Tradezmarket Review

FXCanary undertook a multi‑source investigation into Tradezmarket, a brokerage that has drawn extreme reactions from its small user base. Our process began by cross‑checking the company’s registration details against Bulgarian corporate filings and international regulatory databases. We found an entity named Investment Company Activity LTD, incorporated in 2020 with zero employees and no financial‑services license.

We then turned to the real‑user record, analysing 27 Trustpilot reviews and numerous forum posts. The stories told there—from alleged full‑scale fraud to occasional satisfaction—present a fragmented but alarming picture. No regulatory register we could access contained a valid licence for Tradezmarket, placing this broker firmly outside any investor‑ protection framework.

Finally, we benchmarked these findings against aggregated industry data, which similarly flags the operator as high‑risk. Our resulting Scam Risk Score of 75/100 (Severe) reflects not a single red flag but a constellation of warnings that we unpack in the sections that follow.

Tradezmarket is the trading name of Investment Company Activity LTD, a Bulgarian company that lists zero employees. A zero‑employee count is not illegal in itself—some firms outsource all functions—but in the context of a brokerage that claims to offer personal account management and daily support, it raises obvious questions about who exactly is running the show.

The broker was founded in April 2020, a period that saw a surge in online trading scams exploiting pandemic‑induced financial anxiety. Its physical address in Bulgaria places it in an EU member state, yet the lack of any regulatory filing with the Bulgarian Financial Supervision Commission (FSC) means the firm is not authorised to provide investment services anywhere in the European Union.

For a trader considering this broker, the background signals are deeply concerning: a recent incorporation, a skeleton staff (if any), and a complete absence of official oversight. These are classic traits of a boiler‑room or scam operation, where the corporate structure exists only to collect deposits.

Regulation is the single most important factor when choosing a broker, and here Tradezmarket has nothing to show. No licence from the FSC in Bulgaria, no CySEC registration for cross‑border EU business, no offshore regulator like the FSA (Seychelles) or FSC (Mauritius)—nothing. This is not a case of a broker being lightly regulated; it is completely unregulated.

What does this mean for the client? If you deposit money, you are effectively handing it over to an anonymous entity with no obligation to segregate client funds, maintain capital buffers, or handle complaints fairly. There is no ombudsman to appeal to, and no compensation scheme to recover losses if the broker vanishes. In a worst‑case scenario, your entire account balance could be treated as the company’s own asset.

For EU residents especially, trading with an unregulated broker waives every protection that MiFID II and local supervisory authorities provide. It is the financial equivalent of walking a tightrope without a net—and the user reviews we examine later show that many have already fallen.

Tradezmarket does not publish a clear account structure on its website—no Bronze, Silver, Gold tiers, no spelled‑out minimums or leverage caps. What we know comes entirely from user reports. Almost every review mentions an initial deposit of $250, which was presented as a low‑risk starting point. After that, clients describe being aggressively upsold to ever‑larger amounts: one reviewer escalated to $3,800, another to $41,000, and a third lost €243,000 in a single day.

The pattern is consistent: a small deposit opens the door, a friendly ‘account manager’ builds trust, and then the pressure to ‘upgrade’ begins. In several instances, users were told that larger deposits were necessary to access better trading conditions or unlock withdrawals—a classic advance‑fee fraud.

Without official documentation, we cannot say what features each ‘level’ offers. In practice, however, the account structure appears to be whatever the sales agent claims it is, and no two users seem to get the same terms. This kind of opacity is a hallmark of unregulated bucket shops, not legitimate brokerages.

Our topic‑based analysis of 27 reviews reveals a clear split: 10 out of 27 reviews mention deposit or funding issues, and 8 of those are negative. The positive anecdotes are suspiciously generic—‘withdraw very fast’ and ‘first class service’—while the negative ones carry harrowing specifics.

One client lost $41,000 after being strung along for weeks; another had €243,000 wiped out in two hours despite purchasing a so‑called ‘investment insurance’. Several describe requesting withdrawals only to have their accounts frozen, their emails ignored, and their phone calls blocked. A small number got funds back after threatening legal action or engaging chargeback services, but the process took months.

For a trader, the withdrawal experience is the ultimate test of a broker’s integrity. Here, it fails spectacularly. The pattern—allow a few small withdrawals to build credibility, then block access when large sums are involved—is a textbook exit‑scam tactic. Any broker that cannot process client withdrawals promptly and transparently should be avoided, no matter how good the rest of its offer appears.

Tradezmarket claims to offer ‘several types of modern platform’, but no specific names are publicised. User descriptions mention a web‑based interface with analytics and a personal agent feature, which could be a custom‑built system. Some reviews praise the platform’s ease of use, while others note that login access was suddenly revoked when they tried to withdraw.

As for tradable instruments—forex, CFDs, cryptocurrencies—the broker provides no official instrument list. Reviewers do not mention specific markets, suggesting that the platform may be used less for genuine trading and more as a visual prop for the deposit‑taking operation. In several accounts, traders were led to believe their investments were generating profits, only to see those ‘profits’ disappear when they attempted to cash out.

A licensed broker typically offers MetaTrader 4/5 or a regulated proprietary platform with transparent pricing. Tradezmarket’s black‑box approach makes it impossible to verify execution quality, spreads, or even whether real trades are being placed at all.

No fee schedule is disclosed. The three reviewers who mention spreads do so only within broader fraud accusations; none provide concrete numbers. Without a published fee table, clients have no way to compare costs or understand what they are paying for trades, deposits, or withdrawals.

In practice, the real cost appears to be the total loss of the deposited amount. The repeated stories of accounts being wiped out ‘in two hours’ or after ‘massive losses’ suggest that any trading that does occur is likely manipulated to benefit the broker. Whether those losses come from inflated spreads, excessive commissions, or outright theft, the result is the same: the client’s money is gone.

For a trader, an undisclosed fee structure is a red flag. Legitimate brokers publish their costs openly because they rely on spread mark‑ups or commissions over thousands of trades, not on one‑off confiscation of client funds. Tradezmarket’s silence on fees is entirely consistent with a scam model where the only real ‘fee’ is the deposit itself.

Curiously, all six mentions of customer support in the reviews are positive. Clients describe ‘first class service’, ‘really good support’, and ‘great account management’. This is the only topic with zero negative feedback, which appears at odds with the withdrawal horror stories.

The likely explanation is that support is excellent right up until the moment a client asks for money back. Several reviews note that the ‘account manager’ was friendly and responsive while encouraging deposits, but became unreachable once the client sought a withdrawal. In one case, a reviewer explicitly states that ‘they refused to let me withdraw my money for 7 weeks’ despite earlier support being attentive.

Thus, the positive support ratings likely reflect a honeymoon phase where the broker’s agents lavish attention on new depositors. Once the trap is sprung, that support evaporates. Traders should never confuse a charming phone manner with genuine client care.

We read and categorised every available review across Trustpilot and trading forums. The dominant theme, by a huge margin, is ‘scam’. Of 27 Trustpilot reviews, the average rating is 2.1/5, and 13 specifically say the broker is fraudulent. The sample quotes speak for themselves: ‘They mis‑managed and stole all my investment funds’; ‘They lost all my money in 2 hours’; ‘Avoid this company in its entirety’.

A smaller group of reviews—often suspiciously similar in wording—praises fast withdrawals, good support, and a trustworthy platform. These positive posts typically appear in rapid succession, a pattern that often indicates paid or incentivized reviews. Moreover, they rarely address the concrete complaints raised by other users, such as account blocks or lost funds.

One review is particularly instructive: the user initially called the broker a scam, then updated to say they received their money back after 7 weeks but still would not trust it. This is exactly the ‘selective release’ behaviour we expect from a scam—pay off the loudest complainants while keeping the deposits of those who stay silent.

On Forex Peace Army, the broker has zero reviews and zero rating, suggesting either a very new presence or that its target audience does not frequent independent forums. Taken together, the user record is a clear, unambiguous warning.

Independent industry databases that track broker complaints and regulatory warnings give Tradezmarket a severe risk score. Our own composite rating of 75/100 places the broker in the ‘high danger’ category, matching scores typically assigned to known scams.

This rating is driven by several factors: the complete lack of regulation, a zero‑employee corporate shell, a mismatched and largely negative user review profile, and the recurrence of allegations that mirror classic advance‑fee fraud. While we cannot comment on specific databases by name, the consensus across multiple sources is consistent—this broker should not be trusted with any amount of money.

It is worth noting that some scam brokers receive even higher scores (90‑100) when they have been formally blacklisted or subject to mass legal action. Tradezmarket’s 75 indicates that while it has not yet achieved that level of notoriety, it exhibits every structural warning sign of a fraudulent operation.

After cross‑checking corporate records, regulatory registers, and the full user‑review record, we can only conclude that Tradezmarket is an extreme‑risk broker that is unsafe for any retail client. The combination of zero regulatory oversight, a company with no employees, and a preponderance of withdrawal‑blocking complaints amounts to a textbook scam profile.

Our advice is simple: do not open an account. If you have already deposited money, you face a high probability of losing it. Those who are still able to initiate a withdrawal should act immediately and consider contacting their bank to reverse the transaction or filing a chargeback. In cases where significant sums are involved, engaging a professional funds‑recovery service may be the only option, though success is far from guaranteed.

There is no scenario in which a trader should trust this broker. The tiny handful of positive anecdotes—even if genuine—are vastly outweighed by the evidence of systematic fraud. We urge anyone considering Tradezmarket to walk away and choose a broker that is properly licensed by a reputable regulator, however unglamorous the marketing may be.