Introduction: An Exchange With Extreme “Split Personality”
Over the previous 19 editions, we have investigated a series of crypto exchanges ranging from HashKey to BVOX. For the 20th edition, we are taking on one with an almost extreme “split personality” — Bitunix.
Its résumé looks like that of a “top student” in the crypto industry:
“Founded in 2021,” “over 5 million users across 150+ countries,” “ranked 33rd on CMCs derivatives rankings,” “AA rating from CER.live, ranking among the global top 17,” “$116.8 million in reserves with a 108%+ reserve ratio,” “ISO 27001:2022 certification,” “AUSTRAC registration + El Salvador BSP license + U.S. and Canadian MSB registrations,” a “$30 million Bitunix Care Fund,” and “$5 million in insurance.”
Sounds like the perfect combination of compliance + security + transparency, right？
But on the other side of the story:
The Seychelles Financial Services Authority (FSA) publicly named Bitunix in a 2025 warning, stating that the platform was operating without authorization and falsely claiming to hold a Philippine license. Bitunix has no Tier-1 regulatory oversight, and it does not appear on the ESMA CASP register.
Its Trustpilot score stands at 3.5/5, with users openly calling it a “SCAM” and an “exit scam.”
WikiBit states that Bitunix currently has no valid crypto-asset regulatory oversight.
A user on KYCnot.me complained:
“They freeze your funds without any explanation, forcing you to go through strict KYC before you can withdraw. Very easy to get in, impossible to get out.”
Another Trustpilot user claimed that after depositing $7,000, making a profit within two days, and attempting to continue trading, their account was restricted and they were told to wait 30 days for a review.
In 2025, a system failure reportedly caused some users to be automatically liquidated. Customer support allegedly took weeks to respond, while the compensation offered was described as “negligible.”
So how does an exchange boasting an AA rating, ISO certification, and more than $116 million in reserves end up being labeled an “exit scam” by some users？
Today, we are going to peel back the layers one by one.
1. Regulatory Compliance: AUSTRAC Registration + BSP License + French AMF Blacklist — “Compliance” or Just Regulatory Stickers？
Bitunixs “Full Compliance Package”
Bitunix has gone all-in when it comes to compliance marketing.
According to its official announcements and App Store information, Bitunix claims to have:
Australian AUSTRAC registration — effective January 8, 2026
El Salvador Bitcoin Service Provider (BSP) license — obtained in July 2026
U.S. FinCEN MSB registration
Canadian MSB registration
Philippine VASP license application in progress
Sounds like a textbook case of “global regulatory compliance,” doesnt it？
But there are problems with almost every piece of this “compliance puzzle.”
First: AUSTRAC registration does not mean regulatory endorsement or a financial license.
Bitunix itself makes this crystal clear in its announcement:
“Registration with AUSTRAC does not represent endorsement, approval, or the granting of any form of license by AUSTRAC.”
AUSTRAC is Australias anti-money-laundering regulator. Registration means that the business has been entered into the relevant register and can legally provide digital currency exchange services under the applicable framework.
That is registration, not a comprehensive financial-services license.
Compared with substantive financial regulation by authorities such as Hong Kong‘s SFC or Japan’s FSA, the difference is enormous.
Second: Frances AMF blacklisted Bitunix in March 2025.
The French Financial Markets Authority (AMF) placed Bitunix on its blacklist in March 2025, determining that the platform was unlawfully promoting derivatives products to French residents.
Bitunixs response was essentially to designate France as a restricted jurisdiction rather than publicly demonstrating a comprehensive remediation process or regulatory appeal.
Third: U.S. MSB + Canadian MSB — once again, two “regulatory stickers.”
As we have repeatedly emphasized throughout the previous 19 editions:
An MSB registration is not a financial regulatory license. It is primarily an anti-money-laundering registration.
U.S. MSB registration with FinCEN has a relatively low entry threshold. It does not amount to a comprehensive assessment of the business model, nor does it constitute a solvency guarantee.
Canadas MSB framework is broadly similar in this respect.
RigorRanks assessment is particularly direct: Bitunix operates primarily as a lightly regulated offshore exchange without comprehensive Tier-1 regulatory supervision.
PerpFinder likewise confirms that Bitunix does not appear on the ESMA CASP register, does not have a clearly identified headquarters, and among EU/EEA jurisdictions, appears to restrict only France.
WikiBit reaches an even more direct conclusion: the crypto-asset exchange business claimed by the platform has no valid regulatory oversight.
WikiBit gives Bitunix a regulatory score of 6.16/10.
Fourth: The Seychelles FSA Warning — The Most Damaging Blow
In March 2025, the Seychelles Financial Services Authority (FSA) publicly named Bitunix, stating that the platform was operating without authorization and falsely claiming to hold a Philippine license.
What kind of jurisdiction is Seychelles？
It is one of the worlds best-known offshore registration havens, with a reputation for relatively light regulation. If even the Seychelles FSA publicly says, in effect, “You are not licensed, and you made false claims,” that means Bitunix has run into problems even at the relatively permissive offshore regulatory level.
Fifth: The El Salvador BSP License — How Much Regulatory Weight Does It Really Carry？
El Salvador is indeed the first country in the world to adopt Bitcoin as legal tender, and its Bitcoin Service Provider (BSP) license is indeed issued by the countrys central bank.
But there is a problem:
El Salvador itself has a very small economy and financial market.
An El Salvador license is simply not in the same regulatory league as an EU MiCA/CASP authorization or a Hong Kong SFC VATP license. The level and scope of regulatory oversight are fundamentally different.
Bitunix Chief Strategy Officer Steven Gu described the license as “another validation of compliance and sustainable growth.”
But what exactly has it validated？
It validates that Bitunix can legally conduct Bitcoin-related exchange activities in El Salvador.
Thats it.
Registered Address: St. Vincent and the Grenadines
Bitunix lists the following contact address on Trustpilot:
Euro House, Richmond Hill Road, Kingstown, St Vincent and the Grenadines.
St. Vincent and the Grenadines is, once again, an offshore island jurisdiction.
Like Seychelles and the BVI, it is a classic registration destination in the crypto industry where companies can operate under relatively light regulatory frameworks.
Risk Rating: High Risk
AUSTRAC registration + BSP license + two MSB registrations = four pieces of the “compliance puzzle.”
But none of them represents comprehensive, hard-core financial regulatory oversight.
The French AMF blacklist, the Seychelles FSA warning, Bitunixs absence from the ESMA CASP register, and its offshore registration in St. Vincent and the Grenadines all point in the same direction.
Bitunixs compliance structure looks less like a genuine “regulatory passport” and more like a carefully assembled “map of regulatory stickers.”
2. Account Freezes and Withdrawals: Trading Is Easy — Withdrawals Are the Real “Life-or-Death Test”
For most users, routine small deposits and small withdrawals on Bitunix appear to work normally.
The problems become significantly more concentrated when account balances grow or users attempt large withdrawals.
And this is precisely one of the most important warning signals when assessing whether an exchange could potentially be heading toward a liquidity or exit crisis.
Real User Complaints — A Compilation of Public Complaints on Trustpilot and Overseas Communities
Case 1: Large USDC withdrawal after profitable derivatives trading
One user reportedly completed the highest level of KYC, made profits through derivatives trading, and then requested a large USDC withdrawal.
The withdrawal allegedly triggered a platform “compliance review.”
The review dragged on for several weeks. Customer service repeatedly transferred the case between support and retention departments, without providing a clear timeline for account release.
The funds remained trapped on the platform and could not be withdrawn.
Case 2: Sudden account risk-control lock
Some users reportedly experienced sudden account restrictions despite having traded normally and receiving no previous violation notices.
The platform allegedly requested extensive additional documentation, including proof of income and source-of-funds information.
Even after the documents were submitted, some users claimed their cases remained unresolved indefinitely.
Case 3: Small withdrawals work — profits trigger risk controls
A recurring complaint pattern is:
Small deposits and withdrawals work smoothly during initial testing.
But once an account begins generating significant profits, additional risk-control measures allegedly kick in.
Some users summarized their experience as:
“The platform encourages you to trade and make profits, but doesnt want you to withdraw those profits.”
To be clear, not every user experiences account freezes.
The complaints are significantly more concentrated around larger balances and larger withdrawals.
App-store reviews are also revealing: many positive comments focus on smooth trading execution, while a large proportion of negative reviews center around withdrawal problems.
On-Chain Wallet Tracking
Bitunix publicly states that it works with custody providers including Fireblocks and Cobo, and claims that the majority of user assets are stored in cold wallets using MPC (multi-party computation) signing, with no single private-key control point.
Its public Proof-of-Reserves page also publishes a Merkle-tree root hash, allowing users to verify whether their account balance is included in the proof of reserves.
But there is a limitation:
Ordinary users can verify whether their own account balance is included in the Merkle tree, but they cannot independently verify that the complete on-chain wallet balances correspond exactly to the total user assets claimed by the platform.
Third-party blockchain analysts can identify publicly disclosed cold-wallet addresses, but they cannot independently confirm whether those addresses are 100% dedicated to customer assets or whether they also contain the platforms proprietary funds.
In other words, the blockchain evidence does not provide an absolutely closed-loop verification system.
Official KYC Policy: The “Invisible Roadblock” to Withdrawals
Bitunixs official support documentation explicitly states that:
“Certain features, including withdrawals, may require identity verification before they can be used.”
Accounts that have not completed identity verification may be unable to withdraw or may face withdrawal restrictions.
You can deposit without completing the full KYC process, but when you try to withdraw, the requirements can become progressively stricter.
Isnt that essentially a case of “letting you in first, then raising the barriers when you try to leave”？
At its core, Bitunixs withdrawal controversy resembles what we have seen with UZX, Azbit, and BVOX:
Deposits arrive instantly. Withdrawals？ First, you have to clear one hurdle after another.
The Trustpilot complaints did not appear out of nowhere.
“Very easy to get in, impossible to get out” may be the most concise description of the concerns raised by some users.
Risk Rating: High Risk
Basic account security measures such as passwords and two-factor authentication appear relatively solid.
The biggest concern is concentrated in the large-withdrawal stage.
The platform retains broad discretion over risk-control decisions, while users may face vague explanations for freezes and limited avenues for appeal.
3. Proof of Reserves Transparency: $116.8 Million in Reserves + AA Rating — But Who Actually Verified It？
Official Data: Almost Textbook-Perfect
To Bitunixs credit, the exchange has invested considerable effort into reserve transparency.
Its disclosed figures include:
Total reserves of approximately $116.83 million, with asset coverage above 100%
Latest PoR data, dated January 1, 2026: BTC 108%, ETH 107%, USDT 110%
CER.live AA rating, ranking among the global top 17, with a server-security score of 96
ISO/IEC 27001:2022 certification
Cobo Custody and periodic audits by Hacken/Salus
$5 million Nemean Services insurance coverage
A $30 million Bitunix Care Fund intended to protect users
But where are the problems？
First: Proof of Reserves Is Not the Same as a Financial Audit
A crypto-native PoR primarily proves that certain account balances are included in a cryptographic structure.
It is not equivalent to a full financial audit conducted by an independent accounting firm.
It can demonstrate that “the balance is recorded inside the tree,” but it cannot completely eliminate concerns regarding external liabilities, undisclosed obligations, or hidden losses.
Second: CER.lives AA Rating Is a Security Rating — Not a Financial Audit
CER.live evaluates factors such as:
Server security
Penetration testing
Vulnerability and bug-bounty programs
It does not verify exactly how much money the exchange has or whether the reported assets actually exist in full.
Third: Hacken/Salus Security Audits Are Not Financial Audits
Their audits primarily examine technical and security risks, such as whether software or infrastructure contains vulnerabilities.
They do not independently verify whether the claimed $116.8 million in reserves actually exists.
Fourth: The Protection Fund Is Primarily Platform-Declared
The Bitunix Care Fund is publicly presented by the platform itself.
There is no publicly demonstrated evidence of fully independent third-party custody and segregation of the fund.
In an extreme market event, whether the fund could actually provide full compensation to affected users remains difficult for outsiders to independently verify.
Fifth: Only the Merkle Root Is Publicly Disclosed
Bitunix publishes the Merkle root for its proof of reserves, but does not publicly disclose the complete list of wallet addresses.
As a result, the public cannot perform a complete, independent on-chain reconciliation of all customer assets.
Risk Rating: Medium-High Risk
Among offshore exchanges, Bitunixs reserve transparency appears to be above average.
However, there is still a significant gap between “relatively transparent” and fully independently verifiable.
Proof of reserves ≠ proof that an exchange can never collapse.
4. Asset Strength: Rankings Are Rising — But the Real Financial Strength Remains Murky
The Impressive Numbers
Bitunix has reported or been ranked with the following figures:
CMC derivatives ranking: rose from 45th to 37th
CoinGecko ranking: rose from 38th to 18th
CoinGlass 2025 report: among the worlds top 7 exchanges, with average daily trading volume of approximately $12.7 billion
Messari: approximately $11.7 billion in 30-day total trading volume
User base: increased from around 2 million to 5 million+
Supports 1,100+ trading pairs
Offers leverage of up to 200x
On paper, these numbers look impressive.
But there is another side to the story.
The registered entity is an offshore company in St. Vincent and the Grenadines.
There are no publicly available comprehensive financial statements, and Bitunix does not publicly disclose its net proprietary capital.
Therefore, outsiders cannot independently determine the platforms true financial foundation.
Offshore derivatives exchanges also face the industry-wide problem of potentially inflated reported trading volumes, including wash trading, automated trading, and market-making bots.
As a result, the actual size of Bitunixs organically retained user base is difficult to independently verify.
The same issue applies to its protection fund and insurance coverage:
The amounts are publicly announced by the platform, but there is no publicly available independent assurance report that fully verifies these figures.
Risk Rating: Medium Risk
Bitunixs surface-level metrics look impressive.
But its underlying proprietary capital remains largely a black box.
If a concentrated withdrawal wave or bank-run-like event were to occur, the platforms true ability to withstand the pressure cannot currently be quantified with confidence.
5. Internal Operations & Management: Arron Lee, Slater, Guo Li — Three Names, Three Mysteries
Founding Team: Arron Lee + Slater
According to Coinpedia, Bitunix was co-founded by Arron Lee and Slater, with the latter also serving as the head of marketing for the Asian market.
Arron Lee is described as having an entrepreneurial track record and also serves as CEO.
Core Management Team
Kx Wu: Chief Operating Officer (COO)
Wen Gu (Steven Gu): Chief Strategy Officer (CSO)
Bill Wang: Chief Marketing Officer (CMO)
The Biggest Mystery: Who Is Guo Li？
A March 2025 investigation published by the Russian investigative platform VKLADER alleged that more than 75% of Bitunix‘s controlling ownership belongs to an individual named Guo Li (郭立), who is reportedly the company’s actual controlling shareholder.
Bitunix is also associated with Arron Lee, who has been described as one of its “key founders and executives.”
And here is where things get interesting:
Who exactly is Guo Li？
There is virtually no publicly available information that can be used to independently identify or verify this individual.
What is the relationship between Arron Lee and Guo Li？
One is presented as the founder + CEO, while the other has been alleged to be the actual controlling shareholder.
So who is really calling the shots？
And why is it so difficult to find meaningful public information about someone allegedly controlling more than 75% of the company？
Registered Jurisdiction: St. Vincent and the Grenadines
Bitunix is registered in St. Vincent and the Grenadines, yet another offshore island jurisdiction.
The company has been associated with names including Bitunix Innovation Limited and Bitunix Fintech LLC.
One company.
Two names.
An offshore registration jurisdiction.
And an alleged controlling shareholder who is almost impossible to independently identify.
Read into that what you will.
Risk Rating: High Risk
Arron Lee appears to be the “public face,” while Guo Li is the alleged “shadow” behind the company.
One founder + CEO is visible to the public, while an alleged controlling shareholder remains largely hidden.
This kind of dual-track ownership and governance structure creates a significant level of information opacity in itself.
6. Product Experience & Trading Depth: Derivatives Are the Strong Point, but High Leverage Hides Serious Risks
Bitunix has clearly positioned itself around:
Derivatives + high leverage + copy trading + high-frequency trading tools.
The platform offers leverage of up to 200x and continues to add trading tools, alerts, risk-management features, Multi-Trade, and other functionality.
For professional traders, this can be an advantage.
For ordinary users, however, it can become a major risk.
Because:
200x leverage does not make it easier to make money. It makes it easier to get liquidated — much faster.
Bitunix also offers:
- 1,100+ spot trading pairs
- Copy trading
- Dollar-cost averaging (DCA)
- Dual investment
- TradingView chart integration
- Other trading and investment tools
However, its spot-market liquidity is weaker than its derivatives market, and liquidity for some smaller-cap tokens can be relatively thin.
Another notable feature is that users can trade without mandatory KYC in certain circumstances.
No mandatory KYC is a double-edged sword.
Registration is fast.
Trading is fast.
But when you try to withdraw, KYC suddenly appears.
That is not necessarily “great user experience.” It can feel more like “letting you in first, then raising the barriers when you try to leave.”
Risk Rating: High Risk
7. Real Community Feedback: Trustpilot 3.5/5 — A Tug-of-War Between “SCAM” and “Great”
Bitunix has a Trustpilot rating of around 3.5/5, with user reviews showing significant polarization.
Negative Reviews
“Complete scam and bonus theft + random account blocks”
“They have now locked users funds, blow you off completely in support chat, and seem to be attempting some sort of exit scam.”
“Worst crypto exchange they can frozen ur al asset they can roll back all ur profit just stay to away from them.”
Positive Reviews
“I like Bitunix. There are so many asset available, including US stock right now. I like the app & easy to use.”
“Been in their community for a while and its actually quite active compared to most exchanges.”
The Bottom Line
Bitunixs community reputation is almost a perfect example of survivorship bias.
Users who have never experienced a serious problem:
“The platform is pretty good. It has lots of features and the app is easy to use.”
Users who have experienced account restrictions or withdrawal problems:
“The platform is a complete scam. I cant get my money back.”
And the key question is:
What happens when you become one of the users who encounters a problem？
At that point, you may find yourself with very limited options and little leverage over the platform.
Third-Party Platforms: A Sea of “Red Flags”
Cashbackforex
Cashbackforex states that the company “appears to be currently unregulated by any government agency.”
It ranks Bitunix 31st out of 574 exchanges, where a higher position indicates greater risk.
KYCnot.me
A user review describes the experience as:
“Very easy to get in, impossible to get out.”
Seychelles FSA
The Seychelles FSA publicly named Bitunix and warned that it was unauthorized and falsely claimed to hold a Philippine license.
Scamadviser
The domain bitunix-exchange.top has been flagged as “very likely a scam.”
Risk Rating: High Risk
8. Comprehensive Exit Scam Risk Assessment
| Dimension | Risk Level | Brief Assessment |
| Regulatory Compliance | High | AUSTRAC + BSP + MSB = regulatory “stickers”; publicly named by the Seychelles FSA; blacklisted by the French AMF; absent from the ESMA CASP register; registered in St. Vincent and the Grenadines |
| Account Freezes / Withdrawals | High | Trustpilot 3.5/5; “very easy to get in, impossible to get out”; reports of restrictions after users made profits |
| Reserve Transparency | Medium-High | $116.8 million in reserves + AA rating, but nearly 80% is reportedly USDT; no independent full financial audit |
| Asset Strength | Medium-High | No disclosure of proprietary net assets; no independent third-party verification; true financial strength remains difficult to assess |
| Team & Operations | High | Arron Lee is the public face, while Guo Li is allegedly the “shadow” controller; the alleged actual controlling shareholder is difficult to independently verify |
| Product Experience | High | Feature-rich, but withdrawal concerns remain; “no KYC” can become a trap; 200x leverage is a double-edged sword |
| Community Feedback | High | Trustpilot 3.5/5; publicly named by the Seychelles FSA; users describe it as “very easy to get in, impossible to get out” |
Overall Rating: High Exit Risk
Bitunix is an extremely unusual case in this series — a contradiction between a “data top student” and a “user nightmare.”
Its risk profile can almost be described as a textbook case of split personality:
A “Regulatory Sticker Map”
AUSTRAC registration + BSP license + two MSB registrations.
Four pieces of the puzzle are put together, yet they still fail to produce a genuine “hard-core financial regulatory license.”
The French AMF blacklist, the Seychelles FSA warning, and Bitunixs absence from the ESMA CASP register are far more significant signals.
A “Withdrawal Nightmare” Script
“Very easy to get in, impossible to get out.”
“Restricted after making money.”
“System failures caused liquidations.”
“Customer service took weeks to respond.”
Taken together, these are the kinds of warning signs that should make users extremely cautious about leaving substantial funds on the platform.
Reserves: “Beautiful but Fragile”
$116.8 million in reserves + an AA rating + ISO certification.
The numbers look almost textbook-perfect.
But if nearly 80% of the reported reserves are held in USDT, concentration risk becomes a concern.
If USDT itself were to experience a major disruption, the resilience of the entire reserve structure could come under pressure.
A “Dual-Track” Team Structure
Arron Lee is presented as the public-facing CEO, while Guo Li has been alleged to be the shadow controlling shareholder.
When the identity and role of an alleged actual controlling person are difficult to independently verify, an obvious question arises:
How much money would you be comfortable entrusting to such an exchange？
A Deeply Polarized Community
Some users praise the platform:
“The app is easy to use.”
Others accuse it of being an:
“exit scam.”
But the key issue is this:
Once you become one of the users who encounters a serious problem, your experience can be completely different.
This is not simply a question of whether Bitunix has a “high exit risk.”
It is the deeper problem of a platform whose public data looks almost perfect while parts of the user experience raise serious concerns.
9. Recommendations for New and Existing Users
For New Users
Enter With Caution
Bitunix is not like UZX or Azbit, where the warning signs may be obvious at first glance.
It has an AA rating, approximately $116.8 million in reported reserves, and AUSTRAC registration.
But the combination of:
Seychelles FSA warning + lack of Tier-1 regulatory oversight + Trustpilot 3.5/5
should give any prospective user serious pause.
Ask yourself:
Are you really willing to make that bet？
If You Insist on Trying It, Test the Entire Process With a Small Amount
Run through the complete cycle:
Deposit → Trade → Withdraw
Pay particular attention to the withdrawal process.
Many of the complaints highlighted on Trustpilot emerged when users attempted to withdraw their funds.
Beware of the “No-KYC” Trap
No KYC during registration can make onboarding extremely fast.
But if KYC suddenly becomes mandatory when you try to withdraw, that is not necessarily “great user experience.”
It can feel more like:
“Let you in first, then raise the barriers when you try to leave.”
Be Extremely Careful With 200x Leverage
On a platform that has faced user complaints alleging system failures and automatic liquidations, 200x leverage should be treated as an accelerator, not a safety net.
At 200x leverage, even a very small adverse price movement can result in liquidation.
For Existing Users
Evaluate Your Exposure
If funds held on Bitunix account for more than 10% of your total crypto assets, consider gradually reducing your exposure.
This does not mean Bitunix will necessarily disappear tomorrow.
The concern is that regulatory uncertainty + withdrawal complaints + offshore operating structures create a combination of risks that should not be ignored.
Test a Withdrawal Now
Try making a withdrawal.
If it works, that provides some evidence that your account is currently functioning normally.
If it does not work, discovering the problem sooner is better than discovering it later when your entire position is at risk.
Dont Treat Bitunix as Your “Core Holdings” Exchange
Bitunix may have an AA security rating and approximately $116.8 million in reported reserves.
But neither of these guarantees that the platform will remain safe in the future.
Dont Deposit Large Amounts
This may be the simplest — and most important — piece of advice.
Keep your exchange exposure proportional to the level of risk you are actually willing to accept.
The Bottom Line
Who Is Bitunix Suitable For？
Users who are willing to bet that a “data top student” will not collapse, as well as existing users who have not experienced withdrawal problems.
Who Is It Not Suitable For？
New users who prioritize strong regulation, security, transparency, and institutional accountability.
Bitunix occupies a strange position in the crypto industry.
Compared with “wild” offshore platforms such as UZX and Azbit, it is arguably far more sophisticated:
AA security rating
Approximately $116.8 million in reported reserves
AUSTRAC registration
ISO certification
Large product portfolio
But compared with more heavily regulated exchanges such as HashKey and Bitvavo, the gap is equally significant:
No clear Tier-1 regulatory oversight
Public warning from the Seychelles FSA
French AMF blacklist
Allegations and complaints from users describing the platform as an “exit scam”
Bitunix is like a “successful businessman” wearing a designer suit, a luxury watch, and driving an expensive car.
But you can never be completely sure:
Maybe the suit is rented.Maybe the watch is fake.Maybe the car is borrowed.
And the scariest part？
Once you hand him your money, he might disappear.
Next Edition Preview
WikiBit Exchange Exit Risk Ranking #21 — WEEX
Stay tuned.
Risk Disclaimer
This article represents an independent analytical opinion only and does not constitute investment advice.
Cryptocurrency investments involve significant risks. Please conduct your own research and exercise caution before investing.
Information in this article was updated on September 8, 2026. Please cross-check and independently verify the latest information through multiple sources before making any decisions.