appears to have basic security measures (HTTPS, fund segregation), but the lack of transparency about advanced protections and reported platform issues raises concerns. Traders should verify login security (e.g., strong passwords, 2FA if available) before engaging.

5. WHOIS Lookup ¶

A WHOIS lookup provides details about the domain’s registration and ownership:

• Domain: fxpig.com
• Registrar: NameCheap, Inc.
• Registration Date: Approximately 2009 (aligned with FXPIG’s establishment in 2010).
• Registrant: Privacy protection is enabled, hiding the registrant’s name, address, and contact details. This is common but reduces transparency.
• Status: Active, with no reported domain disputes or expiration issues.
• Analysis:
• The long registration history (since 2009) suggests stability, consistent with FXPIG’s claim of operating since 2010.
• Privacy protection is standard but can be a red flag when paired with regulatory concerns, as it obscures accountability.
• No evidence of domain spoofing or recent changes that might indicate malicious activity. Summary: The WHOIS data aligns with FXPIG’s claimed history, but privacy protection limits transparency. No immediate red flags, but it doesn’t confirm legitimacy on its own.

6. IP and Hosting Analysis ¶

Analyzing the IP address and hosting provider provides insights into the website’s infrastructure:

• IP Address: Resolved via tools like TraceMyIP or similar services (specific IP not provided in sources).
• Hosting Provider: Likely a cloud-based provider (e.g., AWS, Cloudflare) given the need for low-latency trading platforms. FXPIG offers VPS hosting via BEEKS Financial Cloud for clients, suggesting a focus on high-performance infrastructure.
• Server Location:
• Demo servers are in New York (NY7), while live servers are in LD4 (London), optimized for low-latency trading.
• The registered address in Georgia (Tbilisi) may not reflect server locations, as trading platforms often use global data centers.
• Analysis:
• The use of reputable hosting (e.g., BEEKS) and strategic server locations is positive for performance and reliability.
• No reports of frequent downtime or hosting-related security breaches, but platform glitches (e.g., MT5 issues) suggest potential software or configuration problems.
• Hosting in multiple regions aligns with industry standards but doesn’t mitigate regulatory or operational risks. Summary: FXPIG’s hosting infrastructure appears robust, with reputable providers and global server locations. However, reported platform issues indicate possible software vulnerabilities.

7. Social Media Presence ¶

FXPIG’s social media activity provides insights into its marketing, engagement, and reputation:

• Platforms:
• Twitter/X: FXPIG maintains an active presence, posting updates about trading contests, platform features, and promotions. No specific negative sentiment is noted in recent posts.
• LinkedIn: Likely used for corporate branding, but no detailed activity is reported.
• YouTube/Instagram: Possible channels for tutorials or marketing, though not explicitly mentioned in sources.
• Trustpilot: While not a social media platform, FXPIG engages with user reviews, responding to complaints and positive feedback.
• Engagement:
• Positive posts highlight trading contests, low spreads, and customer support.
• Negative user feedback on Trustpilot (e.g., scam allegations, MT5 issues) contrasts with FXPIG’s promotional content, suggesting selective engagement.
• No evidence of widespread social media backlash, but the volume of complaints on review platforms overshadows social media positivity.
• Red Flags:
• FXPIG’s association with HyperTrade.ai, accused of scams, may spill over into social media sentiment if users post about it.
• Limited transparency about regulatory status in social media posts could mislead potential clients. Summary: FXPIG maintains a professional social media presence, but user complaints on review platforms outweigh promotional efforts. Traders should cross-check social media claims with independent reviews.

8. Red Flags and Potential Risk Indicators ¶

Several red flags and risk indicators emerge from the analysis:

• Revoked Regulation: The VFSC license (No. 014578) is reportedly revoked, and FXPIG is not overseen by any top-tier regulator. BrokersView and WikiFX confirm no valid regulatory status, classifying FXPIG as a scam or high-risk broker.
• Scam Reports: Multiple sources (WikiFX, scamrecovery.net, Trustpilot) report scam allegations, including stolen funds, deleted accounts, and ignored withdrawals.
• Prop Firm Issues: The partnership with HyperTrade.ai, accused of suspending profitable accounts, suggests FXPIG may benefit from predatory practices.
• Platform Glitches: Unintended trades and MT5 unavailability indicate technical instability, potentially costing users money.
• Withdrawal Delays: Complaints about unprocessed or delayed withdrawals raise concerns about liquidity or intentional withholding.
• Lack of Transparency: Privacy-protected WHOIS data and vague regulatory claims reduce accountability.
• High Leverage: Up to 1:500 leverage, while attractive, poses significant risks, especially for inexperienced traders.
• Restricted Countries: FXPIG does not accept clients from the U.S., Canada, Israel, New Zealand, Iran, North Korea, or OFAC countries, limiting market reach and raising questions about compliance. Summary: The combination of revoked regulation, scam allegations, platform issues, and questionable partnerships makes FXPIG a high-risk broker. These red flags warrant extreme caution.

9. Regulatory Status ¶

FXPIG’s regulatory status is a critical concern:

• Claimed Regulation:
• FXPIG claims to be regulated by the Vanuatu Financial Services Commission (VFSC) with license number 014578.
• Previously registered in New Zealand under the Financial Service Provider Register (FSPR) until 2016, when it relocated to Vanuatu due to stricter regulations.
• Holds an A-Category license with the Financial Commission (FinaCom), a Hong Kong-based dispute resolution organization, offering up to $20,000 in compensation per client.
• Verification:
• VFSC License Revoked: WikiFX and BrokersView report that the VFSC license is revoked or unverifiable, with no match found in the VFSC registry. This suggests FXPIG is unregulated.
• Vanuatu Regulation: VFSC is a lenient regulator with low capital requirements ($2,000) and limited client protection compared to FCA, ASIC, or CySEC. Even when licensed, VFSC oversight was weak.
• FinaCom: While FinaCom provides some dispute resolution, it is not a regulatory authority and lacks the enforcement power of government regulators.
• No Top-Tier Regulation: FXPIG is not regulated by FCA, ASIC, CFTC, or other stringent authorities, reducing investor protection. BrokerChooser explicitly advises against FXPIG due to this.
• Implications:
• Unregulated brokers pose risks of fraud, fund mismanagement, or insolvency with no legal recourse.
• The revoked VFSC license and unverifiable claims suggest FXPIG may misrepresent its status to attract clients.
• UK and EU residents are not targeted, as FXPIG operates outside MiFID II frameworks, further limiting protections. Summary: FXPIG is effectively unregulated, with a revoked VFSC license and no oversight from top-tier regulators. The FinaCom membership offers limited protection, making FXPIG a risky choice.

10. User Precautions ¶

To mitigate risks when considering FXPIG, users should take the following precautions:

• Verify Regulation: Independently check FXPIG’s regulatory status via VFSC or other registries. Avoid unregulated brokers, especially for large deposits.
• Start with a Demo Account: Use FXPIG’s free demo account to test platforms, spreads, and execution without risking real money.
• Research Reviews: Cross-reference user feedback on Trustpilot, ForexPeaceArmy, and WikiFX to identify patterns of complaints or scam allegations.
• Avoid Prop Firms: Be cautious of FXPIG’s partnerships with prop firms like HyperTrade.ai, which have been accused of scams. Verify terms before participating.
• Secure Accounts: Use strong passwords, enable 2FA (if available), and avoid sharing login details. Be wary of unsolicited requests for remote access or additional fees.
• Test Withdrawals: Deposit a small amount initially and attempt a withdrawal to confirm reliability before committing larger sums.
• Understand Risks: Acknowledge the high risk of CFDs and leverage (up to 1:500). Only trade with funds you can afford to lose.
• Monitor Fees: Check for hidden fees (e.g., withdrawal, inactivity, or deposit charges) and compare with industry standards.
• Report Issues: If scammed or unable to withdraw funds, report to local authorities, file a chargeback with your bank, or seek help from services like MyChargeBack.
• Consult Experts: Seek advice from independent financial advisors before trading with FXPIG, especially given its regulatory status. Summary: Users must exercise extreme caution, prioritize demo trading, verify withdrawals, and avoid large investments until FXPIG’s reliability is confirmed.

11. Potential Brand Confusion ¶

FXPIG’s branding and operations may cause confusion with other entities:

• Similar Names:
• The name “FXPIG” is unique but could be confused with other forex brokers or platforms using “FX” (e.g., FxFWay, Crypt Fx Tm).
• No evidence of deliberate mimicry, but the playful “PIG” acronym may mislead users into perceiving it as less serious or trustworthy.
• Prop Firm Associations:
• FXPIG’s partnership with HyperTrade.ai causes confusion, as users may conflate the two entities. FXPIG’s claim that HyperTrade is separate does not address its role as the platform provider.
• Other prop firms using FXPIG’s platform (e.g., FXIFY) may further blur lines, especially if they share similar branding or practices.
• Regulatory Claims:
• FXPIG’s outdated or false VFSC license claims may confuse users who assume it is regulated. The lack of clarity on its website exacerbates this.
• The FinaCom membership may be mistaken for formal regulation, misleading less-informed traders.
• Geographic Confusion:
• The registered address in Georgia (Tbilisi) contrasts with its Vanuatu licensing history and New Zealand origins, potentially confusing users about its jurisdiction. Summary: FXPIG’s unique branding minimizes direct name confusion, but its prop firm partnerships and unclear regulatory claims may mislead users. Traders should clarify the entity they’re dealing with.

12. Website Content Analysis ¶

Analyzing the content of https://fxpig.com/ provides insights into its transparency, professionalism, and potential risks:

• Content Overview:
• The website promotes FXPIG as a “True STP broker” offering 300+ products, raw spreads from 0.0 pips, and 100% STP execution.
• Features include MT4, MT5, cTrader, FIX API, and VPS hosting via BEEKS Financial Cloud.
• Risk disclaimers warn of CFD and leverage risks, stating that most retail accounts lose money.
• The site highlights a trading contest and referral bonuses, appealing to new traders.
• Transparency:
• Positive: The risk disclaimer is prominent, and account types (Standard, Premier, Pro) are detailed with minimum deposits ($200, $5,000, $50,000).
• Negative: Regulatory status is vague, with no clear mention of the revoked VFSC license or current oversight. This omission is misleading.
• Contact details (email: [email protected], live chat) are provided, but the physical address in Georgia is not prominently displayed.
• Red Flags:
• Claims of “institutional liquidity” and “20+ Tier-1 LPs” lack verifiable evidence, which is common in scam broker marketing.
• The playful branding (e.g., pig mascot, “Where Traders Come to Win”) may downplay the seriousness of trading risks, potentially misleading novices.
• No mention of platform glitches or MT5 issues reported by users, indicating selective transparency.
• The site’s focus on high leverage (1:500) and bonuses may attract inexperienced traders without adequate risk education.
• Professionalism:
• The website is well-designed, with a modern interface and clear navigation, aligning with industry standards.
• However, the lack of regulatory clarity and failure to address user complaints (e.g., withdrawals, scams) undermines credibility. Summary: The website is professional and informative but lacks transparency about regulatory status and operational issues. Risk disclaimers are present, but promotional claims may oversell benefits while downplaying risks.

13. Recent Developments ¶

Recent information (up to April 22, 2025) highlights ongoing concerns:

• Regulatory Warnings:
• BrokerChooser (April 2025) labels FXPIG as unsafe due to its lack of top-tier regulation, urging traders to avoid it.
• TradersUnion (April 2025) rates FXPIG’s safety as 4.7/10, citing weak VFSC regulation and scam risks.
• User Complaints:
• Trustpilot reviews (May 2024) continue to report MT5 unavailability, withdrawal delays, and scam allegations, with no resolution from FXPIG.
• BrokersView (2024) notes a user’s unprocessed withdrawal, reinforcing liquidity concerns.
• Platform Issues:
• Persistent MT5 problems and glitches (e.g., unintended trades) suggest unresolved technical issues.
• No public statement from FXPIG addressing these complaints, indicating poor crisis management. Summary: Recent data reinforces FXPIG’s high-risk profile, with ongoing regulatory, operational, and user trust issues.

14. Critical Evaluation ¶

While FXPIG presents itself as a transparent STP broker with competitive offerings, several factors undermine its credibility:

• The revoked VFSC license and lack of top-tier regulation place client funds at risk, with no legal recourse in disputes.
• Scam allegations, withdrawal delays, and prop firm controversies suggest potential fraud or mismanagement.
• Platform glitches and MT5 unavailability indicate technical instability, which is unacceptable for a trading broker.
• The playful branding and aggressive marketing (e.g., high leverage, bonuses) may target inexperienced traders, downplaying risks.
• Positive reviews exist, but they are overshadowed by consistent negative feedback and red flags across multiple platforms. These issues contrast with the establishment narrative of FXPIG as a reliable broker. The lack of regulatory oversight and failure to address complaints suggest either incompetence or intentional misconduct.

15. Conclusion and Recommendations ¶

FXPIG (Prime Intermarket Group Asia Pacific Limited) is a high-risk broker due to its revoked VFSC license, scam allegations, platform issues, and questionable prop firm partnerships. While it offers competitive platforms (MT4, MT5, cTrader) and some users report positive experiences, the lack of top-tier regulation, withdrawal problems, and technical glitches make it an unsafe choice for most traders. Recommendations:

• Avoid Trading with FXPIG: Opt for brokers regulated by top-tier authorities like FCA, ASIC, or CySEC (e.g., eToro, XTB, CMC Markets).
• If Considering FXPIG:
• Use a demo account to test functionality without risking funds.
• Deposit minimal amounts and verify withdrawals before committing more.
• Monitor account activity closely and document all transactions.
• Avoid prop firm challenges (e.g., HyperTrade.ai) linked to FXPIG.
• Report Issues: If scammed, contact local authorities, file a chargeback, or seek help from recovery services like MyChargeBack.
• Conduct Due Diligence: Always verify a broker’s regulation, read user reviews, and consult financial advisors before investing. Traders should prioritize safety and transparency over FXPIG’s promotional claims. The risks far outweigh potential benefits.

Notes ¶

• This analysis is based on available data up to April 22, 2025, and critically evaluates sources for bias or inconsistencies.
• No direct access to FXPIG’s platform or accounts was used; findings rely on public reviews, regulatory records, and website content.
• If you need specific checks (e.g., real-time WHOIS, IP lookup, or social media sentiment), please provide additional tools or access. Let me know if you’d like further clarification or analysis on any aspect!