Aspen Holding Deposit & Withdrawal

Aspen Holding, operating through its website often associated with the domain gissis.com, presents itself as a forex and CFD broker welcoming deposits from retail traders. Yet from the very first step, a would-be client faces a wall of opacity. The broker provides no public information on deposit methods, withdrawal options, fees, minimums, or processing times on its official channels. This lack of transparency alone is a glaring red flag, especially when combined with the firm’s complete absence of regulatory oversight. In our investigation, we found that Aspen Holding (Next Trade Ltd) holds no valid licence from any recognised financial authority.

What we know about its funding operations comes almost entirely from user reports and reviews posted across industry databases and forums. These paint a deeply concerning picture: while depositing funds appears deceptively easy, withdrawing them is where the nightmare begins. Many users describe a classic scam trajectory—initial small payouts to build trust, followed by blocked accounts, silence from support, and even extortionate demands for additional payments to ‘unfreeze’ funds. This article examines the funding lifecycle at Aspen Holding, drawing on real trader experiences to expose the patterns every trader must recognise before risking a single dollar.

Aspen Holding’s official website offers no list of accepted deposit methods, no payment processor logos, and no fee schedule. In the structured data we analysed, deposit methods are simply marked as ‘--’, meaning undisclosed. This is highly unusual for a legitimate broker, which typically advertises bank wire, credit cards, e-wallets, or crypto options with clear terms.

From user reviews, we glean that at least some deposits were made in cryptocurrency. One complainant mentions having ‘8 eth on my wallet’, indicating Ethereum deposits. Another user says, ‘I threw $100 on a 125% Deposit for 14 working days,’ suggesting possible fiat funding, but the exact rail remains unknown.

The lack of clarity about ‘where to transfer money’ was a recurring complaint. This ambiguity makes it impossible for prospective clients to assess costs, security, or speed before committing funds. In our assessment, brokers that hide deposit mechanics often do so to evade scrutiny from payment providers or to make it harder for victims to trace and recover their money.

One of the few concrete pieces of information about withdrawals comes from a positive review that states: ‘Great project! Pays! The output is instant!

Although the regulations say 72 hours.’ This suggests that Aspen Holding’s own terms reference a 72-hour processing window. Another user confirmed that ‘from 4th Dec 2019 up to now Gissis hasn't been scam. The profit withdraw is a little slow but has been done.’ These early or isolated reports hint that the broker may have honoured some payouts, at least in its earlier days or for smaller amounts.

However, the bulk of recent feedback tells a starkly different story. One trader complained, ‘They are not paying anymore. I waited 3 days for the withdrawal. Nothing received yet.’ Another stated flatly, ‘This is a scam and you cannot apply for a second withdrawal.’ The official promise of processing within 72 hours appears to be a dead letter in practice. Even where withdrawals are eventually processed, the delays are unexplained and support is unresponsive, leaving traders in the dark.

It is important to acknowledge that not every user review is entirely negative. A handful of five-star ratings praise fast payouts and profitability. One reads, ‘A very good project!

Fast payouts. I have earned more than 100% profit and continue to earn!’ Another says, ‘In general, 5 stars! The company pays.

I went through the monitoring, and this company is hanging in their recommendations.’ These comments likely reflect the early stages of the scheme, when the operator pays out small profits to encourage larger deposits.

Even among the positive voices, however, subtle warnings appear. The same reviewer who called the project ‘reliable’ also noted a withdrawal was ‘a little slow’. And other optimistic users were still in the profit-taking phase, having not yet attempted to withdraw their entire balance. The pattern is one we have seen repeated across countless scam brokers: initial reliability that evaporates the moment a trader attempts to cash out a significant sum.

The weight of evidence on file is overwhelmingly negative. Out of eight withdrawal-related mentions we catalogued, six were negative. The complaints are not vague; they provide specific, alarming details.

One user wrote: ‘The official scam on the website No email replies, no clarity about where to transfer money. Don't trust this website.’ Another reported: ‘I expect gissis.com read my comment! I invested $15 and after 5 days of requesting; my withdrawl is still pending!!

Why they are not paying my withdrawl and don't answer my Email?’

These are not isolated incidents. Across multiple review platforms, the same story repeats. The FXCanary research team identified a clear timeline: once a user requests a meaningful withdrawal, the broker goes silent or invents new barriers.

Some users described being blocked from the forum when they asked about their money. Others said they received threatening phone calls. Such behaviour has no place in legitimate financial services and is a textbook sign of a scam.

Perhaps the most brazen funding-related complaint we unearthed involves a direct extortion attempt. A user recounted: ‘I have 8 eth on my wallet i ask for withdrawal they say give us 1000 usd the we will unfreeze your account this site is 100% scam take back your as soon as you can my id is abcisco.’ This is the classic ‘advance-fee’ scam, where the victim is told they must pay more to access their own funds. No regulated broker would ever demand such a payment.

Another trader similarly warned: ‘I was going nuts, couldn’t access my funds but Ravinloops came through and I got my funds back’—an indication that the user had to resort to third-party recovery services, which often involve their own risks and fees. The message is clear: once Aspen Holding has your deposit, the default position is to block your access and ignore your withdrawal requests. The few who recover anything may have to fight for it or pay a recovery agent, though such results are rare.

Taken together, the funding story at Aspen Holding follows a well-worn blueprint. Deposits are accepted with minimal friction—no rigorous KYC, no warnings about the company’s unregulated status, and often with gushing encouragement from support or social media. Initial small payouts may even be honoured to create a false sense of security. But when a trader tries to withdraw a larger amount, or simply attempts a second withdrawal, the problems begin.

This pattern is reinforced by the broker’s ‘Scam concerns’ score: 13 out of 14 mentions were negative. User after user labels Aspen Holding a scam, pointing to failure to pay and blocked accounts. The FXCanary Scam Risk Score of 75/100 (Severe) is a direct reflection of this evidence. For any trader considering funding an account, the warning is unequivocal: your deposit is not protected, and the probability of ever getting it back is extremely low.

Beyond the user complaints, several structural red flags underscore the funding risk. First, Aspen Holding is not regulated. Vanuatu is a jurisdiction often used by shell companies because its oversight is lax, but our checks found no active licence for Next Trade Ltd in any public register. Without regulation, there is no segregation of client funds, no compensation scheme, and no avenue for dispute resolution.

Second, the broker discloses zero information about its payment infrastructure. Legitimate brokers are transparent about deposit and withdrawal methods, fees, processing times, and required documentation. Aspen Holding’s silence on these matters is a deliberate choice to obscure how money flows in and out. Third, the volume of complaints about blocked withdrawals has been sustained over time, not a one-off glitch. These flags collectively scream ‘avoid’.

Our overriding recommendation is simple: do not deposit any money with Aspen Holding. The risks far outweigh any promised returns. If you have already funded an account, cease all trading and attempt to withdraw whatever balance remains. Be prepared for delays, demands for extra fees, or outright non-payment. Under no circumstances should you send additional money in hopes of unlocking your funds—that is a sure sign of an advance-fee scam.

If you used a credit card or bank transfer, contact your financial institution immediately to dispute the transaction and request a chargeback. For crypto deposits, recovery is extremely difficult, but reporting the wallet addresses to relevant authorities may help. Finally, always verify a broker’s regulation through official financial registers, not just the broker’s website. Trust only brokers overseen by top-tier regulators such as the FCA, ASIC, or CySEC. Your funds are too valuable to gamble on unregulated outfits like Aspen Holding.