Is Blueberry a Scam?

At FXCanary, we don't rely on marketing claims or superficial ratings. Our safety analysis is built on multiple pillars: regulatory licensing, the robustness of client fund protections, real trader feedback on fund access, and a broker’s transparency and track record. For Blueberry Markets, our team conducted a deep-dive investigation, cross-checking its Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) licences against official registers, scrutinising thousands of user reviews, and mapping patterns in withdrawal disputes. The result is a Scam Risk Score of 20/100 — low, but not unconditional.

A low score signals that Blueberry largely operates within a regulated framework and has not triggered the most severe scam hallmarks such as outright fraud or large-scale fund freezes. However, the presence of 50 withdrawal-related complaints within a pool of 3,249 Trustpilot reviews (a ratio of about 1.5%) merits careful attention. No broker is perfect, and even regulated entities can fall short on service quality, especially when clients are profitable. Our analysis separates systemic red flags from isolated grievances, always with the retail trader’s protection in mind.

Blueberry Markets operates under two active ASIC licences: a Market Making Licence (number 535887) and a Forex Execution Licence (number 364411). Both are issued to BLUEBERRY MARKETS PTY LTD, registered at Level 17/135 King St, Sydney. ASIC-regulated brokers must meet net tangible asset requirements, maintain professional indemnity insurance, and handle client funds according to strict segregation rules. We verified both licence numbers against ASIC’s professional register and found them current and in good standing — a crucial first checkpoint.

ASIC’s regulatory framework is often considered a gold standard, yet it is not immune to broker misconduct. In recent years, ASIC has tightened leverage limits and banned certain risky products for retail clients, but offshore entities operating under the same brand can still pose risks. Blueberry’s Australian licence means clients are on a solid legal footing, but traders should confirm they are onboarded under the Australian entity, not an unregulated affiliate. Our investigation did not uncover any offshore clones, but the broker’s employee count is listed as zero, which may suggest a lean or outsourced operational model — a point we explore later.

ASIC mandates that all retail client money is held in segregated trust accounts, separate from the broker’s operational funds. This means if Blueberry faces insolvency, client funds should be ring-fenced and not available to creditors. However, unlike the UK’s Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS) or Cyprus’s Investor Compensation Fund, Australia does not have a dedicated compensation scheme for forex or CFD retail clients. Instead, brokers must hold professional indemnity insurance, but the coverage and claims process can be opaque.

We also note that ASIC introduced negative balance protection for retail CFD clients, ensuring traders cannot lose more than their deposited balance. Blueberry’s licence obliges it to comply with this rule. In user reviews, we did not see complaints of negative balances being pursued, which is a positive sign. However, traders should always verify their account terms and confirm that negative balance protection is explicitly stated in their client agreement.

Withdrawals are the ultimate litmus test of a broker’s integrity. Across 48 user comments specifically about withdrawals, 29 (60%) were positive, describing fast, hassle-free processes. One trader noted, “Deposits and withdrawals were instant,” and another highlighted “very simple, fast” transactions. Yet the 15 negative complaints cannot be dismissed. They repeatedly echo a pattern: traders who were profitable or attempting to withdraw significant sums encountered unexpected roadblocks.

A particularly alarming review details: “I have $3000 in my account, my account was fully verified. When I tried to withdraw my funds error pop up that I need to contact support, I did contacted support they told me I need to upload proof of address.” Another former Introducing Broker reported that his new live account was frozen after profitable trades. In total, our aggregated data counted 50 withdrawal-related complaints — a figure that, while not catastrophic, suggests traders should proceed with caution and document every communication with the broker.

We also observed a handful of reviews where traders accused Blueberry of “eating all the rebates” or designing systems to “trap profitable traders”. While these are subjective claims, the sheer repetition of withdrawal delays and profit denials raises a red flag. It is essential for potential clients to understand that not every withdrawal issue indicates a scam, but a broker that makes it difficult to access profits is a high-risk partner regardless of regulation.

Clone broker scams are a pervasive threat in forex, with fraudsters impersonating legitimate firms to steal credentials and funds. In Blueberry’s case, our search across phishing databases, scam reporting sites, and industry blacklists turned up zero clone or impersonator sites. This is encouraging: the brand does not appear to be actively targeted by fraudsters, and Blueberry’s online presence is likely well-managed.

Nevertheless, we always advise traders to independently verify they are on the correct website (the root domain should match the one provided in ASIC’s register) and to check that the company details on their account statements match BLUEBERRY MARKETS PTY LTD. Never rely on links sent via email or social media. Blueberry’s clean record on impersonation lowers one avenue of risk, but vigilance remains a must.

Despite ASIC regulation, FXCanary identified several red flags that temper our overall safety assessment. The most recurrent and serious theme in user reviews is the difficulty withdrawing profits. In the “Profit / payouts” topic, sentiment was evenly split: 10 positive and 10 negative mentions. Several traders explicitly stated that Blueberry denied or delayed profit payouts after winning trades, citing vague “liquidity” issues or demanding repetitive KYC checks — a classic tactic used by problematic brokers.

The “Account & KYC” topic also skewed heavily negative, with 7 out of 8 mentions being complaints. Users reported being asked for documents they had already submitted, experiencing sudden account blocks, or facing declined card deposits without explanation. One review from February 2025 noted that they were allowed to trade with 1:500 leverage without any suitability assessment, leading to severe losses. This hints at possible inadequacies in Blueberry’s onboarding and risk warning practices.

The broker’s employee count is listed as zero. While this could reflect an outsourced model or a data entry anomaly, it raises the question of whether Blueberry operates with sufficient human oversight. A lean structure may translate to slower responses when problems arise. We also note that the broker does not disclose deposit or withdrawal methods publicly, which limits transparency. The existence of 15 scam allegations among user comments adds to the cautionary narrative.

On the other side of the ledger, Blueberry enjoys a robust Trustpilot score of 4.5 out of 5 from over 3,200 reviews — a figure that is hard to fake and suggests a generally satisfied client base. Positive reviews frequently praise the broker’s fast execution, low spreads on instruments like gold, and helpful customer support. One user stated, “spreads on gold is very low, thats the best part of it,” and others commended the MT5 integration.

The broker’s ASIC licence is a powerful green flag. Being regulated in a major jurisdiction obliges Blueberry to follow strict financial and ethical standards, and it provides an avenue for dispute resolution through the Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA). We saw evidence of the support team resolving issues in some cases; for example, one trader initially had a bonus issue but later updated the review after Blueberry’s intervention.

The absence of clone sites further reduces the risk of users being duped by impostors. Additionally, the “Speed” topic showed 46 positive mentions out of 51, with deposit and withdrawal speeds often described as instant. Many traders explicitly called Blueberry “the best broker” they have used. This mixed but largely positive sentiment underscores that for a majority of clients, Blueberry delivers a competitive trading experience.

Regardless of a broker’s regulatory status, traders must adopt a defensive mindset. Before funding an account with Blueberry, we recommend verifying the ASIC licence numbers (535887 and 364411) on the official register and ensuring your account is held with BLUEBERRY MARKETS PTY LTD, not an unregulated offshore entity. Save all correspondence, including KYC submissions and chat logs, and make a habit of screenshotting your account balance and trading history.

Test the withdrawal pipeline early: request a small withdrawal soon after funding, preferably before placing large trades. If you encounter repeated document requests or vague excuses, escalate promptly via registered email and, if unresolved, lodge a complaint with AFCA. Given the complaints around profit denials, it may be wise to set conservative profit-taking targets and withdraw gains regularly rather than letting a large balance accumulate.

Leverage of 1:500 is extremely high and can amplify losses. Even though Blueberry offers it, use it sparingly if at all, and only after fully understanding the risks. Finally, remember that even the most regulated broker can fail or engage in misconduct. Never deposit more than you can afford to lose, and diversify your trading capital across different brokers if possible. Blueberry’s low Scam Risk Score suggests it is not an outright scam, but trader vigilance remains the ultimate safeguard.