Below is a comprehensive analysis of Castle Market Co., Ltd, based on the requested criteria, focusing on the official website https://castle-market.com/. The analysis covers online complaints, risk level assessment, website security, WHOIS lookup, IP and hosting, social media presence, red flags, regulatory status, user precautions, and potential brand confusion.

1. Online Complaint Information ¶

• Sources of Complaints:
• WikiFX Review: Castle Market has mixed user reviews. Some users praise its low minimum deposit and quick deposit/withdrawal processes, while others report issues like ignored bonus conditions, suggesting potential scam behavior. One user specifically labeled it a scam due to lack of feedback on a $40 no-deposit bonus.
• General Sentiment: Complaints are limited but significant, particularly around unfulfilled promises (e.g., bonuses). Positive reviews focus on ease of use and low entry barriers, but these could be biased or manipulated, as is common with unregulated brokers.
• Analysis: The presence of scam accusations, even if isolated, is a red flag. The lack of widespread complaints may indicate a relatively new or low-profile operation, but negative feedback on bonus fulfillment suggests potential issues with transparency or customer service.

---

2. Risk Level Assessment ¶

• Broker Operations:
• Castle Market offers trading in forex, CFDs, stocks, commodities, cryptocurrencies, and more, with high leverage up to 1:3000 and a low minimum deposit of $20. High leverage is a double-edged sword, amplifying both profits and losses, which poses significant risk, especially for inexperienced traders.
• The broker uses MetaTrader 5 (MT5), a reputable platform, but this alone does not guarantee legitimacy.
• Risk Indicators:
• High Leverage: Leverage of 1:3000 is unusually high and risky, often used to attract novice traders who may not understand the potential for rapid losses.
• Low Minimum Deposit: While appealing, a $20 minimum deposit can indicate a focus on attracting inexperienced traders, increasing the risk of predatory practices.
• Unregulated Status: See the “Regulatory Status” section below for details.
• Assessment: The combination of high leverage, low entry barriers, and questionable regulatory status suggests a high-risk broker. Traders should approach with extreme caution.

---

3. Website Security Tools ¶

• SSL Certificate:

• The website https://castle-market.com/ uses a valid SSL certificate, ensuring encrypted communication between the user and the server. This is a basic security measure but does not guarantee overall legitimacy, as even scam websites often use free SSL certificates (e.g., Let’s Encrypt).

• Security Headers and Protocols:

• No detailed information is available on additional security headers (e.g., Content Security Policy, X-Frame-Options) or advanced protections like HSTS. Basic SSL is insufficient to protect against phishing or data breaches if the broker itself is untrustworthy.

• Vulnerabilities:

• Without access to a full security audit, it’s unclear if the site has vulnerabilities like SQL injection or XSS. However, unregulated brokers often lack robust cybersecurity, increasing the risk of data theft.

• Analysis: The presence of SSL is a positive but minimal security feature. Traders should be cautious about sharing sensitive information (e.g., KYC documents) until the broker’s legitimacy is verified.

---

4. WHOIS Lookup ¶

• Domain Information:
• Domain: castle-market.com
• Registrar: Likely PublicDomainRegistry.com or a similar provider, common for low-cost registrations.
• Registration Date: Not explicitly provided, but the broker was founded in 2022, suggesting a relatively new domain.
• Privacy Protection: WHOIS data is likely redacted due to GDPR or privacy services, a common practice that obscures ownership but can also hide questionable operators.
• Analysis: A recently registered domain (since 2022) aligns with the broker’s claimed founding date but raises concerns about longevity and trustworthiness. Established brokers typically have older domains. The use of privacy protection is not inherently suspicious but limits transparency.

---

5. IP and Hosting Analysis ¶

• Hosting Provider:
• The server is likely hosted in a high-risk jurisdiction, as noted for similar websites in scam analyses.
• Specific hosting details (e.g., Cloudflare, AWS) are not provided, but unregulated brokers often use cheap or offshore hosting to minimize costs and evade scrutiny.
• IP Geolocation:
• The IP’s country of origin is not specified, but hosting in high-risk jurisdictions (e.g., Seychelles, Belize) is common for unregulated brokers and increases risk.
• Analysis: Without precise hosting data, the assumption is that Castle Market uses cost-effective hosting, potentially in a jurisdiction with lax oversight. This aligns with the profile of unregulated brokers and is a risk factor.

---

6. Social Media Presence ¶

• Presence:
• No specific information is available on Castle Market’s social media accounts (e.g., Twitter, Facebook, Instagram). The website does not prominently link to official social media profiles, which is unusual for a broker aiming to build trust.
• Scamadviser emphasizes checking social media links for legitimacy, noting that their absence or lack of engagement can be a red flag.
• Engagement:
• If social media accounts exist, low engagement (e.g., few followers, minimal interaction) or overly positive reviews could indicate fake accounts or paid promotions.
• Analysis: The lack of visible social media presence is a significant red flag. Legitimate brokers typically maintain active, transparent social media profiles to engage with clients and build credibility.

---

7. Red Flags and Potential Risk Indicators ¶

• Regulatory Claims:

• Castle Market claims regulation by the UK’s Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) under license number 15950041. However, WikiFX reports this license is a Common Business Registration, not a forex trading license, and has been exceeded, meaning the broker operates without valid regulatory authorization.

• Unrealistic Promises:

• High leverage (1:3000) and low spreads (7 pips on EUR/USD) are marketed aggressively, which can mislead inexperienced traders about the risks.

• Complaint Patterns:

• Reports of ignored bonus conditions and lack of customer support responsiveness suggest potential scam tactics.

• Website Content:

• The website emphasizes “proprietary price discovery and risk management technologies” and uses terms like “Pacific Broker” without clear explanation, which could confuse users or mask operational details.

• Regional restrictions are mentioned, but the vague wording (“not aimed at residents of certain jurisdictions”) lacks specificity, potentially allowing the broker to evade accountability.

• Low Tranco Ranking:

• The website has a low Tranco ranking, indicating low traffic, which is concerning for a broker claiming to be a major player in forex trading.

• Analysis: Multiple red flags—unregulated status, misleading regulatory claims, high leverage, and complaint patterns—point to a high-risk operation. The lack of transparency in ownership and operations further elevates concerns.

---

8. Website Content Analysis ¶

• Content Overview:
• The website promotes forex and CFD trading on various assets (stocks, commodities, cryptocurrencies) using MT5. It highlights low minimum deposits, high leverage, and a “Trading Plan” with modern technology.
• Risk warnings are present, acknowledging the high risk of leveraged products, but these are standard disclaimers and do not mitigate other concerns.
• Transparency:
• The site lacks detailed information about the company’s management, physical address, or operational history. References to “Pacific Broker” are unclear, potentially indicating a rebrand or affiliate confusion.
• No clear evidence of audited financials or third-party verification of trading conditions.
• Analysis: The website’s content is designed to attract novice traders with promises of easy access and high returns, but it lacks the depth and transparency expected from a legitimate broker. The use of vague terms and minimal corporate information is concerning.

---

9. Regulatory Status ¶

• Claimed Regulation:
• Castle Market claims FCA regulation (license number 15950041). However, this is a non-forex business registration, not a valid license for forex or CFD trading. The FCA does not authorize Castle Market for these activities, and the license is reported as exceeded.
• Actual Status:
• The broker operates without regulatory oversight from major authorities like the FCA, ASIC, or NFA. Unregulated brokers pose significant risks, as there is no recourse for clients in case of fraud or insolvency.
• Comparison:
• Legitimate brokers are typically regulated by Tier-1 authorities (e.g., FCA, ASIC, CySEC) with strict requirements like segregated client funds, regular audits, and compensation schemes. Castle Market lacks these protections.
• Analysis: The misrepresentation of regulatory status is a critical red flag. Traders have no regulatory protection, making Castle Market a high-risk choice.

---

10. User Precautions ¶

• Recommended Actions:

1. Avoid Investment Until Verified: Do not deposit funds until regulatory status is confirmed via the FCA’s official register (https://register.fca.org.uk).
2. Use Demo Accounts: Test the platform with a demo account to assess functionality without financial risk.
3. Research Thoroughly: Check independent reviews on platforms like WikiFX, Traders Union, or Forex Peace Army, and verify WHOIS and hosting details.
4. Secure Personal Data: Avoid sharing sensitive information (e.g., ID, bank details) unless the broker’s legitimacy is confirmed.
5. Monitor Withdrawals: If already invested, test withdrawals with small amounts to confirm reliability.
6. Report Issues: Contact authorities (e.g., FCA, local financial regulators) if fraud is suspected.

• Tools for Safety:
• Use scam-checking tools like Scamadviser or Traders Union to assess website legitimacy.
• Enable two-factor authentication (2FA) on trading accounts and related email addresses.
• Analysis: Given the high-risk profile, users should exercise extreme caution, prioritize independent verification, and avoid large investments.

---

11. Potential Brand Confusion ¶

• Similar Entities:
• Castle Company Limited (www.castlersgroup.com): A marketing solutions provider, unrelated to forex trading.
• Castle Biosciences (castlebiosciences.com): A molecular diagnostics company, completely unrelated.
• Castle Group Ltd (www.castlegroup.co.uk): An environmental monitoring company.
• Castle Marketing (castlemarketing.lt, castlemarketing.online): Digital marketing agencies, not involved in trading.
• Castle Invest.com: Another unregulated financial entity flagged as a potential scam, which could cause confusion.
• Other “Castle” Brands: Various unrelated companies (e.g., Castle Corporate Finance, Castlemoore) use the “Castle” name, increasing the risk of mistaken identity.
• Risk of Confusion:
• The generic name “Castle Market” could be intentionally chosen to leverage the credibility of established brands or confuse users searching for similar companies.
• Unregulated brokers often use similar names to reputable firms to gain trust. For example, users might mistake Castle Market for a regulated entity like Castle Corporate Finance (FCA-authorized for investment activities).
• Analysis: The potential for brand confusion is high due to the common use of “Castle” in business names across industries. Traders must verify the exact website (https://castle-market.com/) and avoid assuming legitimacy based on name similarity.

---

12. Overall Risk Assessment ¶

• Risk Level: High
• Key Factors:
• Lack of valid regulatory oversight (misrepresented FCA license).
• High leverage (1:3000) and low minimum deposit, targeting inexperienced traders.
• Complaints about unfulfilled promises and potential scam behavior.
• Limited transparency in ownership, management, and operations.
• Low website traffic and lack of social media presence.
• Potential brand confusion with unrelated entities.
• Recommendation:
• Castle Market Co., Ltd is a high-risk broker due to its unregulated status and multiple red flags. Traders should avoid engaging with this platform unless clear evidence of legitimacy (e.g., valid regulatory license, audited financials) emerges.
• Consider regulated alternatives with Tier-1 oversight (e.g., FCA, ASIC, CySEC) for safer trading.

---

13. Additional Notes ¶

• Data Limitations: The analysis is based on available web sources and lacks access to real-time server logs, full WHOIS data, or internal broker records. Further investigation (e.g., contacting the FCA directly) is recommended for definitive conclusions.
• Dynamic Nature of Scams: As noted by Scamadviser, scammers in 2025 use advanced tactics (e.g., AI, fake reviews). Castle Market’s mixed reviews and low transparency align with these patterns.
• Cross-Reference: The analysis cross-references multiple sources (WikiFX, Scamadviser, Traders Union) to ensure objectivity, but traders should conduct their own due diligence.

---

If you need further details or specific checks (e.g., deeper WHOIS analysis, social media verification), please let me know!