Introduction: The A and B Sides of a “Living Fossil” in Crypto
Over the first 16 editions, we dug into a series of exchanges ranging from HashKey to Hibt. Today, in the 17th edition, we turn to a genuine crypto “old-timer” — BigONE.
Its résumé reads like a “living fossil” of the crypto industry: “Founded in 2017,” “the original Yunbi team,” “co-founded by Li Xiaolai and Old Cat (Yu Wenzhuo),” “incubated by INBlockchain (InBlockchain Capital),” “ranked No. 40 globally on CoinMarketCap,” “nine years of operating history,” and “approximately $426 million in Proof of Reserves (PoR).”
Sounds like a veteran, legitimate crypto institution, right？
But on the other side of the story — Japans Financial Services Agency (FSA) has repeatedly warned and cracked down on it for “continuing to operate without obtaining a license despite receiving multiple warnings.”
On September 2, 2026, the Korea Digital Asset Exchange Alliance (DAXA) found that BigONE was allegedly operating in South Korea without registration and called for a police investigation.
CoinPaprika labels it “not MiCA compliant,” with a confidence score of only 5.76%. WikiBit describes it as operating under “loose regulation.” CoinGecko gives it a Trust Score of 5/10, while Trustpilot rates it just 2/5.
In July 2025, BigONE suffered a supply-chain attack that resulted in losses of more than $27 million. On-chain investigator ZachXBT accused it of processing more than $60 million in scam-related transactions over a consecutive seven-month period.
Users have also complained that they were asked to pay a “20% tax” to withdraw funds, that their accounts were locked, and that a €12,000 investment had turned into a balance of 74,000 USDT on paper — but could not actually be withdrawn.
So how did a crypto industry veteran become a “regular” on regulatory blacklists？
Today, we dig into the story layer by layer.
1. Regulatory Compliance: From FSA Crackdowns in Japan to DAXA Enforcement in South Korea — A Collector‘s Guide to the “Blacklist”
Japan’s FSA: Repeated Warnings, Followed by a Crackdown
BigONEs regulatory history can be traced back to 2018.
In June that year, Japans Financial Services Agency (FSA) took action against several unregistered cryptocurrency exchanges. Huobi and BigONE announced their withdrawal from the Japanese market on the same day.
But the story did not end there.
In February 2025, Japans FSA once again cracked down on five cryptocurrency exchanges, including BitTrade (BigONE).
The FSA‘s announcement was explicit: under Japan’s Payment Services Act, cryptocurrency exchanges must obtain an FSA license if they want to provide cryptocurrency trading and custody services in Japan.
These exchanges had reportedly received multiple warnings but continued operating without obtaining the required licenses, prompting the FSA to take further action.
“Multiple warnings,” “still no license,” and “continued operating.”
This is not simply a case of “the license application is still pending.” It raises the much more serious question of knowingly continuing operations despite regulatory warnings.
South Koreas DAXA: September 2, 2026 — The Latest Heavy Blow
On September 2, 2026, DAXA, the Digital Asset Exchange Alliance of South Korea, identified four foreign virtual asset businesses allegedly operating in South Korea without registration and called for police investigations.
Among the exchanges named was “Big One.”
This was not merely a “warning.” It was a request for a police investigation.
In South Korea, conducting virtual asset business without the required registration may result in criminal penalties.
Other Regulatory Statuses: Red Lights Everywhere
CoinPaprika: Clearly labels BigONE as “not MiCA compliant,” with a confidence score of only 5.76%.
WikiBit: Describes it as operating under “loose regulation” and advises users to be cautious, with a compliance risk score of just 5.86.
CertiK Security Rating: “No license, no certification.” Restricted/prohibited countries include Cuba, North Korea, Syria, Iran, China, and Iraq.
FXVerify states: “The company currently appears to be unregulated by any government authority.”
Place of Registration: Seychelles — Another “Offshore Shell”
CoinGecko shows that BigONE was founded in 2017 and registered in Seychelles. The company itself also confirms that “BigONE is a global cryptocurrency exchange registered in Seychelles.”
What is Seychelles？ We have seen it far too many times in the previous 16 editions — UZX, Azbit, Deepcoin, FameEX, OrangeX… all registered in Seychelles.
Seychelles is not regulation. It is a “regulatory vacuum.”
Risk Rating: High Risk
Japanese FSA crackdown + South Korean DAXA police investigation + Seychelles registration + “not MiCA compliant” + no license or certification — BigONEs compliance record looks like a “regulatory blacklist” stretching across Asia, Europe, and Africa.
For an established exchange founded in 2017, operating for nine years without obtaining a meaningful regulatory license is, in itself, one of the biggest risk signals.
2. Account Freezes & Withdrawals: Trustpilot 2/5 — “Pay a 20% Tax Before You Can Withdraw”
BigONE has a rating of just 2/5 on Trustpilot — “Bad.”
“€12,000 Became 74,000 USDT, But It Couldnt Be Withdrawn”
This is one of the most alarming complaints:
“My friend invested €12,000, and the account showed a total balance of 74,000 USDT. But when trying to transfer the funds back, there were countless problems. Apparently, the full amount could not be transferred back and a 20% ‘tax’ had to be deducted first… but somehow that still didn‘t work. In the end, he was told that he had to pay 20% tax in advance to a certain wallet before the withdrawal would take effect. This is pure fraud! My friend can’t even access the app anymore. All functions have been locked!”
A €12,000 investment allegedly turned into 74,000 USDT on the account — roughly a sixfold return.
But when the user tried to withdraw, they were allegedly told to pay a 20% “tax” first. Even after that, the funds still could not be withdrawn, and the account was eventually locked.
“187 USDT Was Transferred to an Unknown Scam Wallet”
Another complaint states:
“I transferred 187 USDT to BigONE, bought USHA and placed a sell order. A few months later, when I checked my account, my sell order had disappeared from the spot account, and the 187 USDT had been transferred to an unknown scam Tron wallet. From this scam wallet, my funds were transferred to another scam wallet worth approximately 993,000 USDT. BigONE did not help me and kept saying it was my fault. But I wasn‘t even logged in at the time, and I wasn’t hacked.”
The users assets allegedly “walked away” from the platform on their own — while the platform reportedly neither provided an explanation nor offered compensation, instead insisting that “it was your fault.”
Cryptos “Internal Affairs Investigator” ZachXBT: Seven Consecutive Months of Processing Scam Funds
In July 2025, on-chain investigator ZachXBT publicly accused BigONE of processing at least $60 million in scam-related funds through a deposit address over a consecutive seven-month period.
The transactions allegedly involved pig-butchering scams, romance scams, and investment fraud.
Another address associated with BigONE reportedly received an additional $4.5 million in similar scam-related funds within the preceding week.
ZachXBTs response was blunt:
“I have no sympathy for this team… they used the same account for seven months.”
BigONE responded that it had frozen some of the stolen funds and was cooperating with law enforcement.
However, ZachXBT quickly pushed back, arguing that BigONE had failed to take action while scam activity had been flowing through its platform for months.
On-Chain Wallet Tracking: Key Findings
BigONE regularly publishes snapshots of its hot and cold wallet addresses. Small spot withdrawals have complete and verifiable on-chain transaction hashes.
In July 2025, approximately $27 million in assets were stolen in a supply-chain attack targeting a hot wallet. BigONE subsequently took timely measures to contain the losses and reportedly compensated users in full. The underlying assets in cold wallets were not compromised, indirectly supporting the effectiveness of its cold-storage isolation architecture.
Wallet addresses associated with contract margin and locked-yield/earn products have not been made fully transparent and traceable.
Risk Rating: High Risk
3. Proof of Reserve Transparency: $426 Million in PoR — But Who Verified It？
BigONE has begun publishing monthly Merkle-tree Proof of Reserves (PoR) snapshots and has introduced a third-party organization for verification.
However, the level of detail in the reserve reports remains limited. Spot, derivatives, and earn-product funds are not fully disclosed separately. Community analysts have also questioned the depth of the verification process, meaning that real-time verification of the platforms assets remains impossible.
Total Assets Under Management: Approximately $426.089 Million
Bitcoin (BTC): 96.15%
Tether (USDT): 1.93%
Ethereum (ETH): 1.09%
Platform Token ONE: 0.82%
But there are several problems.
First: Who Is the “Independent Audit Firm”？
None of the publicly available materials clearly identifies a specific auditing firm.
Bitvavo has The Network Firm LLP. Coincheck has engaged one of the Big Four accounting firms.
So where exactly is BigONEs “independent audit firm”？
Second: Monthly Snapshots Are Static
The PoR snapshots are published monthly. During the periods between snapshots, changes in assets and liabilities cannot be continuously monitored, particularly when the market experiences sharp volatility.
Third: No Independent, Dedicated User-Asset Insurance Fund
BigONE has not established a clearly independent and dedicated insurance compensation fund specifically designed to protect user assets.
Fourth: Not All Locked-Yield/Earn Assets Are Fully Covered by Reserves
Assets allocated to locked-yield and earn products have not been fully incorporated into the disclosed reserve coverage.
Risk Rating: Medium-High Risk
4. Asset Strength: Ranked No. 40 on CMC, But the Numbers Dont Add Up
The Impressive Numbers
CoinMarketCap global ranking: No. 40
24-hour trading volume: Approximately $907 million, according to CMC
Coins: 114–120
Trading pairs: 504–521
Founded: 2017, with nine years of operating history
Monthly page views: Approximately 7.37 million
But the Numbers Dont Stand Up to Scrutiny
The data is highly inconsistent.
CoinMarketCap reports approximately $907 million in 24-hour trading volume, while CoinPaprika says BigONE reports 24-hour trading volume of $999,819,500.00, but estimates the actual trading volume at only $78,910,754.0.
That is a difference of more than tenfold.
There have also been historical incidents in which third-party organizations reportedly exposed fake trading-volume practices, with artificially inflated transaction volumes generated over short periods. As a result, the platforms underlying real liquidity has remained subject to long-term market scrutiny.
In addition:
- There is no recent publicly disclosed fundraising endorsement from major top-tier venture capital firms.
- Complete financial statements, including revenue and liabilities, are not publicly disclosed.
- Although the $27 million hacking incident was reportedly fully compensated, the event inevitably consumed a significant amount of the platforms risk reserves, potentially reducing its ability to withstand liquidity stress.
Risk Rating: Medium-High Risk
5. Internal Operations & Team: Li Xiaolai and “Old Cats” Crypto “Powerhouse” Lineup
Founders: An All-Star Cast from the Early Crypto Industry
BigONEs founding team is arguably one of the most high-profile lineups in the history of the crypto industry:
Li Xiaolai: One of Chinas earliest crypto evangelists and an early investor in projects such as EOS and Bitmain.
Old Cat (Yu Wenzhuo): Co-founder of Yunbi, co-founder of INBlockchain, and former CEO of BigONE.
INBlockchain (InBlockchain Capital): Founded by Li Xiaolai and Old Cat, and one of Asias earliest blockchain investment firms.
Core team from Yunbi: BigONEs early team came largely from Yunbi, which was once described as the “No. 1 cryptocurrency exchange in the world.”
Current Management Team
According to RootData:
Ian Tian: CEO; previously a technology partner at INBlockchain and a graduate of Nankai University.
Jun Cheng: Former COO (now departed); currently the founder of UNIBLOCK.
Arrietty Yang: Chief Marketing Officer; holds a masters degree in sociology from Yunnan Normal University.
Athena Miao: Chief Business Officer; graduated from the National University of Singapore.
Daniel: Vice President of Asset Management.
Ethen Yu: Vice President of Engineering.
The Shadow Behind the Halo
First: How Much Is the “Li Xiaolai + Old Cat” Halo Still Worth？
Li Xiaolai has remained a controversial figure in the crypto industry in recent years, from the infamous “recording scandal” to questions surrounding various projects.
Although Old Cat remains something of a “spiritual figurehead” for BigONE, he is no longer serving as CEO.
When a founder steps away from an exchange, the question naturally follows:
Who is actually setting the strategic direction？
Second: CoinGecko Gives the Team Just 0.5/10
CoinGecko gives BigONE a team score of only 0.5/10.
Its evaluation criterion is whether “senior leadership team members have publicly available profiles that can be verified through credible sources.”
A score of 0.5 effectively means the teams transparency barely passes the threshold.
For an exchange that has been operating for nine years, why is its team transparency still rated at just 0.5/10？
Risk Rating: Medium Risk
Li Xiaolai + Old Cat + the original Yunbi team — the founding team certainly has an impressive pedigree.
But the founders‘ withdrawal from day-to-day leadership, uncertainty surrounding the CEO information, and CoinGecko’s extremely low 0.5/10 team score are all weakening the credibility of BigONEs supposedly “elite” lineup.
6. Product Experience & Trading Depth: Feature-Rich, But the User Experience of This “Old-Timer” Leaves Much to Be Desired
Product Line: Almost Everything Is There
BigONE does indeed offer a broad range of products:
Spot trading: 114–120 cryptocurrencies and 504–521 trading pairs
Perpetual contracts
Leveraged ETFs: 3x long/short products
Asset management, staking, and PoS mining pools
Lending services
BigONE Card: A crypto payment card supporting WeChat Pay, Alipay, and Apple Pay, with a daily limit of up to $50,000
Proprietary Cowpresso matching engine
But the Complaints Are Hard to Ignore
First: Withdrawals Are a Major Pain Point
The negative reviews on Trustpilot and Google Play overwhelmingly focus on withdrawals:
“Slow reviews,” “accounts locked,” and “being asked to pay taxes.”
Second: Poor KYC Experience
A Google Play user complained:
“During registration, it makes you think that you only need email verification to trade, but when you try to withdraw, you discover that full KYC is required, and then you have to wait several days.”
In other words, the platform may appear easy to get started with — until you actually try to withdraw your funds.
Third: Customer Support Quality Is Questionable
One Trustpilot user wrote:
“Customer service uses a bunch of fake names (Shelly, Abby, Ella, Laura, Betty…), and when responding, they just use standard scripted questions while completely ignoring everything mentioned previously.”
Risk Rating: Medium Risk
No matter how long the product list is, or how flashy the BigONE Card may look, it cannot hide the two core problems:
Difficult withdrawals + poor customer support.
For a “veteran” exchange that has been operating for nine years, the user experience appears, according to these complaints, to remain at a level more commonly associated with obscure or low-quality platforms.
7. Real Community Feedback: Trustpilot 2/5 — “SCAM” Everywhere
BigONE has a rating of just 2/5 on Trustpilot.
The core allegations in the negative reviews are remarkably consistent:
“They require you to pay a 20% tax before withdrawing. Even after paying, you still cant withdraw, and eventually the account gets locked — pure scam!”
“Scam exchange. Stay away. They refuse to tell users that certain contracts are unsupported. More than a year later, they still refuse to add a simple warning, causing users to lose money.”
“BigONE did not help me and kept saying it was my fault. But I wasn‘t even logged in at the time, and I wasn’t hacked.”
ZachXBT: “Processing Scam Funds for Seven Consecutive Months”
The allegations made by on-chain investigator ZachXBT may be the most damaging.
This is not merely a user complaint — it involves on-chain evidence.
According to the allegations, a single address processed at least $60 million in scam-related funds over seven consecutive months.
That raises a much more serious question than an isolated customer-service complaint:
Why did the platform allegedly continue processing funds linked to scams for such an extended period？
South Koreas DAXA: Latest Enforcement Action on September 2, 2026
Just days ago, on September 2, 2026, South Koreas DAXA reportedly identified Big One as allegedly operating without the required registration and called for a police investigation.
Risk Rating: High Risk
8. Comprehensive Exit Scam Risk Assessment
| Dimension | Risk Level | Summary |
| Regulatory Compliance | High | Japanese FSA crackdown + South Korean DAXA police investigation + Seychelles registration + “not MiCA compliant” |
| Account Freezes / Withdrawals | High | Trustpilot 2/5; “pay a 20% tax before withdrawing”; ZachXBT allegations of processing scam-related funds |
| Reserve Transparency | Medium-High | Claims $426 million in PoR but does not identify the auditing firm; CoinGecko shows “data unavailable” |
| Asset Strength | Medium-High | Ranked No. 40 on CMC, but data is highly inconsistent; confidence score only 5.76%; asset scale significantly smaller than major competitors |
| Team & Operations | Medium | Impressive Li Xiaolai + Old Cat pedigree, but founders have stepped away, CEO information is unclear, and the team score is only 0.5/10 |
| Product Experience | Medium | Broad product lineup, but difficult withdrawals, poor customer support, and a problematic KYC experience |
| Community Feedback | High | Trustpilot 2/5; ZachXBT allegations; regulatory pressure from both Japan and South Korea |
Overall Rating: Medium-High Exit Scam Risk
BigONE is an extremely unusual case in this series — an “old-timer” inside the high-risk club.
Its risk profile is fundamentally different from “shady” platforms such as UZX, Azbit, and FameEX.
It Has an “Elite” Background
Li Xiaolai, Old Cat, the original Yunbi team, and incubation by INBlockchain — this is not a shell company whose founders are impossible to identify.
It Has Nine Years of Operating History
Founded in 2017, BigONE has survived the 2017 crackdown, the March 12 crash, and the FTX collapse.
This is not a short-lived platform that disappears after three months.
It Has Real Assets
Approximately $426 million in claimed PoR and a No. 40 ranking on CoinMarketCap — this is not an empty shell with zero assets.
But Here Is the Problem —
The regulatory “blacklist” keeps getting longer.
Japanese FSA crackdown → South Korean DAXA police investigation → “not MiCA compliant” → CertiKs “no license, no certification.”
After nine years, BigONE still has not secured a meaningful regulatory license.
The allegations involving scam funds did not come out of nowhere.
ZachXBTs on-chain evidence allegedly shows that $60 million in scam-related funds flowed through BigONE over a seven-month period.
BigONE responded that it had “frozen some of the funds.”
But the question remains:
Why did it allegedly take seven months for action to be taken？
User fund security is also a major concern.
“Pay a 20% tax before withdrawing,” “funds transferred out of the account on their own,” and Google Play users calling it a scam — these are not simply complaints about poor user experience.
They raise questions about fund security itself.
The founders halo is also fading.
Li Xiaolai remains a controversial figure, while Old Cat is no longer CEO.
The once-glamorous “powerhouse lineup” may increasingly exist more as a legacy brand than as an active management advantage.
This is not simply a question of whether BigONE has a “high risk of disappearing.”
It is the story of a once-glorious crypto veteran that appears to be sliding toward the abyss.
9. Recommendations for New and Existing Users
For New Users
Enter With Extreme Caution
BigONE is not like UZX or Azbit — platforms that may look suspicious at first glance.
It has history, a recognizable background, and substantial reported assets.
But Japanese FSA enforcement + the South Korean DAXA investigation + ZachXBTs allegations create three major red flags.
Are you really willing to make that bet？
If you insist on trying the platform, start with a small amount and test the entire process:
Deposit → Trade → Withdraw
Pay particular attention to withdrawals.
Many of the complaints on Trustpilot emerged precisely when users attempted to withdraw their funds.
Watch Out for “High-Yield” Traps
BigONE offers products including staking, PoS mining pools, and leveraged ETFs.
If a platform has been accused of processing scam-related funds, would you really want to entrust your money to its “high-yield” products？
For Existing Users
Evaluate Your Exposure
If more than 10% of your total assets are held on BigONE, consider gradually reducing your exposure.
Not because BigONE is necessarily going to disappear tomorrow, but because regulatory risks are accumulating.
Japan has already taken action.
South Korea is investigating.
Who could be next？
Try a Small Withdrawal Now
Make a small withdrawal test today.
If it works, that at least indicates that withdrawals are functioning for your account at the moment.
If it does not, discovering the problem early is far better than discovering it after your position has grown larger.
Monitor Regulatory Developments
South Koreas DAXA has already called for a police investigation.
If South Korean authorities formally prosecute or take further enforcement action against BigONE, the exchange could face even greater liquidity pressure.
Dont Treat BigONE as Your Core Holding Platform
BigONE has nine years of history and an impressive founding pedigree.
But neither guarantees future safety.
When regulatory crackdowns and allegations involving scam-related funds enter the picture, history alone is not enough.
Dont Deposit Large Amounts Anymore
This may be the simplest — and most important — piece of advice.
The Bottom Line
Who Is BigONE Suitable For？
Long-time users willing to bet that an established “old-timer” will not collapse, as well as veteran crypto users who continue to have strong faith in Li Xiaolai and Old Cat.
Who Is It NOT Suitable For？
New users who prioritize regulatory compliance, security, and transparency.
BigONE is in an awkward position.
It may be 100 times stronger than platforms such as UZX and Azbit — it has history, a recognizable background, and substantial assets.
But it may also be 100 times weaker than compliant, regulated exchanges such as HashKey and Bitvavo — it lacks meaningful licensing, has faced regulatory enforcement, and has been accused of processing scam-related funds.
BigONE is like an old hotel that was once prestigious:
The décor is outdated.
The service has deteriorated.
The guests are leaving.
Yet the owner is still insisting:
“Weve been in business for nine years!”
But the real question is:
In crypto, can nine years of history really pay the bills？
Coming Next
WikiBit Exchange Exit Scam Risk List — No. 18: Poloniex — Stay Tuned!
Risk Disclaimer
This article represents personal analytical views only and does not constitute investment advice. Cryptocurrency investments involve significant risks. Please exercise caution before investing.
Information in this article was updated on September 4, 2026. Please cross-check and verify the latest information through multiple sources before making any decisions.
