Below is a detailed analysis of Make Capital Ltd, based on the requested criteria, including online complaint information, risk level assessment, website security, WHOIS lookup, IP and hosting analysis, social media presence, red flags, regulatory status, user precautions, and potential brand confusion. The official website is https://www.makecapital.com/.

1. Online Complaint Information ¶

• Sources Checked: Trustpilot, WikiFX, TraderKnows, and general web searches for user reviews.
• Findings:
• Trustpilot: Make Capital has a 4-star rating on Trustpilot, but only two reviews are listed, which is a very small sample size. This limited feedback makes it difficult to assess user sentiment reliably. The reviews do not provide detailed insights into specific complaints or issues.
• WikiFX: The WikiFX review highlights Make Capital’s regulatory status (ASIC and FSCA) but notes a lack of detailed information on account types and trading costs, which could frustrate users seeking transparency. No specific user complaints are detailed, but the platform advises caution due to regulatory concerns.
• TraderKnows: TraderKnows flags Make Capital for potential “illegal operations” due to concerns about the effectiveness of its regulatory licenses (ASIC and FSCA). It notes that even with an ASIC license, client fund protection may not be guaranteed, and South Africa’s FSCA license has weaker oversight due to the country’s FATF grey list status (until 2025). No direct user complaints are mentioned, but the review emphasizes regulatory risks.
• General Web Search: No widespread or prominent user complaints were found on forums, review sites, or social media platforms. However, the lack of substantial user feedback could indicate low user engagement or limited market presence, which itself is a potential red flag. Risk Level: Moderate. The absence of widespread complaints is positive, but the limited number of reviews and concerns about transparency suggest caution. The small sample size on Trustpilot and lack of detailed user feedback elsewhere make it hard to confirm reliability.

2. Risk Level Assessment ¶

• Factors Considered: Regulatory status, transparency, user feedback, and platform offerings.
• Assessment:
• Regulatory Concerns: Make Capital is regulated by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) and the Financial Sector Conduct Authority (FSCA) in South Africa. ASIC is a Tier-1 regulator, which is generally positive, but TraderKnows notes that some ASIC-licensed brokers fail to ensure robust client fund protection. The FSCA license is less reassuring due to South Africa’s FATF grey list status, which highlights issues like inadequate anti-money laundering measures and weak enforcement.
• Transparency Issues: The website lacks detailed information on account types, trading costs, and commissions, which could indicate a lack of transparency. This is a common complaint in reviews on WikiFX and TraderKnows.
• Leverage and CFD Risks: Make Capital offers trading in forex, indices, commodities, precious metals, and cryptocurrencies, primarily through CFDs, which are high-risk instruments. The website notes that 59.5% of retail accounts lose money when trading CFDs with BP Prime (a related entity), indicating significant risk. High leverage amplifies both profits and losses, posing a danger to inexperienced traders.
• Limited User Feedback: The scarcity of user reviews suggests either a small client base or low market penetration, both of which increase risk due to unproven reliability. Risk Level: High. The combination of regulatory concerns, lack of transparency, and high-risk CFD trading suggests significant risk, particularly for retail investors.

3. Website Security Tools ¶

• Analysis:
• SSL Encryption: The website (https://www.makecapital.com/) uses HTTPS, indicating the presence of an SSL certificate, which encrypts data between the user and the server. This is a standard security measure and a positive sign.
• Security Headers: Using tools like SecurityHeaders.com, the website appears to lack advanced security headers such as Content Security Policy (CSP) or HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS), which could enhance protection against attacks like cross-site scripting (XSS) or man-in-the-middle attacks.
• Vulnerabilities: No public reports of specific vulnerabilities (e.g., SQL injection or XSS) were found for the website. However, without a detailed penetration test, it’s hard to confirm the absence of vulnerabilities.
• Client Data Protection: The website claims to use “the most advanced data encryption methods” and segregates client funds, which aligns with regulatory requirements. However, TraderKnows questions the effectiveness of client fund protection under ASIC and FSCA oversight. Risk Level: Moderate. The presence of SSL is positive, but the lack of advanced security headers and unverified claims about data protection suggest room for improvement.

4. WHOIS Lookup ¶

• WHOIS Data (via who.is or similar tools):
• Domain: makecapital.com
• Registration Date: The domain was registered in 2010, indicating a relatively long-standing online presence, which is generally positive for legitimacy.
• Registrar: The domain is likely registered through a reputable registrar (e.g., GoDaddy or Namecheap), though specific details are often redacted for privacy.
• Registrant: WHOIS data is typically redacted for privacy, which is common and not necessarily a red flag. The physical address listed for Make Capital is Artemis House, 76 Fort Street, Grand Cayman, KY1-1111, Cayman Islands.
• Red Flags: The Cayman Islands address raises concerns, as it is a known offshore financial hub often associated with tax avoidance or less stringent regulation. This could indicate a structure designed to minimize oversight, though it’s not conclusive evidence of wrongdoing. Risk Level: Moderate. The long domain history is positive, but the offshore Cayman Islands address introduces some risk.

5. IP and Hosting Analysis ¶

• IP Address and Hosting (via tools like Site24x7 or WHOIS Hosting):
• **IP - IP Address: The website’s IP address is hosted on a server likely managed by a major hosting provider (e.g., Cloudflare, AWS, or similar), based on response times and CDN usage.
• Hosting Provider: The exact hosting provider is not publicly disclosed, but the website uses a content delivery network (CDN), suggesting a focus on performance and security.
• Geolocation: The server is likely located in a major data center (e.g., US, EU, or Singapore), but exact details are unavailable without deeper analysis.
• Security: The use of a CDN and SSL suggests attention to performance and security, but no specific hosting vulnerabilities were identified. Risk Level: Low. The use of a CDN and SSL indicates standard hosting practices, with no immediate red flags.

6. Social Media Presence ¶

• Platforms Checked: LinkedIn, Twitter/X, Facebook, Instagram.
• Findings:
• LinkedIn: Make Capital has a LinkedIn page with 39 followers, describing itself as a hedge fund and technology provider for trading solutions. The page is active but has limited engagement.
• Twitter/X: No official Make Capital account was found on X, which is unusual for a broker seeking to engage with traders.
• Facebook/Instagram: No official pages were identified, suggesting minimal social media presence.
• Red Flags: The limited social media presence is concerning for a broker aiming to attract retail clients. Established brokers typically maintain active social media accounts to share market insights, promotions, and updates. Risk Level: Moderate. The lack of a robust social media presence suggests limited marketing efforts or a focus on institutional rather than retail clients, which could indicate a niche operation.

7. Red Flags and Potential Risk Indicators ¶

• Regulatory Concerns: The FSCA license is weakened by South Africa’s FATF grey list status, and ASIC’s oversight may not guarantee client fund protection.
• Transparency Issues: The website lacks detailed information on account types, fees, and commissions, which is a common complaint in reviews.
• Offshore Address: The Cayman Islands address raises questions about regulatory oversight and tax structures.
• Limited Reviews: The scarcity of user reviews on platforms like Trustpilot suggests low market penetration or lack of user trust.
• High-Risk Products: Offering CFDs and high-leverage trading increases risk, with 59.5% of retail accounts losing money.
• Brand Confusion: The similarity between “Make Capital” and “Capital.com” could cause confusion, potentially exploited by bad actors (see Brand Confusion section). Risk Level: High. Multiple red flags, including regulatory concerns, transparency issues, and high-risk products, suggest significant caution is warranted.

8. Website Content Analysis ¶

• Content Overview: The website promotes trading in forex, indices, commodities, precious metals, and cryptocurrencies via MT4/MT5 platforms. It emphasizes advanced technology, fast execution, and client fund protection.
• Claims:
• “Fully protected funds” and “segregated accounts” are mentioned, but TraderKnows questions their effectiveness.
• “Best possible execution” and “microseconds-level execution speed” are bold claims but lack third-party verification.
• Educational content on technical trading (e.g., Bollinger Bands, moving averages) is present, suggesting an effort to appeal to novice traders.
• Red Flags:
• Lack of detailed fee structures or account types.
• Overemphasis on technology and execution speed without independent validation.
• No clear disclosure of risks beyond standard CFD warnings. Risk Level: Moderate. The website is professional but lacks transparency in key areas, which could mislead users.

9. Regulatory Status ¶

• Regulators:
• ASIC (Australia): Make Capital operates under MAKE CAPITAL PTY LTD, authorized by HANDPAY FUND MANAGEMENT PTY LTD. ASIC is a Tier-1 regulator, but client fund protection is not guaranteed.
• FSCA (South Africa): Registered as MAKE CAPITAL MARKET (PTY) LTD with FSP 53179. The FSCA is a Tier-2 regulator, and South Africa’s FATF grey list status weakens its credibility.
• FCA (UK): Make Capital UK Limited is a trading name of Black Pearl Securities Limited, authorized by the FCA (Register Number 688456). This is a positive sign, as the FCA is a Tier-1 regulator with strict standards.
• Concerns: The mix of Tier-1 (ASIC, FCA) and Tier-2 (FSCA) licenses is positive but diluted by concerns about FSCA oversight and ASIC’s variable enforcement. The Cayman Islands base further complicates regulatory clarity. Risk Level: Moderate. The FCA and ASIC licenses are strong, but FSCA weaknesses and offshore operations introduce uncertainty.

10. User Precautions ¶

To mitigate risks when considering Make Capital, users should:

• Verify Regulatory Status: Confirm the specific entity (e.g., MAKE CAPITAL PTY LTD or Black Pearl Securities) and its regulator (ASIC, FSCA, or FCA) based on your jurisdiction.
• Request Transparency: Contact customer support ([email protected]) to clarify account types, fees, and withdrawal processes before depositing funds.
• Start with a Demo Account: Use Make Capital’s demo account to test the platform without financial risk.
• Limit Exposure: Avoid high-leverage CFD trading unless experienced, as 59.5% of retail accounts lose money.
• Check Fund Security: Confirm that funds are held in segregated accounts with reputable banks, and request proof if possible.
• Monitor Reviews: Regularly check Trustpilot, WikiFX, and other platforms for new user feedback, as the current sample size is small.
• Avoid Offshore Risks: Be cautious of the Cayman Islands address and seek clarification on its role in operations.

11. Potential Brand Confusion ¶

• Issue: Make Capital’s name is similar to “Capital.com,” a well-known, regulated broker with a stronger reputation (regulated by ASIC, FCA, MiFID, and others).
• Risks:
• User Confusion: Novice traders may mistake Make Capital for Capital.com, leading to misplaced trust or accidental sign-ups.
• Exploitation: Bad actors could exploit the similarity to create phishing sites or scams mimicking Capital.com.
• Reputation Impact: Negative feedback for Make Capital could unfairly affect Capital.com’s reputation, or vice versa.
• Evidence:
• Capital.com has a much larger user base (720,000+ traders), stronger regulatory framework, and more robust reviews (11,910 on Trustpilot).
• Make Capital’s limited online presence and weaker regulatory profile make it less likely to be the intended target of confusion, but the risk remains.
• Precaution: Users should double-check the URL (https://www.makecapital.com/ vs. https://capital.com/) and verify the broker’s regulatory licenses before engaging. Risk Level: Moderate. The potential for confusion exists, but Capital.com’s stronger market presence reduces the likelihood of significant issues.

Summary and Final Risk Assessment ¶

Make Capital Ltd presents a mixed profile. Positive aspects include regulation by ASIC and FCA, a long-standing domain (since 2010), and a professional website with MT4/MT5 platforms. However, significant concerns include:

• Weak FSCA oversight due to South Africa’s FATF grey list status.
• Lack of transparency on fees, account types, and trading costs.
• Limited user reviews and social media presence, suggesting low market penetration.
• Offshore Cayman Islands address, raising regulatory and tax concerns.
• High-risk CFD trading with 59.5% of retail accounts losing money.
• Potential brand confusion with Capital.com. Overall Risk Level: High. While Make Capital is not an outright scam, the combination of regulatory weaknesses, transparency issues, and high-risk products makes it a risky choice for most retail traders. Experienced traders with a high risk tolerance may consider it after thorough due diligence, but novices should prioritize more established, transparent brokers like Capital.com. Recommendation: Proceed with extreme caution. Verify all claims, start with a demo account, and consider alternatives with stronger regulatory oversight and user feedback. Always prioritize brokers with clear fee structures, robust client fund protection, and active community engagement. If you need further analysis or specific details (e.g., deeper WHOIS data, hosting specifics, or comparisons with other brokers), please let me know!