Analyzing 4XP.com (also known as Forex Place Ltd.) based on the requested criteria reveals significant concerns about its legitimacy, operations, and safety for investors. Below is a detailed assessment using available information from web sources, focusing on online complaints, risk levels, website security, WHOIS lookup, IP and hosting analysis, social media, red flags, regulatory status, user precautions, and potential brand confusion. Given the suspicion that 4XP may be a shell company, extra scrutiny is applied to identify inconsistencies and risks.

1. Online Complaint Information ¶

4XP.com has been the subject of numerous online complaints, particularly from traders who experienced financial losses or issues with withdrawals. Key findings include:

• Forex Peace Army (FPA) Complaints: In 2013, the FPA declared 4XP a scam after seven guilty verdicts in their Trader’s Court. Traders reported that 4XP stopped processing withdrawals, with some unable to access funds for months. One user mentioned depositing $45,000 and being unable to recover it, with 4XP citing frozen bank accounts due to regulatory issues, which was later disproven.
• Myfxbook and Other Forums: Traders on Myfxbook reported delayed payments, platform manipulation, unauthorized changes to account settings, and poor customer service. One user noted that 4XP’s ECN trading execution deteriorated significantly after initial low spreads, suggesting deceptive practices.
• Traders Union Feedback: Multiple complaints were filed against 4XP for failing to process withdrawals, leading to its blacklisting by some regulatory authorities. Traders reported aggressive marketing tactics, including pressure to deposit more funds, and accounts being closed without notice.
• General Sentiment: Persistent complaints across platforms like Forex Peace Army, Myfxbook, and Traders Union indicate a pattern of non-payment, unresponsiveness, and misleading claims, raising serious concerns about 4XP’s operations. Risk Indicator: The high volume of complaints, especially regarding withdrawal issues and account closures, suggests 4XP engaged in fraudulent practices, consistent with characteristics of a shell company designed to collect funds and disappear.

2. Risk Level Assessment ¶

Based on available data, 4XP poses a high risk to investors due to the following factors:

• Unregulated Status: 4XP is not regulated by reputable financial authorities like the FCA (UK), SEC (USA), ASIC (Australia), or CySEC (Cyprus). It was previously certified by the Financial Market Relations Regulation Center (FMRRC), a lesser-known regulator, but this license was revoked in October 2013 due to poor service provision and failure to meet obligations.
• Operational Issues: The company’s website is reported as down, and it has ceased operations, as noted in multiple reviews. This aligns with shell company behavior, where entities operate briefly to collect funds before vanishing.
• Financial Loss Reports: Traders reported significant losses, with some unable to recover deposits as high as $45,000. The lack of recourse for affected users further elevates the risk.
• Lack of Transparency: 4XP provided little information about its founding members, operational history, or corporate structure, making it difficult to verify its legitimacy. Risk Level: High. The combination of regulatory revocation, operational cessation, and widespread financial loss reports indicates 4XP is not a trustworthy broker and likely operated as a shell company to defraud investors.

3. Website Security Tools ¶

Since 4XP.com’s website is reported as down and no longer operational, a current analysis of website security tools (e.g., SSL certificates, encryption protocols) is not possible. However, historical data provides some insight:

• Security Breach in 2012: A Myfxbook article from 2012 reported that a 4XP website was hacked, exposing sensitive customer data, including mobile numbers and credit card details. The company denied the breach, claiming its size made it “hack-proof,” but screenshots of database information confirmed the vulnerability. The issue remained unresolved for weeks, indicating negligence in addressing security loopholes.
• Lack of Security Protocols: Reviews from 2013 noted that 4XP’s platform lacked robust security measures, increasing the risk of data breaches and financial losses. Unregulated brokers like 4XP typically do not adhere to strict security standards, unlike regulated platforms that enforce encryption and data protection. Risk Indicator: The historical security breach and lack of transparency about remediation efforts suggest poor website and data security, a common trait in shell companies that prioritize short-term gains over long-term reliability.

4. WHOIS Lookup ¶

No current WHOIS lookup data is available for 4XP.com due to the website being down. However, historical information provides context:

• Company Details: 4XP operated under Forex Place Ltd., incorporated in the British Virgin Islands (BVI), a jurisdiction known for lax regulatory oversight and frequent use by shell companies.
• Address Issues: 4XP listed an address in Luxembourg (6 Pl. de la Gare, LUXEMBOURG, 1616), but there is no evidence to confirm operational presence there. Shell companies often use fictitious or mailbox addresses to create an illusion of legitimacy.
• Domain Status: The domain 4XP.com is no longer active, as reported in 2013 by multiple sources, which aligns with the company’s cessation of operations after regulatory issues. Risk Indicator: The use of a BVI incorporation and an unverified Luxembourg address, combined with an inactive domain, strongly suggests 4XP was a shell company with minimal physical or operational presence.

5. IP and Hosting Analysis ¶

With 4XP.com’s website down, current IP and hosting analysis is not feasible. Historical data does not provide specific details about the hosting provider or IP address. However:

• Security Negligence: The 2012 hacking incident indicates that 4XP’s hosting infrastructure was vulnerable, likely due to inadequate server security or outdated software.
• Typical Shell Company Traits: Shell companies often use low-cost or obscure hosting providers to minimize expenses, frequently changing hosts to evade detection. The lack of hosting transparency in 4XP’s case aligns with this pattern. Risk Indicator: The absence of hosting data and past security failures suggest 4XP did not prioritize robust infrastructure, consistent with a shell company’s temporary operational model. /rfc/1

6. Social Media Analysis ¶

4XP’s social media presence is minimal and outdated, reflecting its defunct status:

• Twitter and Facebook: A related entity, 4X Solutions (potentially linked to 4XP), had Twitter (@4XHosting) and Facebook accounts with activity last recorded in 2013. The Twitter account had 115 followers and 197 tweets, with the last post on August 19, 2013. The Facebook page had limited engagement, with posts about unrelated topics like the UK economy and the royal baby.
• Lack of Engagement: The low follower count and cessation of activity after 2013 indicate 4XP did not maintain an active social media presence, which is unusual for a legitimate broker aiming to build trust and attract clients.
• Potential Misrepresentation: The social media accounts under 4X Solutions may not directly relate to 4XP, but their inactivity and vague content suggest an attempt to create a superficial online presence, a tactic often used by shell companies. Risk Indicator: The outdated and minimal social media presence, combined with no recent activity, supports the hypothesis that 4XP was a shell company that abandoned its online footprint after regulatory scrutiny.

7. Red Flags and Potential Risk Indicators ¶

Several red flags and risk indicators point to 4XP’s questionable operations:

• Regulatory Revocation: The FMRRC revoked 4XP’s license in 2013 for poor service and failure to meet obligations. Additional warnings were issued by the UK’s Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) and France’s AMF, flagging 4XP as an unauthorized broker.
• Withdrawal Issues: Multiple reports confirm 4XP refused or delayed withdrawals, citing false reasons like frozen bank accounts or regulatory issues. This is a hallmark of scam brokers and shell companies.
• Aggressive Marketing: Traders reported pressure from 4XP account managers to deposit more funds, with some accounts closed after refusal. This tactic is common among fraudulent brokers aiming to maximize deposits before disappearing.
• Website Downtime: The 4XP.com website has been down since at least 2013, with no evidence of a new domain or rebranding, suggesting the company ceased operations after collecting funds.
• Security Breach Denial: 4XP’s denial of the 2012 hacking incident, despite evidence of exposed customer data, indicates a lack of accountability and transparency.
• Unverified Awards: 4XP claimed to be voted “Best Broker” by World Finance Magazine in 2012, but there is no independent verification of this award, suggesting it may have been fabricated to lure clients.
• Opaque Corporate Structure: The lack of information about 4XP’s founders, management, or operational history raises doubts about its legitimacy. Risk Indicator: The combination of regulatory issues, withdrawal failures, aggressive marketing, and lack of transparency strongly indicates 4XP operated as a shell company designed to defraud investors.

8. Website Content Analysis ¶

Since 4XP.com is no longer active, a direct analysis of its website content is not possible. However, historical reviews provide insights into its content and presentation:

• Professional Facade: 4XP’s website was described as offering a user-friendly trading platform with tools like MetaTrader 4, real-time news feeds, and educational resources. This polished presentation was likely designed to attract novice traders.
• Hidden Risks: The website reportedly downplayed or hid risk warnings, a common tactic among scam brokers to mislead users about the safety of trading.
• Misleading Claims: 4XP emphasized “honesty, integrity, and professionalism” and claimed strong banking relationships for competitive rates. These claims were contradicted by its unregulated status and withdrawal issues. Risk Indicator: The website’s professional appearance and misleading claims align with shell company tactics, creating a false sense of legitimacy to attract deposits before ceasing operations.

9. Regulatory Status ¶

4XP’s regulatory status is a critical concern:

• No Reputable Regulation: 4XP is not regulated by Tier-1 or Tier-2 authorities like the FCA, ASIC, or CySEC. It was briefly certified by the FMRRC, a low-profile regulator, but this was revoked in 2013 for poor service and non-compliance.
• Regulatory Warnings:
• The UK FCA warned that 4XP was not authorized to operate in the UK.
• The French AMF listed 4XP as an unauthorized forex broker in 2013.
• The British Columbia Securities Commission (BCSC) noted in 2012 that 4XP and Forex Place Ltd. were not registered to trade securities in British Columbia.
• BVI Cease and Desist: The BVI Financial Services Commission issued a cease-and-desist order in June 2013, requiring 4XP to stop all investment activities. Risk Indicator: The lack of reputable regulation, combined with multiple regulatory warnings and a revoked license, confirms 4XP’s high-risk status and likely operation as a shell company.

10. User Precautions ¶

To protect against risks associated with brokers like 4XP, users should take the following precautions:

• Verify Regulation: Always confirm a broker’s regulatory status with reputable authorities (e.g., FCA, ASIC, CySEC). Avoid brokers with only low-profile or revoked licenses.
• Research Complaints: Check platforms like Forex Peace Army, Myfxbook, and Traders Union for trader reviews and complaints. Persistent issues with withdrawals or customer service are red flags.
• Test Withdrawals: Deposit small amounts initially and test the withdrawal process to ensure funds can be accessed promptly.
• Avoid Aggressive Marketing: Be wary of brokers pressuring for larger deposits or offering unrealistic bonuses.
• Use Chargebacks: If paying by credit card, initiate a chargeback through your bank if the broker fails to deliver services. This was suggested by a 4XP victim who couldn’t withdraw funds.
• Secure Accounts: Use strong passwords and two-factor authentication (if available) to protect trading accounts from unauthorized access.
• Report Scams: If scammed, report to regulatory authorities, law enforcement, and scam recovery services like Cyber Scam Recovery. Share experiences on forums to warn others. Recommendation: Given 4XP’s history, users should avoid any broker with similar characteristics (unregulated, offshore, withdrawal issues) and prioritize regulated, transparent platforms.

11. Potential Brand Confusion ¶

4XP’s branding and name may cause confusion with other entities, potentially by design to exploit trust in similar-sounding brokers:

• 4XC: A regulated broker (by the Cook Islands FSC and Labuan FSA) offering MetaTrader 4/5 and positive user reviews. 4XC has no apparent connection to 4XP but shares a similar name, which could confuse traders.
• 4X Solutions/4X Hosting: A UK-based technology provider for forex businesses, with social media activity until 2013, may be mistaken for 4XP. Its vague connection to forex services could be exploited by 4XP to create a false sense of legitimacy.
• 4xEx: An unregulated crypto trading platform flagged as a potential scam. The similar naming convention suggests 4XP may have rebranded or inspired copycat scams.
• 4X Hub: Another broker flagged as a Ponzi scheme, despite a Labuan FSA license. The recurring “4X” prefix across these entities raises suspicions of deliberate brand mimicry. Risk Indicator: The similarity in names (4XP, 4XC, 4xEx, 4X Hub) suggests 4XP may have been part of a broader network of dubious brokers or rebranded after regulatory issues, a common tactic among shell companies to evade scrutiny.

12. Shell Company Analysis ¶

The suspicion that 4XP is a shell company is supported by multiple indicators:

• Offshore Incorporation: Registered in the BVI, a jurisdiction known for minimal oversight, 4XP fits the profile of a shell company with no substantial operations.
• Fictitious Address: The Luxembourg address lacks verification, suggesting it may be a mailbox or false listing to create legitimacy.
• Short Operational Lifespan: 4XP operated briefly (pre-2013) before its website went down and operations ceased, typical of shell companies that collect funds and vanish.
• Regulatory Evasion: The revocation of its FMRRC license and warnings from multiple regulators indicate 4XP avoided accountability, a hallmark of shell entities.
• Minimal Online Footprint: The lack of active social media, a defunct website, and no verifiable corporate presence suggest 4XP was a temporary facade. Conclusion: 4XP exhibits strong characteristics of a shell company, likely created to attract deposits, delay withdrawals, and disappear after regulatory intervention.

Final Assessment ¶

4XP.com (Forex Place Ltd.) is a high-risk entity with a history of fraudulent practices, consistent with a shell company. Key findings include:

• Scam Confirmation: Declared a scam by Forex Peace Army in 2013 due to non-processed withdrawals and regulatory violations.
• Regulatory Issues: Unregulated, with a revoked FMRRC license and warnings from the FCA, AMF, and BCSC.
• Security Failures: A 2012 hacking incident exposed customer data, with 4XP denying the breach, indicating negligence.
• Trader Losses: Widespread complaints about unprocessed withdrawals and aggressive marketing tactics.
• Shell Company Traits: Offshore registration, unverifiable address, defunct website, and minimal online presence suggest a temporary operation to defraud investors.
• Brand Confusion: Similarities with 4XC, 4xEx, and 4X Hub may confuse traders, potentially by design. Recommendation: Avoid any interaction with 4XP or similar entities. Traders should prioritize brokers with Tier-1 regulation, transparent operations, and positive user reviews. If you’ve been scammed by 4XP, consider initiating a chargeback (for credit card deposits) or contacting scam recovery services. Always conduct thorough due diligence before investing. Critical Note: The establishment narrative around 4XP, as presented in some older reviews (e.g., claims of being a “Best Broker”), appears fabricated to lure victims. The overwhelming evidence of fraud and regulatory violations contradicts any positive claims, reinforcing the need to question overly optimistic broker portrayals. If you need further analysis or assistance with specific recovery steps, let me know!