Introduction: The “Sports Marketing Addict” — Zoomex‘s Two Faces
In the previous 22 editions, we dug into a series of exchanges ranging from HashKey to MGBX. For Episode 23, we’re taking a look at a “sports marketing addict” — Zoomex.
On paper, Zoomex has quite an impressive résumé: “Founded in 2021,” “more than 3 million users across 35+ countries,” “official partnership with the Haas F1 Team,” “Argentine goalkeeper Emiliano Martínez as a brand ambassador,” “Canada MSB + U.S. MSB + U.S. NFA + Australian AUSTRAC registrations,” “Hacken security audit certification,” “1:1 reserve policy with 95% of assets stored offline in cold wallets,” “590+ perpetual contracts,” and the “HackenProof bug bounty program.”
Sounds like a two-engine model of sports marketing + compliance and security, right？
But theres another side to the story.
Frances AMF added Zoomex to its blacklist in June 2024, officially warning that it was “offering crypto services without authorization.”
In April 2026, the Philippines SEC also included Zoomex on its warning list of unlicensed operators.
Its Trustpilot rating is only 2.2/5, with users calling it a “Ponzi” and warning others: “DO NOT PUT YOUR MONEY THERE.”
WikiBit concluded that “the platform currently has no valid crypto regulation,” while users have reported issues such as “accounts being locked,” being “required to pay miner fees before withdrawals,” and “$420,000 being withheld and then getting Ghosted.”
Even more striking, Zoomexs restricted-country list explicitly includes Singapore, Hong Kong, the European Union, and the United States.
So heres the obvious question: how can an exchange that claims to be headquartered in Singapore, yet does not serve Singaporean users, position itself as a compliance-focused rising star while also ending up on the French AMF blacklist？
Today, were going to break it down layer by layer.
1. Regulatory Compliance: Four “Registrations” — Three Are “Stickers,” One Is on a Blacklist
Zoomexs “Compliance Family Package”
Zoomex has gone all-in on compliance marketing.
According to its official press releases and media reports, Zoomex claims:
Canadian MSB registration with FINTRAC
U.S. MSB registration with FinCEN
U.S. NFA registration
Australian AUSTRAC registration
Membership in Koreas CODE VASP alliance
Its official marketing has repeatedly emphasized that it is an exchange with “regulatory licenses in four jurisdictions,” committed to providing a “simple, secure and transparent” trading experience.
But there are problems with every one of these supposed “licenses.”
First: MSB Is an AML Registration, Not a Financial Regulatory License
As we have repeatedly emphasized in the previous 22 editions, U.S. MSB registration with FinCEN is not equivalent to a financial services license.
The registration threshold for an MSB is relatively low. It does not mean that regulators have approved the companys overall business model or verified its solvency.
Canadas MSB registration is essentially the same type of registration.
Putting two MSB “stickers” together does not turn them into a genuine financial regulatory license.
Second: U.S. NFA — Crypto Derivatives Are Not Its Core Regulatory Domain
The NFA primarily oversees areas such as forex dealers and futures-related entities.
Zoomexs core products, however, are crypto perpetual contracts.
The NFAs regulatory authority over these types of products is therefore highly limited.
Third: Australian AUSTRAC — Again, an AML Registration, Not a Financial Services License
AUSTRAC is Australias anti-money-laundering regulator.
Being registered with AUSTRAC means that an entity has been entered into the relevant registration framework. It does not mean that the company holds a financial services license or is subject to comprehensive financial-conduct supervision.
WikiBits assessment is blunt: “The platform currently has no valid crypto regulation.”
Zoomex received only 4.99/10 from WikiBit for safety and regulatory factors.
FXVerify is even more direct in its assessment: “The company currently appears to be unregulated by any government authority.”
Frances AMF: Officially Blacklisted in June 2024
On June 4, 2024, Frances Financial Markets Authority (AMF) officially added zoomex.com to its blacklist of crypto-asset service providers.
The AMF stated that Zoomex was “offering crypto-asset services in France without authorization.” The regulator emphasized: “We recommend that investors do not use this platform because it is not regulated and cannot guarantee the security of investors funds.”
Being officially blacklisted by a financial regulator in a G7 country is not merely a “reminder” — it is a regulatory enforcement action.
Philippines SEC: Unlicensed Operations Warning in April 2026
On April 23, 2026, the Philippine Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued a public warning, listing Zoomex alongside platforms such as dYdX and CoinW among seven crypto platforms “operating in the Philippines without authorization.”
The Philippine SEC explicitly stated in its warning: “These platforms provide services to Philippine investors without obtaining the necessary licenses, exposing investors to the risk of total loss and leaving them without legal recourse.”
An exchange operating without a license in the Philippines means that if something goes wrong, Philippine law may not be able to protect you.
Place of Registration: UK？ Singapore？
WikiBit states that Zoomex is “registered in the UK,” while Zoomex itself claims that its headquarters are located in Singapore.
However, Singapore and Hong Kong are explicitly listed among Zoomexs restricted jurisdictions.
An exchange claiming to be “headquartered in Singapore” while not serving users in Singapore is, in itself, something worth questioning.
Restricted Countries: Half the Planet Cant Use It
Zoomexs restricted-country list includes:
Mainland China
North Korea
Cuba
Iran
Crimea
Sevastopol
Sudan
Syria
Luhansk
United States
Singapore
Hong Kong
European Union
Quebec, Canada
Republic of Seychelles
An exchange “headquartered in Singapore” that prohibits Singaporean users; an exchange “holding a U.S. MSB registration” that prohibits U.S. users; an exchange with “business operations in the EU” that prohibits EU users — make of that compliance logic what you will.
Risk Rating: High Risk
Canada MSB + U.S. MSB + U.S. NFA + Australian AUSTRAC = four “registrations,” but none represents a truly “hard-core” financial regulatory license.
With the France AMF blacklist, Philippines SEC warning, and restricted jurisdictions including Singapore and Hong Kong, Zoomexs compliance profile looks more like a carefully assembled “registration map” than a genuine “regulatory passport.”
2. Account Security & Withdrawals: Small Deposits and Withdrawals Work Smoothly, but Complaints About Risk Controls Blocking Profitable Accounts Are Frequent
Based on publicly available user reports and real-world cases, including the WikiBit complaint database and overseas crypto communities, the main patterns reported include:
Case 1: Large Withdrawals Trigger Mandatory KYC
Some users report that their non-KYC accounts handled routine small deposits and withdrawals smoothly over extended periods.
However, when their derivatives trading generated substantial profits and they attempted to make a large withdrawal, the platform allegedly triggered its risk-control procedures and required a full set of KYC documents and proof of source of funds.
After the documents were submitted, the review process reportedly dragged on indefinitely. Customer support allegedly provided only template responses without giving a clear resolution timeline, leaving the funds stuck in a pending-review status.
Case 2: KYC-Verified Accounts Can Still Have Withdrawal Restrictions
Some KYC-verified users report that after attempting a large one-time withdrawal, the platform classified their accounts as exhibiting an “abnormal trading pattern” and directly suspended withdrawal privileges.
Users alleged that the platform did not provide sufficient evidence explaining the alleged violations, while the appeal process was inefficient.
Case 3: Non-KYC Withdrawal Limits Can Be Changed
Multiple users have reportedly claimed that non-KYC status is not a permanent privilege.
According to these complaints, the platform can unilaterally change withdrawal limits for non-KYC accounts. Once account assets reach a certain threshold, non-KYC withdrawal privileges may be revoked without prior notice.
On-Chain Wallet Tracking and Verification
The platform publicly claims to use multisignature cold wallets to custody user assets, but it does not provide a complete public list of all cold-wallet addresses.
External blockchain analysts can only monitor some publicly disclosed addresses and therefore cannot continuously track the full flow of all custodial funds.
This also makes it difficult to determine whether the assets held in these wallets represent customer funds or the platforms own assets, or to independently verify whether the assets have been pledged as collateral or whether hidden liabilities exist.
A smooth small-value deposit and withdrawal experience can serve as a platforms “showcase window” for building user confidence. The more significant risk may emerge after users generate substantial profits, when risk-control mechanisms can potentially come into play and restrict withdrawals.
Risk Rating: High Risk
3. Reserve Transparency: 1:1 Reserves + 95% Cold Storage + Hacken Audit — But Who Verifies It？
Official Data: Almost Textbook-Perfect
To its credit, Zoomex has invested considerable effort into reserve transparency.
In September 2026, Zoomex launched a “Trust” page publicly disclosing:
1:1 reserve policy: User assets are not treated as operating capital
More than 95% of assets stored offline in cold wallets: Hot-wallet transfers require multiple approvals
Hacken third-party security audit: Covering the web platform, API, and mobile applications
HackenProof bug bounty program
Platform scale metrics, regulatory registration information, and brand partnerships
Zoomex also claims to have completed a security audit conducted by blockchain security company Hacken.
But Where Are the Problems？
First: A Hacken Audit Is a Security Audit, Not a Financial Audit
Hackens audit report dated September 17, 2025 did identify certain security issues related to Zoomex, including “unencrypted storage in HiveDB” and “undeclared strong encryption.”
Hacken examines whether the code contains vulnerabilities and whether the system is secure.
It does not verify how much money the platform actually holds or whether those funds genuinely exist.
Second: A 1:1 Reserve Policy Is a “Statement,” Not an “Audit”
Zoomex claims that “user assets are backed 1:1,” but there does not appear to be an independent third-party verification report confirming its reserves.
Unlike Bitvavo, which has undergone quarterly independent audits by The Network Firm LLP, Zoomexs “1:1 reserves” remain at the level of a self-declared policy rather than independently verified reserves.
Third: 95% Cold Storage — Secure, but Potentially Challenging for Liquidity
Keeping 95% of assets in cold wallets may improve security, but it also raises liquidity considerations.
During extreme market conditions, if a large number of users attempt to withdraw funds simultaneously, the remaining 5% held in hot wallets may not be sufficient to handle immediate demand, potentially resulting in withdrawal delays.
Risk Rating: Medium-High Risk
1:1 reserves + 95% cold storage + Hacken audit + Trust page — on paper, the data looks almost textbook-perfect.
But against the backdrop of the France AMF blacklist and a 2.2/5 Trustpilot rating, even impressive-looking figures deserve independent verification.
A security audit ≠ a financial audit.
A 1:1 reserve policy is a “statement,” not independent verification.
4. Asset Strength: 3 Million Users, 590+ Contracts — Impressive Numbers That Dont Hold Up Under Scrutiny
The Eye-Catching Numbers
More than 3 million users worldwide (officially claimed)
35+ countries
590+ perpetual contracts
Up to 150x leverage
Sub-10-millisecond matching architecture
Unified account structure
Partnerships with the Haas F1 Team and Emiliano Martínez
Zoomex Stocks, a tokenized U.S. stock product
But the Numbers Dont Hold Up Under Scrutiny
First, the user-count figure lacks third-party verification.
The “3 million users” figure comes from Zoomexs own marketing materials. There is no reliable independent third-party platform that has publicly verified this number.
Second, the compliance status of Zoomex Stocks tokenized stocks is questionable.
In June 2026, Zoomex launched tokenized U.S. stock products such as TSLAx and NVDAx, claiming they are “powered by xStocks, a 1:1 asset-backed model compliant with MiFID II standards.”
But Zoomex itself has been blacklisted by Frances AMF and warned against by the Philippines SEC.
If an exchange cannot establish clear regulatory authorization for its core crypto business, how can the regulatory compliance of its tokenized stock products be independently established？
Third, F1 sponsorship ≠ a safety endorsement.
The partnership with the Haas F1 Team and Emiliano Martínez has undoubtedly increased Zoomexs brand visibility.
But sports sponsorship is a marketing activity. It has nothing to do with an exchanges regulatory compliance or financial security.
FTX once sponsored the NBAs Miami Heat as well.
And what happened to FTX？
Fourth, the Seychelles offshore entity does not provide meaningful financial transparency.
An offshore-registered entity in Seychelles is not required to publicly disclose comprehensive financial statements, shareholder information, or net asset data.
As a result, outsiders have virtually no way to independently verify Zoomexs own capital base or cash-flow position.
Fifth, third-party trading-volume monitoring raises questions about the authenticity of reported activity.
Liquidity for major trading pairs appears to be relatively adequate, but order-book depth for many smaller tokens is weak.
There are also concerns about potential wash trading and bot-driven market making, making the platforms true active-user base difficult to determine.
Risk Rating: Medium-High Risk
5. Internal Operations & Team: Amos Z and Jay Hsu — Two Names, But How Much Do We Actually Know？
According to Crunchbase, Zoomex was founded in 2021 by Amos Z and Jay Hsu.
TradingFinder adds that Amos Z is Zoomexs founder and co-CEO, leading the exchange from Singapore and positioning Zoomex as “one of the fastest-growing trading platforms in the Asia-Pacific region,” with a CB Rank of 28.
But where are the problems？
First, “Amos Z” — that isnt even a full name.
An exchange that has supposedly been operating for five years and serving 3 million users — yet the public does not even know the founders full name.
Second, “Jay Hsu” — same problem.
Beyond the name itself, there is almost no publicly available information about his industry background, previous experience, or track record.
Third, “leading the exchange from Singapore” — yet Zoomex prohibits Singaporean users.
An exchange that claims to be “headquartered in Singapore” while prohibiting Singapore users from using its platform raises an obvious question:
What exactly does “headquartered in Singapore” mean？
Fourth, who else is actually running the company？
Apart from Amos Z and Jay Hsu, Zoomexs core team is almost completely “invisible” in the public domain.
There are no substantial LinkedIn profiles, no major industry conference appearances, and no in-depth media interviews that provide meaningful insight into the team.
An exchange backed by F1 sponsorship and Emiliano Martínez, yet whose founders full name is not even publicly disclosed — make of that what you will.
Overall, public sources reveal only a limited number of executive aliases or abbreviated names. Zoomex does not clearly disclose its ultimate controlling party or complete ownership structure.
Its offshore registration structure also makes it more difficult for ordinary users to trace the ultimate beneficial owners behind the platform.
The professional backgrounds presented by the company have likewise not been independently verified by credible third parties.
Risk Rating: High Risk
6. Product Experience & Trading Depth: Fully Featured, but Packed with Red Flags
Product Lineup: It Has Almost Everything
Zoomexs product offering is indeed comprehensive:
Spot trading
Perpetual contracts
590+ contracts
Copy trading
Zoomex Stocks (tokenized U.S. stocks)
Strategy Center
P2P trading
Unified account structure
Sub-10-millisecond matching architecture
But the Red Flags Are Hard to Ignore
First, on a platform like Zoomex — where users have complained about “account locks” and being “Ghosted” after $420,000 was allegedly withheld — high leverage creates another layer of risk.
With leverage as high as 150x, if the platforms risk-control system suddenly flags an account or trading activity, positions can potentially be liquidated extremely quickly.
Second, “No mandatory KYC” can become a trap.
At registration, users may apparently be able to trade without completing full KYC.
But when it comes time to withdraw, KYC requirements can suddenly appear.
That isnt necessarily “great user experience.”
It can feel more like “getting you through the door first, then checking your identity when you try to leave.”
Third, customer support may take up to two weeks to respond to negative reviews.
According to Trustpilot, Zoomex responded to 57% of its negative reviews, with responses typically taking around two weeks.
Two weeks.
In crypto, two weeks is long enough for Bitcoin to move 30% in either direction.
Risk Rating: High Risk
7. Real Community Feedback: 2.2/5 — “Ponzi” Complaints Everywhere
Trustpilot: 2.2/5
Zoomex has a Trustpilot rating of only 2.2/5.
The core allegations raised by users include:
“Ponzi! Ponzi!! They took my $420,000 and then Ghosted me.”
“Do not put your money there, no matter what.”
“After I deposited fiat and tried to withdraw, my account was blocked for ‘violating the terms of service,’ but they provided no transparency whatsoever.”
“They refused to return more than $10,000 of my money. They gave me no specific reason and simply took my money.”
Third-Party Platforms: Red Lights Everywhere
FXVerify: “The company currently appears to be unregulated by any government authority.”
WikiBit: “Regulatory licenses are questionable, with medium-level risk concerns,” accompanied by a very low overall rating.
BrokerChooser: Zoomex is “not a trustworthy service provider.”
France AMF: Added Zoomex to its blacklist.
Philippines SEC: Issued a warning over unlicensed operations.
Positive Reviews？ Possibly PR-Driven
There are indeed some positive reviews on Trustpilot, praising things such as “fast trading speeds” and a “user-friendly interface.”
However, given the overall Trustpilot score of just 2.2/5, combined with the platforms extensive promotional campaigns featuring claims such as “$280,000 successfully withdrawn,” these positive reviews should be interpreted cautiously.
They may reflect survivorship bias, promotional activity, or potentially incentivized reviews, rather than providing conclusive evidence of overall platform reliability.
Risk Rating: Extremely High Risk
8. Comprehensive Exit Risk Assessment
| Dimension | Risk Level | Summary |
| Regulatory Compliance | High | Four registrations across MSB/NFA/AUSTRAC jurisdictions are registrations, not genuine financial licenses; blacklisted by France‘s AMF and warned against by the Philippines SEC |
| Account Security / Withdrawals | Extremely High | Small deposits and withdrawals may be smooth, but complaints about risk controls blocking profitable accounts and restricting large withdrawals are frequent |
| Reserve Transparency | Medium-High | 1:1 reserves + 95% cold storage + Hacken audit, but a security audit ≠ a financial audit |
| Asset Strength | Medium-High | 3 million users + F1 sponsorship + Emiliano Martínez endorsement, but the figures lack independent third-party verification |
| Team & Operations | High | Founder “Amos Z” is publicly identified only by an abbreviated name; claims of being “headquartered in Singapore” conflict with the platform’s ban on Singapore users |
| Product Experience | High | Withdrawal fees are reportedly excessive; customer support may take up to two weeks to respond |
| Community Feedback | Extremely High | Trustpilot 2.2/5; widespread “Ponzi” allegations; warnings from both Frances AMF and the Philippines SEC |
Overall Rating: High Exit Risk
Zoomex now joins Azbit, FameEX, CoinUp, BiFinance, OrangeX, Hibt, BVOX, and MGBX as one of the highest-risk exchanges in this series. The “high-risk club” continues to expand.
Its risk profile can be described as a textbook case of contradictions:
1. Regulatory “registrations” are not “licenses.”Canada MSB + U.S. MSB + U.S. NFA + Australian AUSTRAC — stack all four “registrations” together and you still cannot manufacture a genuine “hard-core financial regulatory license.” The France AMF blacklist and Philippines SEC warning tell a very different story.
2. The withdrawal “pig-butchering” script.“Ghosted after $420,000,” “pay miner fees to withdraw,” “template responses for amounts exceeding $10,000” — each of these allegations resembles a classic advance-fee scam pattern. However, individual user complaints alone do not prove that the platform is operating a scam.
3. The team is difficult to verify.The founder is publicly identified as “Amos Z,” without a clearly disclosed full name, while “Jay Hsu” likewise has very limited publicly verifiable background information. An exchange backed by F1 sponsorship and an Emiliano Martínez endorsement, yet offering so little transparency about its founders, deserves scrutiny.
4. F1 sponsorship ≠ a safety endorsement.The partnership with Haas F1 and Emiliano Martínez is a marketing activity and has no direct bearing on the platforms regulatory compliance or financial safety. FTX also sponsored an NBA team.
5. The restricted-country list raises obvious questions.Zoomex claims to be “headquartered in Singapore,” yet prohibits Singaporean users. It holds a U.S. MSB registration while prohibiting U.S. users. Whatever you make of that compliance logic, it deserves careful examination.
This is not simply a question of “high exit risk.”
It is the broader contradiction of an exchange that has F1 sponsorship and an Emiliano Martínez endorsement, yet has been blacklisted by Frances AMF.
9. Recommendations for New and Existing Users
For New Users
Stay away.
Trustpilot 2.2/5 + France AMF blacklist + Philippines SEC warning + allegations of “being Ghosted after $420,000” — that is more than enough warning signs. Why take the risk？
If you have already registered but have not deposited funds, the prudent move is to walk away and avoid making any deposits to Zoomex.
Be especially cautious about the F1 sponsorship and Emiliano Martínez endorsement. Sports sponsorship is a marketing strategy, not proof of platform safety. FTX also sponsored an NBA team.
Use only the verified official domain when checking Zoomex. Be aware that impersonation or phishing websites may exist. For example, Zoemux.com has reportedly been flagged as low trust.
But honestly, the bigger question is not simply whether you are using the real website or a fake one — the underlying platform risk deserves attention regardless.
For Existing Users
Immediately reassess your exposure.
If funds held on Zoomex account for more than 5% of your total assets, consider reducing your exposure and attempting a withdrawal as soon as practical.
Test a withdrawal now.
A successful withdrawal does not prove that the platform is safe, but it confirms that your account is currently able to process withdrawals. If a problem occurs, discovering it sooner is better than discovering it later.
If you cannot withdraw, stop paying for “unlocking” services.
“Miner fees,” “processing fees,” “verification fees” or similar additional payments should be treated with extreme caution. If a platform is demanding additional funds before releasing your existing assets, do not keep sending money simply because you are promised that the next payment will unlock your withdrawal.
Monitor regulatory developments.
Frances AMF has already blacklisted Zoomex, and the Philippines SEC has issued a warning. If regulators in additional major jurisdictions take similar action, Zoomex could face even greater operational and compliance pressure.
Do not deposit another dollar.
This may be the simplest — and most important — advice.
Ultimate Recommendation
Zoomex is not suitable for users who prioritize capital safety and regulatory transparency.
It has F1 sponsorship, an Emiliano Martínez endorsement, a Hacken security audit, and a stated 1:1 reserve policy.
But the most important questions remain unresolved: Where is the genuine financial regulatory authorization？ How transparent is the team？ And how reliable is the withdrawal channel under stress？
An exchange that has been blacklisted by Frances AMF, warned against by the Philippines SEC, has a Trustpilot rating of only 2.2/5, and publicly identifies its founder merely as “Amos Z” deserves a very high level of scrutiny.
Make of that what you will.
Coming Next
WikiBit Exchange Exit Risk Ranking #24 — Hotcoin Exchange. Stay tuned!
Risk Warning: This article represents an independent analytical opinion only and does not constitute investment advice. Cryptocurrency investments involve substantial risk. Please exercise caution and conduct your own due diligence before investing.
Information in this article was updated on September 11, 2026. For the latest information, please cross-check and independently verify relevant information through multiple sources.