WikiFX

Reply

Having traded with a range of brokers over the years, I approach any new platform with a careful eye—especially when it comes to matters of regulation and transparency. In evaluating SK, several key risks stand out for me. The most crucial issue is their lack of regulatory oversight. Despite being based in South Korea and established as far back as 1955, SK does not have any supervision from the Financial Services Commission (FSC) or the Financial Supervisory Service (FSS). For me, this absence of recognized financial regulation raises immediate red flags regarding investor protection, dispute resolution, and transparency. Another concern is the limited disclosure of their actual trading conditions. As a trader, access to clear information about spreads, leverage, execution, and account types is essential, both for making informed decisions and for risk management. With SK, such details are noticeably lacking. Their “suspicious regulatory license” and “high potential risk” labels further reinforce my caution. Even though SK appears to be a long-established financial firm offering diverse services like stock trading, asset management, and robo-advisory, the fact remains that, in the forex and broader trading context, the lack of robust regulatory backing outweighs these strengths for me. Without a transparent, regulated environment, I would be very cautious about entrusting funds to SK, regardless of their reputation or years in business.