WikiBit Exchange Exit Risk Ranking #26: Biconomy — The “Compliant Exchange” on Canada’s Blacklist, as the “High-Risk Exchange Club” Continues to Expand!

Introduction: A “Self-Proclaimed” Compliant Exchange

In the first 25 editions, we investigated a series of exchanges ranging from HashKey to CoinEx. For the 26th edition, we are taking a closer look at one of the most confusing cases in terms of identity — Biconomy.com.

First, lets clear up one thing: there are two “Biconomy” projects in the crypto industry.

One is Biconomy.io, a Web3 cross-chain infrastructure protocol. It has a publicly identified team, legitimate financing, investment from Coinbase Ventures, and backing from Polygons COO. It has nothing to do with exchange operations.

The other is Biconomy.com, which describes itself as a “global cryptocurrency exchange,” was established in 2019, and operates through the biconomy.com domain.

The subject of todays investigation is the latter.

On paper, its profile sounds impressive: “registered with the Securities Commission Malaysia,” “US MSB + Canadian FINTRAC MSB registrations,” “serving more than 1 million traders worldwide,” “independent third-party custody,” and “support for Malaysian Ringgit (MYR) deposits and withdrawals.”

Sounds like the typical setup of a “regulated Southeast Asian crypto exchange,” right？

But there is another side to the story.

On April 5, 2024, the Alberta Securities Commission (ASC) in Canada officially placed it on its investor alert list, citing the provision of financial services by an “unregistered/unlicensed entity.”

WikiBit gives it a score of 4.99/10, stating directly that the platform currently has no valid crypto-asset regulatory oversight. Trustpilot shows a rating of 3.1/5, with one-star reviews accounting for 49% of the total, while some users have explicitly described it as a “SCAM EXCHANGE.” CoinPaprika gives it a confidence score of 0.00%.

So how can an exchange that claims to be “registered with the Securities Commission Malaysia” end up being blacklisted by a Canadian regulator？

Lets break it down layer by layer.

1. Regulatory Compliance: “Registered in Malaysia” vs. “Blacklisted in Canada” — Two Conflicting Narratives

The “Compliance Package” Promoted by Its Official Channels

Biconomy.com states on Google Play and its official website:

“Biconomy exchange is a digital asset exchange operator registered with the Securities Commission Malaysia. We maintain a 100% clean record with no security or compliance issues.”

Alberta Securities Commission: Officially Blacklisted on April 5, 2024

On April 5, 2024, the Alberta Securities Commission (ASC) officially added Biconomy Ltd., the entity operating the biconomy.com domain, to its investor alert list.

The reason given was:

“Unregistered/unlicensed entity providing financial products or services.”

The ASC warning explicitly states that Biconomy Ltd. is not regulated by the ASC and may not be legally authorized to provide financial services in Alberta.

TradersUnion experts have characterized the platform as “Not Recommended — may be an unregulated or high-risk entity.”

When a provincial securities regulator in Canada puts an exchange on its investor alert list, this goes beyond a simple consumer reminder—it is a formal regulatory warning.

What Does “Registered in Malaysia” Actually Mean？

Biconomy.com claims to be “registered with the Securities Commission Malaysia.” However, several points need to be clarified.

First, “registered” and “licensed” are not necessarily the same thing.

The Securities Commission Malaysia (SC) has different regulatory requirements and statuses for digital-asset businesses. Basic registration or corporate registration should not automatically be interpreted as authorization to provide all forms of regulated financial services.

Biconomy.com describes itself as a “registered operator,” but it has not provided a specific license number or clear regulatory authorization document to substantiate the claim.

Second, Biconomy does not appear on the publicly listed regulated-operator information published by the Malaysian Securities Commission.

For an exchange claiming to be “regulated by the Malaysian SC,” the absence of Biconomy from the regulators publicly available regulated-entity information raises a significant question over what exactly the claimed “registration” represents.

In other words, there is a substantial difference between saying “we are registered” and demonstrating that a financial regulator has actually authorized and supervises the exchanges activities.

WikiBit gives Biconomy a 4.99/10 rating and states directly that the platform currently has no valid crypto-asset regulatory oversight.

Registration Location: Canada？ Malaysia？

Crunchbase shows Biconomy.com as founded by Dmitriy Sheludko, who serves as CEO, with the company headquartered in Canada. The company claims to be “licensed to operate in the United States and Canada.”

However, the developer information on Google Play lists “BIC CORPORATE SDN. BHD.”, with an address in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. The email address is dev@biconomy.my, and the phone number is Malaysian.

An exchange whose official website says its headquarters are in Canada, whose app store information identifies the company as being in Malaysia, which claims to be “registered with the Malaysian SC,” but is blacklisted by the Alberta Securities Commission in Canada — so where exactly is it regulated？

Risk Rating: High Risk

2. Account Security & Withdrawals: Complaints Center on Withdrawal Reviews and Account Freezes, While On-Chain Wallets Cannot Be Fully Verified

Across WikiBits complaint section and multiple crypto communities, complaints about Biconomy mainly fall into two categories:

Withdrawal Restrictions After Profits

Multiple users report that small deposits and modest profits can generally be withdrawn without major problems.

However, once an account generates substantial profits or a large withdrawal is requested, the platform may trigger manual risk controls and demand extensive additional KYC documentation, including selfies holding identification documents and proof of source of funds.

Review periods reportedly stretch from 1–3 days to more than a week. Some users say their documents were repeatedly rejected even after multiple submissions, leaving them unable to complete withdrawals.

Accounts Frozen Without Clear Explanation

Some users report that their accounts were restricted from both trading and withdrawals after engaging in arbitrage between platforms.

Customer service reportedly provides only a generic explanation such as “abnormal trading” without supplying detailed on-chain evidence. Response times are also reportedly slow, with customer-service accounts sometimes failing to respond to private messages in community channels for several days.

On-Chain Wallet Tracking

Biconomys official website does not maintain a long-term public list of its total cold-wallet addresses and only occasionally discloses fragments of wallet addresses.

Researchers attempting to track publicly disclosed deposit aggregation addresses found that platform funds were distributed across multiple addresses and frequently transferred to other small and medium-sized exchanges. This makes it difficult to independently verify whether cold-wallet reserves correspond to outstanding user liabilities.

Once the platform changes withdrawal permissions on its backend, users can only passively wait for the platform to approve their withdrawals. Users do not control the private keys, meaning the security of their assets ultimately depends on the platform.

Real User Feedback

The Complaint Pattern Looks Like a “Textbook” Pig-Butchering Scam

Biconomy.coms Trustpilot rating varies by region, ranging from 3.1/5 to 3.7/5. However, the content of many negative reviews is highly consistent, with several complaints describing what users characterize as a “textbook” pig-butchering scam pattern.

“I Deposited 1,500 USDT but Only Received 370 USDT”

One user provided a detailed account on Trustpilot:

“I transferred 1500 USDT to Biconomy to buy coins. They only credited me with 370 USDT worth of coins. When I contacted ‘customer service’ for an explanation, they refused to help and repeatedly told me to contact the ‘project team’ — which made no sense because I bought the coins on their platform. They refused to explain where the remaining money went and then stopped responding to all my messages.”

Deposit 1,500 USDT, receive only 370 USDT worth of assets — meaning approximately 75% of the funds allegedly disappeared without explanation.

“Withdrawals Disabled, User Threatened With Legal Action”

Another user described an even more serious experience:

“Today I discovered that my withdrawal function had been disabled. Customer service claimed that I had used software to conduct ‘illegal trading’ and generate ‘illegal profits’ (which is completely false — I have never used any trading bots or automated software). They said they needed five business days to investigate. While blocking withdrawals, they continued allowing deposits into my account.”

The user also claimed that customer support sent the following message:

“We can allow you to withdraw your deposited principal, but not the main profits or illegal profits. If the activity is repeated, your account will be banned and your data will be transferred to the tax authorities in your country... If there is any negative information or defamatory content about this situation on social networks, the exchange intends to take legal action against you for defamation and false information.”

Withdrawal restrictions combined with threats of legal action represent a serious red flag from a user-protection perspective.

“Complete the Required Trading Volume Before Paying Taxes”

On the FX110 rights-protection platform, one user reported losses of approximately RMB 500,000 and documented the alleged withdrawal process:

“After completing their so-called required trading volume, they then said I had to pay taxes. They simply refused to process the withdrawal. In the end, money could only go in, but never come out.”

The customer-service response reportedly stated:

“Dear user, according to the system feedback, you have not yet completed the corresponding trading volume. You need to complete the required trading volume before you can normally process your withdrawal.”

FX110s official response stated:

“A compliant broker will not require users to pay taxes when withdrawing funds. This is a common tactic used by fraudulent platforms.”

The alleged sequence is:

Deposit → Trade → Withdrawal rejected → Customer service disappears/blocks user → User removed from community

This complaint pattern has similarities to allegations previously discussed in connection with UZX, Azbit, and BVOX.

Core Complaint Pattern

Biconomy.com complaints show a highly consistent alleged “extraction” pattern:

Users deposit funds and trade normally.

When they request withdrawals, the platform allegedly cites reasons such as “insufficient trading volume,” “illegal profits,” or “taxes must be paid.”

Users are asked to deposit additional funds or complete more trading volume — effectively creating a potential second round of fund extraction.

Customer service becomes unresponsive or provides template responses, while users may be removed from community groups.

Users reportedly face threats of legal action over “negative comments.”

Risk Rating: Extremely High Risk

3. Proof of Reserves: PoR Score of 5%, No Audit, No Public Verification

CoinGecko PoR Score: 5%

CoinGeckos Trust Score page shows Biconomy.com with a Proof of Reserves (PoR) score of only 5%.

What does 5% actually mean？

CoinGeckos PoR assessment considers factors including the public verifiability of available assets, user proof processes, and financial auditing.

A 5% score indicates that Biconomy.com provides very limited information across these verification dimensions.

No meaningful PoR disclosure, no independent audit, and no comprehensive public wallet addresses — Biconomy.coms reserve transparency is therefore extremely limited.

“98% in Cold Wallets” Claim: Sounds Safe, but Lacks Independent Verification

Biconomy.com officially claims that “98% of user assets are stored in cold wallets” and says it provides transparency through public wallet monitoring and liquidity verification on CoinMarketCap. Alchemys exchange directory also reflects this claim.

But there is a key problem:

These figures originate from the platforms own disclosures rather than independent verification.

ChainScores assessment also points out that Biconomy lacks a cryptographically self-verifiable Merkle Tree or ZK-proof system.

In other words, users have no independent mechanism to verify whether the claimed “98% cold-wallet” figure is accurate.

Risk Rating: High Risk

4. Asset Strength: 1 Million Users？ But the Data Is Entirely “Self-Reported”

Official Claims

Established in 2019 and operating for approximately 7 years

Serving more than 1 million traders worldwide, according to the official TEAMZ Summit introduction

Supporting fiat deposits and withdrawals in MYR

Using independent third-party custody

But the Data Lacks Independent Verification

First, the platform has never publicly disclosed its registered capital, operating cash flow, or the size of its risk reserves. There is no backing from major, well-known Tier-1 VC firms, nor is there a publicly verifiable asset custodian. The platform‘s revenue appears to rely heavily on derivatives trading fees and listing fees. Once the market enters a bear cycle and new-user growth slows, pressure on the platform’s cash flow could increase rapidly.

Second, CertiKs “Exchange Maturity” page lists Canada as the country/region of establishment and gives the exchange an operating history of 7 years. Its fundraising history shows an ICO of $11.5 million on October 28, 2021, another $9 million on July 28, 2021, and a $1.5 million seed round on December 31, 2020, with investors including Bain Capital Ventures and Coinbase Ventures.

However, there is a critical source of confusion here:

The fundraising data and investor information displayed on CertiKs page refer to Biconomy.io, the Web3 infrastructure protocol, rather than Biconomy.com, the cryptocurrency exchange.

The two “Biconomy” entities share the same brand name, causing their fundraising and investor information to be mixed together. For ordinary users, it can be extremely difficult to distinguish between the two.

This brand confusion itself represents a risk associated with Biconomy.com.

Third, CertiKs security assessment identifies multiple vulnerabilities. Biconomy.com receives a cybersecurity score of only 35%, with issues including anonymous FTP login, weak SSH passwords, missing HSTS headers, and weak SSL/TLS configurations.

Fourth, CoinGecko gives the exchange a Trust Score of 7/10, but its liquidity rating is “Low.” Despite a reported daily trading volume exceeding $1 billion, CoinGecko rates its liquidity as low.

A combination of “$1.27 billion in daily trading volume” and “Low” liquidity raises questions about the actual depth and quality of the reported market activity.

Risk Rating: Medium-High Risk

5. Internal Operations & Team: Dmitriy Sheludko — How Strong Is the CEOs Background？

CEO: Dmitriy Sheludko

According to CoinMarketCap, Biconomy.com was founded by Dmitriy Sheludko, who serves as CEO.

His publicly available biography states that he holds a bachelors degree in Economics and Psychology from Yale University. Before entering the crypto industry, he reportedly gained extensive experience in trading and capital management at the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) and entered the cryptocurrency industry in 2014.

At BWB 2022, the Korea Blockchain Week event held in 2022, Dmitriy Sheludko appeared in an interview as Biconomys CEO and stated that the company was headquartered in Canada, had obtained operating licenses in the United States and Canada, and was applying for licenses in Dubai and South Korea.

So Whats the Problem？

First, publicly available information about Dmitriy Sheludko is extremely limited.

Apart from a 2022 interview and basic information on LinkedIn, there are few publicly documented industry conference appearances, in-depth media interviews, GitHub activity, or publicly documented project histories.

For a CEO of an exchange that has supposedly been operating for seven years, his public presence is surprisingly limited.

Second, the official website, LinkedIn, and other channels do not provide complete real-name information for the exchanges core founders, technology executives, or financial executives. Some team members reportedly use online aliases, with limited publicly available photos or professional histories.

The operating team appears to be distributed across multiple countries, without a consistently disclosed public office address.

An anonymous or opaque team structure can represent a significant risk factor for a cryptocurrency exchange.

If the ultimate controllers of a platform cannot be clearly identified, users may face substantial difficulties determining who is legally responsible if the exchange collapses or user assets are misappropriated. Cross-border legal action can also be extremely costly and complicated, and in some cases users may struggle even to identify the appropriate legal entity to sue.

Risk Rating: High Risk

6. Product Experience & Trading Depth: Feature-Rich, but Actual Market Depth Is Questionable

Product Line: Almost Everything Is Available

Biconomy.com offers a relatively comprehensive product range, including:

Spot trading, with 300+ cryptocurrencies

Futures

Margin trading

Financial products

Its Google Play rating is 3.45/5, based on approximately 3,450 reviews.

But There Are Plenty of Complaints

First, liquidity is rated “Low.”

Although CoinGecko gives Biconomy a Trust Score of 7/10, its liquidity rating is explicitly listed as Low.

For an exchange claiming daily trading volume of approximately $1.27 billion, this raises concerns that large orders could face significant slippage and that order-book depth may be insufficient.

Second, withdrawals appear to be a “paper feature.”

As discussed above, numerous users have complained about withdrawals being blocked, accounts being locked, and customer service allegedly responding through automated or generic messages.

Third, “delisting without notification” is reportedly a recurring issue.

One Google Play user reportedly wrote:

“They delist coins without notifying you, and then you have to send them out before they restore it. One of my coins disappeared after the 60-day lock-up period — not delisted, just disappeared, because the coin was still there.”

Fourth, the threshold for listing new tokens appears relatively low.

A large number of small-cap and low-liquidity tokens are reportedly listed, increasing the potential for market manipulation and project-team control risks.

Risk Rating: High Risk

7. Real Community Feedback: The “Survivor Bias” Behind a 3.1 Rating

Community feedback appears to divide into two distinct groups.

Light Users

Users trading with relatively small amounts, engaging in short-term trading, and not attempting large withdrawals generally report that:

The interface is relatively simple

Small deposits and withdrawals are relatively smooth

Customer service can handle basic inquiries

Large-Balance Users

Negative reviews are much more concentrated among users dealing with larger amounts.

The main complaints involve:

Difficulty withdrawing profits

Repeated additional KYC requirements

Account freezes

Withdrawal restrictions

Rights-protection posts occasionally appear on X and Telegram communities, but the platform does not appear to have a publicly transparent dispute-resolution or arbitration mechanism. Many complaints ultimately go unresolved.

What Are Users Actually Saying？

One user reportedly wrote:

“This is a fake and fraudulent exchange. They allow you to deposit, but once you start making profits, they freeze your withdrawals and trading privileges. Their so-called risk-control team steps in and freezes your account.”

Another user issued a formal warning regarding Biconomy Exchange, alleging that the platform had withheld assets worth 6,372.88 USDT, equivalent to 63,710 CNT tokens, while failing to fulfill its alleged custodial obligations.

The complaint alleged:

Asset Misappropriation: Customer service allegedly attempted to compensate the user‘s 6,372.88 USDT investment with only 10 USDT, while allegedly confusing a 7.93 USDT trading fee with the user’s total investment amount.

The user further claimed:

“Withholding user funds worth $6,372.88 while offering only 10 USDT in compensation and refusing withdrawals constitutes a serious breach of contract. I demand immediate intervention by senior management and execution of the token migration, otherwise I will seek full compensation of 6,372.88 USDT.”

Account UID: 51485005

June 2026: Security Incident Exposed

In June 2026, a security firm reportedly issued a warning concerning Biconomy Exchanges “welcome package,” alleging active intimidation tactics, malicious withdrawal traps, and a $2 billion fraud network.

The report stated that Biconomy‘s trading bonuses could not be withdrawn, while user-generated profits allegedly had to meet the platform’s minimum withdrawal requirements before they could be accessed. According to the report, this could potentially give the platform an indefinite justification for delaying withdrawals.

Around the same period, Biconomy Exchange was reportedly affected by its “first critical security vulnerability, resulting in user data exposure,” despite the platform previously promoting a “zero-incident” security record.

Risk Rating: Extremely High Risk

8. Comprehensive Exit Risk Assessment

Overall Rating: Extremely High Exit Risk

Biconomy.com joins Azbit, FameEX, CoinUp, BiFinance, OrangeX, Hibt, BVOX, MGBX, Zoomex, and Hotcoin among the highest-risk exchanges covered in this series, as the “high-risk exchange club” continues to expand.

Its risk profile can be described as a “textbook contradiction”:

1. Regulatory “Self-Narrative”

It claims to be “registered with the Malaysian SC,” yet was officially placed on the ASC investor alert list in Canada. Its MSB status has reportedly been marked as “Beyond Business Scope,” while CertiK directly states “Exchange Regulation: None.”

Four sources, three different narratives — and none provides clear evidence that the exchange is genuinely subject to effective regulatory supervision.

2. The “Withdrawal Trap”

“Deposit 1,500 USDT, receive 370.”

“Complete the required trading volume before paying taxes.”

“Withdrawals blocked while deposits remain open.”

“Users threatened with legal action.”

Each of these allegations reflects a pattern commonly associated with fraudulent or abusive trading platforms.

3. Reserve Transparency Is Effectively Zero

A 5% PoR score, no independent audit, and no comprehensive public wallet addresses.

An exchange reporting $1.27 billion in daily trading volume does not provide users with a clear, independently verifiable picture of its reserves.

4. The Team Is “Half Invisible”

CEO Dmitriy Sheludko has publicly documented credentials centered primarily around his Yale education and a 2022 interview, while information about the core management team is extremely limited in the public domain.

For an exchange claiming to serve 1 million users, the lack of transparent information about its management structure raises significant questions.

5. Security Incidents in 2026

Reports in 2026 alleged a “first critical security vulnerability resulting in user data exposure” as well as the exposure of a $2 billion fraud network, despite the platform having previously promoted a “zero-incident” security record.

This is not simply a question of whether the platform has a “high exit risk.”

It is a broader concern involving an exchange that has been placed on a Canadian regulatory warning list, has faced allegations involving withdrawal restrictions and tax demands, and provides extremely limited independent verification of its reserves.

9. Recommendations for New and Existing Users

For New Users

1. Consider avoiding the platform.

The combination of the ASC investor alert, a Trustpilot rating of 3.1, the alleged “1,500 USDT deposited but only 370 USDT received” incident, and a PoR score of 5% represents multiple significant warning signals.

2. If you have already registered but have not deposited funds, consider leaving the account inactive.

There is no apparent reason to take additional custody risk by depositing funds into Biconomy.com when significant questions remain regarding its regulatory status, reserve transparency, and withdrawal practices.

3. Be cautious about the “registered with the Malaysian SC” claim.

“Registered” does not necessarily mean “licensed.”

A legitimate regulatory authorization should be independently verifiable through the relevant regulators official records, including the legal entity and applicable authorization details.

For Existing Users

1. Review your exposure immediately.

If a substantial portion of your total assets is held on Biconomy.com, consider assessing whether you are comfortable with that level of platform and custody risk.

2. Test a withdrawal now.

Attempting a withdrawal can help you determine whether your account currently has normal withdrawal functionality. If there is a problem, identifying it early gives you more time to document the situation and pursue available remedies.

3. If you cannot withdraw, stop paying for “unlocking.”

Be extremely cautious about requests involving “trading volume,” “taxes,” “verification fees,” or similar payments as a condition for releasing your existing funds.

Sending additional money does not guarantee that withdrawals will be restored and may increase your potential losses.

4. Do not panic if you receive threats of legal action over negative comments.

Some users have reported that Biconomy.com customer service threatened legal action if users posted negative information about the exchange.

Preserve all relevant chat records, emails, transaction hashes, deposit and withdrawal records, screenshots, and account information rather than deleting them.

5. Do not deposit another cent until the situation is independently verified.

This may be the simplest — and most important — precaution.

Final Takeaway

Biconomy.com claims to have Malaysian “registration,” MSB “licenses,” and 1 million users.

But the key questions remain:

Where is it actually regulated？

How much user capital does it actually hold？

Can its reserves be independently verified？

Can users withdraw their funds normally when they make substantial profits？

The combination of an ASC investor alert, a 5% PoR score, reported complaints involving 1,500 USDT deposited but only 370 USDT received, and allegations of withdrawal restrictions linked to trading-volume or tax requirements warrants a high degree of caution.

Next Episode

WikiBit Exchange Exit Risk Ranking #27 — WhiteBIT Exchange. Stay tuned!

Risk Disclaimer

This article represents an individual analytical view and does not constitute investment advice. Cryptocurrency investments involve significant risks. Please exercise caution and conduct your own due diligence before making any investment decisions.

Information in this article was updated as of September 16, 2026. For the latest information, please cross-check and verify the relevant facts through multiple independent sources.