Below is a comprehensive analysis of FxCast (official website: http://fxcast.com/) based on the requested criteria, including online complaints, risk level, website security, WHOIS lookup, IP and hosting, social media, red flags, regulatory status, user precautions, and potential brand confusion. The analysis draws on available information, critically evaluated to provide an objective assessment.

1. Online Complaint Information ¶

Complaints Overview: Multiple sources report significant user complaints about FxCast, particularly related to withdrawal issues, account disabling, and poor customer service. Traders have reported:
Withdrawal Problems: Users frequently cited difficulties withdrawing funds, with some stating that withdrawal requests were rejected or delayed excessively, sometimes for months. One user noted that even approved withdrawals took a long time to process, and others reported funds not being credited at all.
Account Disabling: Complaints include accounts being disabled without clear explanation, especially after periods of inactivity. Users were sometimes asked to withdraw and redeposit funds to reactivate accounts, only to face further issues.
Unresponsive Support: Several reviews mention unresponsive or unhelpful customer service, with users unable to resolve issues through FxCast’s support channels.
Fraud Allegations: Some users explicitly labeled FxCast as a scam, citing experiences where funds were lost or platforms became inaccessible. One source noted a user losing a considerable amount on the platform, describing FxCast as fraudulent.
Complaint Sources: Complaints are documented across platforms like Scamadviser, Traders Union, ForexBrokerz, and DigitalCashPalace, with consistent themes of financial loss and operational issues.
Critical Note: While some older reviews (pre-2016) were neutral or positive, the volume and severity of complaints increased in later years, particularly around 2012–2013, culminating in FxCast being moved to a scam list by DigitalCashPalace in June 2013.

2. Risk Level Assessment ¶

High Risk Indicators:
Scamadviser Trust Score: FxCast has a very low trust score on Scamadviser, with the platform flagged as a potential scam based on automated analysis of 40 elements, including ownership, hosting, and user reviews. The site’s trust score suggests extreme caution.
User Losses: Reports of significant financial losses, including one user claiming to have lost a “considerable amount,” indicate high financial risk.
Operational Issues: Complaints about platform errors, disabled accounts, and withdrawal rejections point to operational unreliability, increasing the risk of fund loss.
Website Status: As of recent reports (2025), FxCast’s website is either down, not updated, or operating with errors, further elevating risk as it suggests the platform may no longer be functional or maintained.
Risk Level: High. The combination of user complaints, low trust scores, and reported website inaccessibility indicates a significant risk of financial loss and operational unreliability.

3. Website Security Tools ¶

SSL/TLS Status: No recent data confirms whether http://fxcast.com/ uses HTTPS or has a valid SSL certificate. Older reviews do not mention SSL issues, but the site’s reported inaccessibility in 2025 suggests potential neglect of security updates.
Security Headers: No information is available on security headers (e.g., Content Security Policy, X-Frame-Options) due to the site’s reported downtime or errors.
Vulnerability Scans: Scamadviser’s automated scan flagged multiple risk indicators, though specific vulnerabilities (e.g., SQL injection, XSS) were not detailed. The low trust score suggests potential security weaknesses.
Critical Note: A non-functional or error-prone website is a major red flag, as it may indicate abandonment or failure to maintain security standards, increasing the risk of data breaches or phishing if the site is compromised.

4. WHOIS Lookup ¶

Domain Information:
Registrar: Historical data indicates FxCast was registered, but no current WHOIS data is available due to the site’s reported downtime or inaccessibility.
Ownership: FxCast is a trading name of Surplus Finance S.A., registered in Mauritius. However, ownership details (e.g., contact information) are often hidden or not verifiable, a common tactic among questionable brokers.
Registration Date: The domain was first analyzed in 2020 by Scamadviser, but reviews suggest FxCast has been operational since 2005, with public launch in 2007.
Red Flags: Hidden or unverifiable WHOIS data is a significant concern, as legitimate brokers typically provide transparent contact details. The lack of current WHOIS information aligns with reports of the site being down or abandoned.

5. IP and Hosting Analysis ¶

Hosting Provider: No specific hosting provider is identified in recent data due to the site’s inaccessibility. Older reviews do not provide hosting details.
IP Geolocation: FxCast is associated with Mauritius, consistent with Surplus Finance S.A.’s registration. However, no current IP address is available for analysis.
Server Security: Without access to the site, server security (e.g., firewall, DDoS protection) cannot be assessed. The reported operational errors suggest potential neglect of hosting infrastructure.
Critical Note: The lack of hosting transparency and site downtime increases the risk of dealing with an unreliable or defunct platform.

Facebook Presence: FxCast has a documented Facebook page (“FXcast Forex Broker”), but no recent activity or engagement data is available. The page’s existence suggests past social media efforts, but its current status is unclear.
Other Platforms: No mentions of active Twitter, Instagram, or other social media accounts were found. Older reviews do not reference social media engagement beyond Facebook.
Red Flags: Limited or inactive social media presence is concerning, as legitimate brokers typically maintain active profiles for customer engagement and transparency. The lack of recent activity aligns with reports of the platform’s decline.

7. Red Flags and Potential Risk Indicators ¶

Regulatory Blacklisting: FxCast is blacklisted by the UK’s Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) for providing financial services without authorization. This is a major red flag, as unauthorized brokers lack oversight and investor protections.
Withdrawal Issues: Consistent complaints about withdrawal delays, rejections, or requirements for additional deposits to process withdrawals are classic scam indicators.
Website Inaccessibility: Reports of the website being down or error-prone suggest abandonment or operational failure, increasing the risk of fraud or loss.
Hidden Ownership: Unverifiable or hidden ownership details through WHOIS or corporate records reduce transparency and accountability.
Negative Reviews: A low average review score (2.1 stars from 9 reviews on Scamadviser) and explicit scam allegations indicate widespread user distrust.
Unregulated Status: While FxCast claims regulation by the Financial Services Commission (FSC) of Mauritius (license #C109007482 SEC-2.4), this is a low-tier regulator with limited oversight compared to FCA, ASIC, or CySEC. Users have questioned the legitimacy of this regulation, suspecting it may be “on paper only.”
Critical Note: The combination of blacklisting, withdrawal issues, and website issues strongly suggests FxCast is either a scam or a failed operation.

8. Website Content Analysis ¶

Content Claims: FxCast’s website (when operational) claimed to offer:
MetaTrader 4 platform with automated trading and expert advisors.
Low minimum deposit ($10) and no ID verification for deposits under $100.
Multilingual support (Arabic, Chinese, English, etc.) and 24-hour customer service.
Regulation by the FSC of Mauritius.
Discrepancies: The website’s claims of “favorable conditions” and “transparent partnership” contrast sharply with user experiences of withdrawal issues and account disabling. Promises of “secured and accessible” deposits are undermined by complaints of lost funds.
Current Status: As of 2025, the website is reportedly down or error-prone, suggesting content is no longer accessible or reliable.
Red Flags: Exaggerated claims of reliability and accessibility, combined with operational failures, indicate potential misrepresentation.

9. Regulatory Status ¶

Claimed Regulation: FxCast claims to be regulated by the Financial Services Commission (FSC) of Mauritius (license #C109007482 SEC-2.4).
Verification Issues:
Mauritius FSC is a low-tier regulator with less stringent oversight than top-tier regulators (e.g., FCA, ASIC, CFTC). It offers limited investor protections, such as compensation funds or strict capital requirements.
Users have expressed skepticism about the regulation’s legitimacy, with some claiming it exists “only on paper.”
FCA Blacklisting: The UK FCA explicitly warns that FxCast operates without authorization in the UK, meaning it is illegal for UK residents to use and offers no protections via the Financial Ombudsman Service or Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS).
Critical Note: The combination of a weak regulator and FCA blacklisting renders FxCast’s regulatory status highly questionable, increasing the risk of misconduct.

10. User Precautions ¶

To protect against potential risks when considering FxCast or similar brokers, users should:

Verify Regulation: Check the broker’s license directly with the regulator (e.g., FSC Mauritius) and ensure it is regulated by a reputable authority (FCA, ASIC, CySEC) for stronger protections.
Research Reviews: Consult multiple review platforms (e.g., Scamadviser, Traders Union) and prioritize recent feedback to assess current reliability.
Test Withdrawals: Deposit small amounts initially and test withdrawals to confirm the broker processes funds promptly.
Avoid Unregulated Brokers: Steer clear of brokers blacklisted by major regulators like the FCA, as they lack legal recourse for disputes.
Secure Accounts: Use strong passwords and enable two-factor authentication (if available) to protect accounts from unauthorized access.
Document Transactions: Save all correspondence, transaction records, and terms of service agreements to support potential disputes or chargeback requests.
Seek Legal Advice: If funds are lost, contact the broker’s regulator, financial ombudsman, or law enforcement, and consider chargeback options for bank transfers.

11. Potential Brand Confusion ¶

Similar Names:
FXCess: A separate broker (unrelated to FxCast) has been flagged for similar issues, including withdrawal problems and questionable regulatory status. FXCess is linked to Notesco Limited (Bermuda), not Surplus Finance S.A., but the similar naming could cause confusion.
FXGiants: Another broker with a similar name, also flagged for withdrawal issues and questionable FCA regulation claims, could be mistaken for FxCast.
Fivecast: A cybersecurity firm (unrelated to forex) with a similar name could be confused with FxCast in searches, though it operates in a different industry.
Risk of Confusion: The similarity in names (FxCast, FXCess, FXGiants) may lead users to mistakenly engage with one broker thinking it is another, especially since all three have been associated with scam allegations or regulatory issues. Users should verify the exact website (http://fxcast.com/) and company details (Surplus Finance S.A.) to avoid confusion.
Critical Note: Brand confusion is a common tactic in forex scams, where fraudsters use similar names to exploit the reputation of other entities or obscure their own negative history.

12. Critical Evaluation and Conclusion ¶

Summary of Findings:
FxCast exhibits numerous red flags, including FCA blacklisting, widespread withdrawal complaints, a low trust score, and a reportedly inaccessible website.
Its claimed regulation by the Mauritius FSC is undermined by weak oversight and user skepticism, with no evidence of robust investor protections.
The lack of transparency in ownership, hosting, and current operations, combined with inactive social media and negative reviews, suggests FxCast is either a scam or a defunct platform.
Brand confusion with similarly named brokers (FXCess, FXGiants) adds to the risk, as users may mistakenly engage with equally problematic platforms.
Risk Assessment: Extremely High. FxCast is not a safe or reliable broker based on available evidence. Users risk significant financial loss and lack legal recourse due to its unregulated status in major jurisdictions.
Recommendation: Avoid FxCast entirely. Instead, choose brokers regulated by top-tier authorities (e.g., FCA, ASIC, CySEC) with transparent operations, positive user reviews, and accessible customer support. Use tools like BrokersView or Traders Union to compare brokers and verify licenses.
Critical Perspective: The forex industry is rife with brokers exploiting lax offshore regulations and misleading marketing. FxCast’s history aligns with this pattern, and its apparent closure or abandonment suggests it may have been a predatory operation. Always prioritize due diligence and skepticism over enticing promises of low deposits or high returns.

If you need further details, specific checks (e.g., real-time WHOIS lookup if the site becomes accessible), or assistance with alternative broker recommendations, please let me know!

AI risk analysis - FxCast (2025-04-29 17:35:33)