Finantik Review

When a broker markets itself as a UK-based financial services provider yet offers no regulatory credentials, our team takes a forensic approach. For this review, we cross‑checked the official UK Companies House register, the Financial Conduct Authority’s (FCA) public register, and leading international regulatory databases. We also scoured customer review platforms, complaint boards, and aggregated industry data to build an accurate picture.

Our investigation uncovered a corporate entity with zero employees, no physical address, and a legal name that points to a virtual office. Combined with a total absence of any financial licence and a user review record that consists entirely of one‑star scam warnings, the picture that emerged is deeply troubling.

Finantik was incorporated on 28 February 2020 under the legal name ‘Pro Star Griffith Corporate Centre’. This naming convention is often used by businesses that rent a virtual address in a shared office building rather than maintaining a physical trading floor. Our search of the UK Companies House register confirms that the entity has zero employees on file.

A brokerage operating with no staff raises serious questions about who—if anyone—is managing accounts, executing trades, or handling customer support. Legitimate forex brokers, even small ones, typically employ compliance officers, dealers, and support personnel. The absence of any recorded employees suggests that Finantik is little more than a shell company, a common feature of scam operations designed to collect deposits without providing actual trading services.

The broker’s website does not disclose a physical address, management team, or any operational details. This lack of transparency is a hallmark of fraudulent firms, as it makes accountability and legal recourse nearly impossible for victims.

A broker operating from the UK must, by law, be authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) to offer financial services to retail clients. Finantik holds no such licence. Our verification against the FCA’s Financial Services Register returned no results, and extended checks across other major regulators—including CySEC, ASIC, and the FSCA—found no record of authorisation anywhere in the world.

This regulatory vacuum means that clients are not protected by any of the standard safeguards. There is no requirement for client money to be held in segregated accounts, no mandatory participation in a compensation scheme (like the FSCS), and no negative balance protection. If Finantik were to disappear with client funds—as the user reviews already suggest—traders would have virtually no path to recovering their money through any financial ombudsman or regulatory body.

UK-based investors should note that even accessing the Financial Ombudsman Service requires the firm to be FCA-regulated. Without this, the only option is often a costly and uncertain civil lawsuit against an entity that has hidden its true owners and location. This alone makes Finantik an unacceptable counterparty for anyone concerned about the safety of their capital.

Finantik presents four account levels: BASIC at $1,000, GOLD at $10,000, PLATINUM at $25,000, and VIP at $100,000. On the surface, this tiered structure resembles what you might find at a premium broker catering to high‑net‑worth individuals. However, a closer look reveals a crucial gap: not a single trading condition is disclosed for any of these accounts.

There is no information on typical spreads, no mention of commission structures, no maximum leverage limits, and no indication of the execution model (STP, ECN, or market maker). For a trader considering a $100,000 VIP account, the absence of even basic pricing is unthinkable in a legitimate environment. This void suggests either that the accounts are purely for show to lure large deposits, or that the broker simply invents trading conditions after the money is taken.

The minimum deposits themselves are unusually high for an unregulated entity. Most legitimate brokers offer micro or cent accounts with deposits as low as $10–$100, precisely to allow traders to test the platform before committing larger sums. Finantik’s lowest entry point is $1,000—a substantial sum for many retail traders—while the VIP tier targets six‑figure deposits. In our experience, such steep thresholds are a red flag, as they maximise the broker’s gains before any withdrawal attempt is made.

Finantik does not publicly list any deposit or withdrawal methods. There is no mention of bank transfers, credit cards, e‑wallets, or cryptocurrencies. Prospective clients must therefore hand over their funds blindly, without any clarity on how—or if—they will ever get them back.

Real user reviews paint a grim picture of what happens after the deposit. One reviewer states bluntly: ‘Impossible to make withdrawal... Impossible to talk with an agent. I am afraid is a scam.’ Another describes being bombarded with almost 20 calls from a sales agent named Jessi White, who urged them to start with just $250, yet after the money was sent, all communication ceased. These are not isolated anecdotes; every single review we found echoes the same themes: aggressive sales, no post‑deposit support, and complete blockage of withdrawals.

In legitimate brokerages, withdrawal requests are processed within a few business days and the process is clearly documented. The universal difficulty reported by Finantik’s users is consistent with a structure designed to make depositing easy and cashing out impossible—a classic hallmark of a scam. We have seen zero evidence that any trader has ever successfully withdrawn funds from this broker.

A forex or CFD broker’s core offering revolves around its trading platform and the range of instruments available. Finantik reveals neither. There is no indication of whether it uses the industry-standard MetaTrader 4/5, cTrader, or a proprietary web‑based interface. Similarly, no list of tradable assets—currency pairs, commodities, indices, equities, or cryptocurrencies—is provided.

This is deeply abnormal. Even unregulated brokers hoping to appear credible will usually plaster their website with platform logos and market listings to attract traders. The complete absence of such information suggests that Finantik may not actually offer any real trading environment at all. In our investigative experience, this vacuum often indicates a pure deposit‑collection scheme where the promised ‘trading’ is merely simulated or entirely fictitious.

Without a platform or instrument catalogue, there is no way for a trader to evaluate execution speed, charting tools, or market access. The lack of transparency here aligns with the broker’s overall pattern of hiding every operational detail, leaving clients with no means to verify that any trading activity is genuine.

Because Finantik discloses no spreads, commissions, swap rates, or non‑trading fees, the true cost of trading is a complete unknown. In a regulated environment, brokers must publish their spread schedules and fee structures to allow traders to make informed decisions. Here, the silence means that once a deposit is made, the broker can effectively charge whatever it likes.

Hidden fees are a common tactic used by fraudulent brokers to drain accounts slowly until the client attempts to withdraw, at which point additional ‘administration’ or ‘handling’ fees are often invented to block the request. User reviews do not detail fee structures, but the pattern of blocked withdrawals suggests that unseen costs may be used as a pretext to deny cash‑outs.

Competitive pricing is a cornerstone of client trust. When a broker refuses to disclose its cost model, it signals either that the costs are exorbitant or that trading conditions are irrelevant because the broker’s real revenue comes from trapped deposits rather than legitimate spreads or commissions.

The user review record for Finantik is uniquely damning. We collected and analysed all available feedback from platforms like Trustpilot, Forex Peace Army, and message boards. The result is a perfect negative consensus: there are no positive reviews whatsoever.

One reviewer writes: ‘A total scam company owned by Pro Star. all their forex companies are scams. I am trying to get their actual address, if anyone has it, would appreciate it if you share.’ This connects Finantik to a broader network of suspected scam brokers, a claim that resonates with the zero‑employee shell structure we uncovered. Another states: ‘Scam.

Beware of calls from Birmingham UK. Very shady. No address.

Non UK caller trying to offer stocks and trading advice. Beware.’ This high‑pressure sales tactic—calls from a UK number that likely masks an overseas boiler room—is a classic fraud hallmark.

The withdrawal theme is constant. Multiple users report that after depositing, they could not withdraw any money and could not reach an agent. One detailed account mentions receiving nearly 20 calls from a sales agent named Jessi White, only to be met with silence when asking for written terms or attempting to retrieve funds. Such aggressive pursuit followed by total abandonment is a recognised scam pattern known as ‘exiting’ once the deposit is collected.

The complete absence of even a single satisfied client—coupled with multiple independent scam accusations—makes the review landscape one of the most consistently negative we have ever encountered.

Finantik’s Trustpilot rating stands at 2.5 out of 5, based on only six reviews, all of which are one‑star. While a 2.5 might initially appear mediocre, it is important to understand that this score is the lowest possible when all reviews are negative; Trustpilot’s algorithm often weights star distribution. Forex Peace Army carries no rating at all, which in itself is telling—usually an active broker, even a poor one, will attract some reviews over time. The silence suggests very few actual users or a deliberate avoidance by the broker.

Aggregated industry data from multiple databases aligns perfectly with our findings: no regulatory licences, a severe scam risk score, and multiple withdrawal complaints. There is no discrepancy between the quantitative scores and the raw user testimony; both paint the same picture of a high‑risk entity that should not be trusted with any amount of money.

Our proprietary Scam Risk Score evaluates brokers on factors including regulation, corporate substance, complaint volume, fee transparency, and user review sentiment. Finantik scores a 75 out of 100, placing it firmly in the ‘Severe’ risk category.

The score breaks down as follows: total absence of any regulatory licence contributes 30 points; the zero‑employee shell corporate structure adds 20 points; multiple scam allegations and withdrawal complaints contribute 15 points; and complete opacity in trading conditions, fees, and platforms adds the remaining 10 points. A score above 70 means that in our analysis, the probability of financial loss or fraud is extremely high.

For context, our benchmark for a safe broker is a score below 20-30, indicating strong regulation, transparent operations, and clean user feedback. Finantik is more than double that threshold, underscoring the extreme caution we advise.

No. FXCanary’s investigation leads to an unequivocal recommendation: avoid Finantik entirely. The broker exhibits every red flag associated with deposit‑taking scams: no regulation, a hidden corporate structure, zero employees, undisclosed trading conditions, high minimum deposits, and a user review record that is 100% negative with consistent reports of blocked withdrawals.

The risk of losing all deposited funds is, in our assessment, near certain. There is no evidence that Finantik operates a genuine trading environment or that any client has successfully withdrawn money. The firm’s existence appears to serve only the collection of deposits, after which communication ceases.

We urge all traders, from beginners to professionals, to stay away from Finantik. Regulatory warnings may not yet be widely published because the entity is small, but the evidence gathered in this review is sufficient to categorise it as a high‑risk operation.

If you have sent money to Finantik, take immediate steps to protect yourself. First, stop all further deposits and refrain from paying any additional ‘fees’ or ‘taxes’ that the broker may demand to process a withdrawal—these are almost certainly fraudulent attempts to extract even more money.

Attempt to withdraw your full balance through any method the broker claims to offer, and keep detailed records of all communications, including emails, call logs, and screenshots. If the withdrawal is blocked or ignored, gather all evidence and file a complaint with your local police, Action Fraud (the UK’s national fraud reporting centre), and the FCA. Although the FCA cannot regulate an unlicensed firm, it can investigate and issue public warnings.

Finally, report your experience on review platforms and fraud‑alert websites to warn other potential victims. The more visibility such operations receive, the harder it becomes for them to find new targets.