WikiFX

Reply

As an experienced forex trader, I always prioritize evaluating a broker’s transparency, especially regarding fees on deposits and withdrawals. With MC900, my research raised several concerns that prevent me from trading with confidence. The broker operates with a “suspicious regulatory license” and holds a zero score in the Regulatory Index according to my review. For me, this means I cannot validate whether MC900 follows best practices or adheres to regulatory standards that typically protect clients from hidden fees. Moreover, while the website and business profile seem polished, I found no clear or independently verified information about their actual fee structure for deposits or withdrawals. In my experience, legitimate brokers prominently display all costs, including potential third-party fees, processing times, and currency conversion charges. However, due to MC900’s unverified standing—both with the Cyprus CYSEC and UK’s FCA—I remain very cautious. In the absence of regulatory oversight and without published, third-party-verified documentation, I have to consider the possibility of undisclosed or unexpected fees as a real risk. For me, a lack of fee transparency, combined with high-risk markers and unverified licenses, means I personally would not risk funding an account with MC900. My approach is always conservative when there is even a hint of uncertainty surrounding a broker’s credibility and transparency.