Abstract:In the competitive world of forex trading, protecting the rights and interests of traders is paramount. Unfortunately, there are brokers who exploit traders' trust, leading to significant financial losses. One such case involves PO Trade, a forex broker that has come under scrutiny for allegedly defrauding its clients. This article highlights the experience of a victim, Abdel, who claims to have lost over $115 million in profits due to PO Trade’s unethical practices.

In the competitive world of forex trading, protecting the rights and interests of traders is paramount. Unfortunately, there are brokers who exploit traders' trust, leading to significant financial losses. One such case involves PO Trade, a forex broker that has come under scrutiny for allegedly defrauding its clients. This article highlights the experience of a victim, Abdel, who claims to have lost over $115 million in profits due to PO Trades unethical practices.

The Victim's Account
Abdel, a 23-year-old trader from Yemen, has detailed a troubling experience with PO Trade, also known as Pocket Option. According to Abdel, after successfully trading on the platform, his account was suddenly banned, and his substantial profits were confiscated. He states:
“I traded in PO TRADE LTD/POCKET OPTION correctly and officially, and I have evidence that my transactions are legitimate. My profits exceeded $115 million, but the company blocked my account and stole my earnings, claiming it was due to a technical glitch.”





Abdel alleges that PO Trade manipulated transaction timings in his account statement to justify their actions. He points out discrepancies in the timing of one particular transaction, stating:
“The transaction No. 35272010 shows a time of 11:45:54 on 5/26/2024, but the actual time was 00:45:54 on 5/27/2024. I have documented screenshots of my transactions that prove the legitimacy of my profits.”
Evidence of Fraudulent Practices
Abdel has gathered evidence, including screenshots of his account showing the correct transaction times and amounts. He asserts that he will not rest until he recovers his funds:
“I will continue to demand my rights until I recover all my profits. I have all the documents that prove my case, and I will not give up.”
WikiFX's Role in Protecting Traders
WikiFX is dedicated to safeguarding the legitimate rights of forex traders. This case against PO Trade serves as a stark reminder of the potential risks associated with unregulated brokers. The platform's commitment to transparency and accountability in the forex industry is crucial for protecting traders from fraud.
On WikiFX, this broker has been given a low score of 2.14/10. This is a red flag.

Conclusion
The experience of Abdel with PO Trade is a cautionary tale for all forex traders. It underscores the importance of due diligence when choosing a broker and the potential consequences of trusting unregulated entities. As this case unfolds, it is vital for traders to remain vigilant and aware of their rights. WikiFX will continue to expose fraudulent practices and advocate for the rights of traders everywhere.
If you have experienced similar issues with PO Trade or any other broker, consider reaching out to WikiFX for assistance. Your voice can help bring attention to these fraudulent practices and protect fellow traders from potential scams.


People searching NXG MARKETS regulation or regulation NXG MARKETS need to separate an overseas licence from permission in India. The Reserve Bank of India Alert List, updated 19 November 2025, names NXG Markets and nxgmarkets.com. RBI says listed entities are neither authorised to deal in forex under FEMA nor authorised to run an approved forex electronic trading platform. The broker's own site also says it does not serve residents or citizens of India. This NXG MARKETS review found an overseas Mwali licence record, but no RBI authorisation. No cited court ruling proves fraud. For an Indian user, the local warning and service restriction should control the decision.

Neomarkets, a Kazakhstan-based brokerage firm, is facing some allegations of fund scams and unfair charges. These charges were reportedly on both deposits and withdrawals. As negative Neomarkets reviews became prominent on broker evaluation platforms, it was important to inspect these allegations and understand its regulatory scope. We have covered these in this article.

OnFin, a Comoros-based multi-asset brokerage firm, impresses users with its wide range of products and trading platforms. However, user reviews largely reflect negative sentiments for the broker. Withdrawal issues have allegedly become the talking point among users on broker review platforms such as WikiFX. Among the complaints, one user even highlighted a fund scam totaling over $45,000. Additionally, the alleged failure of the broker in providing trade logs added to negative OnFin reviews. While examining the reviews, we have provided a regulatory overview of the broker.

The UK regulator classified the website as a clone of an authorised firm on 28 August 2026. The FCA says the genuine Reclaim Experts Ltd has no connection with the clone.