WikiFX

Reply

As an independent forex trader with years of experience, I always pay careful attention to the overall trading costs associated with any broker, especially for popular indices like the US100. In the case of MEKSA, I encountered significant challenges in accessing transparent and verifiable information about transaction costs. The broker does not make clear disclosures about spreads, commissions, overnight fees, or detailed fee schedules on its public platforms. This lack of transparency complicates any attempt to accurately evaluate the total trading costs, and it is something I consider a notable red flag. Regulatory oversight—or the lack thereof—also plays a vital role in my assessment. MEKSA currently holds no valid regulatory license, and its regulatory status is marked as suspicious, which increases potential risk, especially regarding fee structures and the security of client funds. In my experience, unregulated environments sometimes result in hidden or unpredictable costs, which can erode trading profits. Furthermore, the absence of accessible, detailed information about deposit and withdrawal fees adds an additional layer of uncertainty. In my view, when a broker cannot provide complete and clear documentation regarding costs on highly traded products like the US100, I interpret this as a risk factor that outweighs any potential advantages. I would approach such an environment with extreme caution until all costs are fully understood and independently verified.