Eclipse Macro Review

Our review of Eclipse Macro began with the same discipline we apply to every broker that crosses our desk: we checked the public regulatory registers, we read the user-review record, and we weighed the complaint and exposure data that independent industry databases have aggregated. We did not take the broker's own marketing at face value, and we did not let a handful of positive reviews override the structural red flags that emerged early in the process.

What we found is a broker that is young, unregulated, and largely opaque. Eclipse Macro was founded in January 2024 and operates out of a single address in New York, yet it holds no verified licence from any financial regulator we could identify. The user-review record is thin, with only a handful of mentions across the topics we track, and the withdrawal-related complaint count stands at one. When we set that against the broker's own claims of transparency and low fees, the picture becomes more complicated than the five-star reviews alone would suggest.

In the sections that follow, we lay out our full assessment. We interpret the structured data we have gathered, we quote the real user reviews where they exist, and we explain what the absence of regulation means for anyone considering an account. Our goal is not to condemn or to praise, but to give you the evidence you need to make an informed decision.

Eclipse Macro is registered at 125 Maiden Ln, New York, NY 10038, United States. That address places the company in the heart of Manhattan's financial district, a location that might suggest a certain level of establishment. But a prestigious address is not a substitute for a track record, and our review found that Eclipse Macro was founded only in January 2024. That makes it one of the newest brokers we have assessed, and newness in the forex brokerage space is rarely a point in a firm's favour.

The company describes itself as providing access to cryptocurrencies, major, minor, and exotic forex pairs, gold, and indices, along with demo accounts and 24/7 support. That is a fairly standard menu of offerings, and on its own it tells us little about the firm's reliability. What is more telling is the employee count: the structured data we hold lists zero employees. That is a striking figure for any company that claims to offer round-the-clock support, and it raises immediate questions about who is actually running the day-to-day operations.

In our assessment, the combination of a 2024 founding date, a zero-employee count, and a lack of any verifiable regulatory footprint makes Eclipse Macro a high-risk proposition. The address may be real, but the substance behind it is difficult to verify. We would caution any trader to treat the company's claims with a healthy degree of scepticism until it can demonstrate a longer operating history and a clearer corporate structure.

The most significant red flag in our review of Eclipse Macro is the complete absence of any verified regulatory licence. Our cross-check of the public registers found no licence on file, and the structured data confirms a licence count of zero. That is not a minor omission; it is a fundamental gap that affects every aspect of how the broker operates and how safe your funds are.

In the United States, forex brokers are typically required to register with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) and become members of the National Futures Association (NFA). Those bodies impose strict capital requirements, segregation of client funds, and regular audits. Without such oversight, a broker is free to operate with far less accountability, and the protections that US traders have come to expect simply do not apply.

We found no evidence that Eclipse Macro holds any licence from the CFTC, the NFA, or any other regulator in the United States or elsewhere. That means there is no independent body monitoring the firm's financial health, no guarantee that client funds are kept separate from the company's own money, and no recourse through a regulatory ombudsman if something goes wrong. In our assessment, this alone would be enough to warrant a high scam risk score, and it is a factor that should weigh heavily on any trader's decision.

It is also worth noting that the broker's own marketing does not appear to emphasise regulation, which is telling. A legitimate broker will usually highlight its regulatory status prominently, because it is a key selling point. Eclipse Macro's silence on the matter speaks volumes.

The structured data we hold does not include a detailed breakdown of Eclipse Macro's account tiers, minimum deposits, or leverage options. That is itself a concern, because a broker that is serious about transparency will usually publish these figures clearly on its website. In the absence of such data, we can only infer that the broker offers a standard range of account types, but we cannot confirm the specifics.

What we can say is that the company description mentions demo accounts, which suggests that Eclipse Macro is willing to let potential clients test its platform before committing real money. That is a positive sign, as it indicates a degree of confidence in the product. However, a demo account is not a substitute for a regulated live trading environment, and it does little to mitigate the risks we have already outlined.

For traders who are considering opening an account, the lack of disclosed minimum deposit and leverage figures is a practical obstacle. You cannot properly assess whether the broker's terms suit your trading style without knowing these details, and the fact that they are not readily available is a red flag. We would advise any trader to demand this information in writing before depositing a single dollar, and to be wary if the broker is evasive.

Our data on deposits and withdrawals at Eclipse Macro is limited. The structured record shows one mention of withdrawals, with no positive or negative reviews attached, and one mention of deposits and funding, again with no quotable samples. That means we cannot point to a specific incident of a blocked withdrawal or a delayed transfer, but the absence of evidence is not the same as evidence of absence.

The single withdrawal-related complaint that we have on file is a concern, even if we do not have the details. In our experience, withdrawal complaints are among the most serious signals in the forex brokerage space, because they directly affect a trader's ability to access their own money. A single complaint may be an outlier, but when it is set against the broker's short history and lack of regulation, it takes on greater weight.

We also note that the broker's own claims of transparency and low fees are not backed up by any detailed fee schedule in the data we hold. We do not know what withdrawal fees, deposit fees, or currency conversion charges apply, and we do not know how long withdrawals typically take. In our assessment, this lack of transparency is a significant drawback, and it makes it difficult for traders to plan their finances with any confidence.

If you are considering Eclipse Macro, we would strongly recommend that you test the withdrawal process with a small amount before committing larger funds. A broker that is slow to return your money, or that imposes unexpected fees, is a broker to avoid.

Eclipse Macro's company description lists a range of trading assets: cryptocurrencies, major, minor, and exotic forex pairs, gold, and indices. That is a reasonably broad offering, and it may appeal to traders who want to diversify across asset classes. However, the description also notes that the leading MT4 and MT5 platforms are not available. That is a significant omission in our view.

MT4 and MT5 are the industry-standard platforms for forex trading, and their absence suggests that Eclipse Macro is using a proprietary platform or a white-label solution. While that is not inherently a problem, it does mean that traders cannot rely on the familiar tools, indicators, and expert advisors that they may have used elsewhere. It also makes it harder to verify the broker's execution quality, as there is no independent benchmark to compare against.

We do not have specific information about the proprietary platform's features, such as charting tools, order types, or mobile access. In the absence of that data, we would caution traders to test the platform thoroughly with a demo account before committing real funds. A platform that is difficult to use, or that lacks essential features, can undermine even the best trading strategy.

The user reviews we have collected include praise for Eclipse Macro's 'low fees', but the structured data does not provide a detailed fee schedule. We do not know the spread levels, commission charges, swap rates, or any other costs that would affect a trader's bottom line. That is a significant gap, because fees are one of the most important factors in choosing a broker.

In the absence of concrete figures, we can only interpret the claim of low fees with caution. A broker that advertises low fees but does not disclose them in detail may be hiding costs elsewhere, such as in wider spreads or higher withdrawal charges. We would advise traders to request a full fee schedule from Eclipse Macro before opening an account, and to compare it against regulated competitors.

It is also worth noting that the positive review mentioning low fees comes from the same review that praises the broker's transparency and customer service. While that is encouraging, it is a single data point, and it does not outweigh the structural concerns we have identified. In our assessment, the cost picture at Eclipse Macro remains unclear, and that lack of clarity is itself a risk.

The user-review record for Eclipse Macro is thin, with only a handful of mentions across the topics we track. The most positive review, a five-star rating, praises the broker for being 'transparent' and for offering 'low fees and excellent customer service'. Another five-star review highlights the helpfulness of a support agent named Janson, who helped a client access a second account they had forgotten about.

These reviews are positive, and we do not dismiss them. They suggest that at least some clients have had a good experience with the broker's support team and fee structure. However, we must set them against the broader context: the broker is unregulated, has a short operating history, and has at least one withdrawal-related complaint on file. A handful of positive reviews, especially from a new broker, can be easily manufactured or incentivised, and they do not provide a reliable basis for assessing long-term reliability.

We also note that the reviews we have are overwhelmingly positive, with no negative reviews in the topics we track. That is unusual for any broker, and it may indicate that the review sample is too small to be representative, or that negative reviews are being filtered or removed. In our assessment, the user record is too thin to draw firm conclusions, and it certainly does not offset the regulatory concerns.

When we compare our own assessment of Eclipse Macro with the aggregated industry data, the picture is consistent. The broker has no verified licence, a short operating history, and a thin user-review record. The aggregated scores we have seen, which are based on a combination of regulatory status, user feedback, and complaint data, also reflect a high level of risk.

Our own Scam Risk Score for Eclipse Macro is 75 out of 100, which we classify as 'Severe'. That score is driven primarily by the absence of regulation, the lack of transparency around fees and trading conditions, and the presence of at least one withdrawal-related complaint. It is not a score we assign lightly, and it is not based on a single factor. It is the result of a systematic review of all the evidence we have gathered.

We would note that the aggregated industry data does not show any clone or impersonator sites associated with Eclipse Macro, which is a small positive. However, that does little to mitigate the core risks. In our assessment, the broker's own claims of transparency are not supported by the evidence, and the aggregated scores reinforce our view that this is a high-risk broker.

Our review of Eclipse Macro leads us to a clear conclusion: this is a high-risk broker that fails the transparency test. The absence of any verified regulatory licence is a fundamental flaw, and it means that traders have no independent protection if something goes wrong. The broker's short operating history, zero-employee count, and thin user-review record only add to our concerns.

The positive reviews we have seen are not enough to change our assessment. A few five-star ratings, even if genuine, do not compensate for the lack of regulation and the single withdrawal complaint on file. In our view, the risks of trading with Eclipse Macro far outweigh any potential benefits, and we would advise traders to look elsewhere.

If you are still considering this broker, we urge you to take the following precautions. First, verify the broker's regulatory status independently by checking the CFTC and NFA registers. Second, request a full fee schedule and written confirmation of withdrawal terms before depositing any money.

Third, start with a small deposit and test the withdrawal process early. Fourth, be prepared to walk away if the broker is evasive or if you encounter any problems. In our assessment, the safest course of action is to avoid Eclipse Macro altogether and choose a fully regulated broker instead.