INFINOX Deposit & Withdrawal

Every deposit into a broker account carries the expectation that funds will be available promptly and withdrawals will be processed without unnecessary friction. When that trust breaks down, it undermines the entire trading experience.

For INFINOX, the public narrative is mixed. On Trustpilot, a 4.6-star rating and 1,122 reviews paint a largely positive picture, and many traders praise the speed of deposits and payouts. But our deeper review exposes a significant undercurrent of funding failures — from deposits that vanish for weeks, to withdrawals blocked on vague "KYC investigation" grounds, to accounts frozen without explanation. These are the stories that define whether INFINOX is a safe place for your money.

Despite being an internationally active broker with FCA and SCB licenses, INFINOX provides no public breakdown of accepted deposit methods, minimums, or processing times — not on its website nor in its standard account documentation. FXCanary’s research team found that this information is simply not disclosed.

From user reports, we can piece together that deposits via bank transfer, credit/debit cards, and cryptocurrency wallets are accepted, at least in some jurisdictions. One reviewer complained about a two-hour wait for a crypto wallet address approval, and others mention allocating funds from Korean bank accounts, suggesting regional variation. But the absence of a clear, official funding page is a red flag — it forces traders to rely on customer support for basic facts that should be transparent upfront.

Smooth deposit experiences certainly exist. Many five-star reviews mention "fast payout" and "deposits and withdrawals are smooth and reliable." Yet even among these positives, funding is often mentioned as an afterthought, not a standout feature.

The alarm bells ring in the negative deposit complaints. One trader described an infuriating loop: a $250 deposit never credited to the trading account; after a two-week struggle, the funds were returned. The same trader tried a $225 deposit, which also failed. Another user reported an $250 deposit that never appeared, only to eventually be sent back.

These aren't isolated incidents. In our topic analysis, "Deposits & funding" registered 24 mentions, with 13 of them negative — a negativity rate over 50%. For a broker that presents itself as a premier FCA-regulated entity, such a high deposit-failure complaint rate is unusual and concerning. It suggests either systemic back-office problems or a deliberate pattern of obstructing entry at the funding stage.

On the surface, INFINOX withdrawal speeds can be impressive. Traders who get their money out often do so quickly. One five-star review simply says "fast payout," and another states "Didn’t have issue with deposit or withdrawal" over two years of trading.

But when we focus on the 11 negative withdrawal mentions out of 20 total, a disturbing pattern emerges. Several reviews describe a scenario where everything worked perfectly at first, only to deteriorate later. One trader stated: "When I started with Infinox, everything was fine, execution speed, customer support, withdrawal with speed of light … Later they showed me their true colour." After closing a day with a balance of $975, the withdrawal experience turned hostile.

Another user complained of requesting a withdrawal since 5th November 2025, with the broker citing an ongoing "investigation and KYC process" — a classic delaying tactic used by scam brokers. A third account was simply blocked without reason, leaving the trader unable to withdraw, deposit, or trade.

Inexperienced traders might dismiss these accounts as isolated, but our investigative team has reviewed hundreds of broker cases. The pattern is consistent with what industry observers call "jackpot blocking" — a broker allows smooth withdrawals for small amounts to build trust, then seizes upon a larger balance to invent bureaucracy, freeze the account, or vanish entirely.

INFINOX’s aggregated industry data reveals 22 withdrawal-related complaints across major platforms. That is a substantial number for a broker of its size and supposed tier-1 regulation. Moreover, the Trustpilot page, while maintaining a high average, is littered with recent one-star reviews accusing the company of outright theft. One client described depositing $12,000, generating $5,850 in profit, only to have all profits removed without justification. Another wrote: "I wasn’t sure if I would ever see progress on an account that reflected approximately USD 76,700…"

What makes these cases particularly troubling is the lack of clear resolution. Few complainants report getting their money back after escalation; most describe a wall of silence or repetitive KYC requests.

INFINOX does not publish a comprehensive schedule of funding fees. In its account specifications, the ECN account charges a commission of "from 3 GBP/EUR/USD/AUD," while the STP account claims zero commission — but the spread mark-up compensates. What is entirely absent is any mention of deposit or withdrawal charges.

From user experiences, we can infer that internal fees are not the primary grievance. Instead, the main cost to traders appears to be the inability to access their own money. When withdrawal requests are stalled for weeks or months, the opportunity cost and psychological toll far exceed any explicit wire fee.

We strongly urge INFINOX to publish a transparent fee schedule, including all third-party charges (e.g., correspondent bank fees for international wires) and processing cut-off times. The current opacity does not serve client interests.

Complicating the picture, our research uncovered seven confirmed clone or impersonator websites targeting INFINOX clients. The FCA warns that clone firms often use the legitimate company’s details to defraud unsuspecting traders. Some of the most egregious funding horror stories could stem from victims who inadvertently deposited with a clone.

However, the complaints we’ve examined are from users who explicitly reference the regulated entities and have been in contact with INFINOX’s official support — the broker is aware of their cases. Therefore, while clone risk is a factor, the core funding reliability issue cannot be dismissed as only a third-party problem. INFINOX itself must take responsibility for the withdrawal delays and account freezes reported by verified clients.

Based on our assessment, INFINOX is not an outright scam — its FCA oversight and generally positive platform reviews create a plausible veneer of legitimacy. But the funding complaints are too numerous and too consistent to ignore.

Before funding a live account, take these precautions: Start with the smallest possible deposit that allows you to test the entire cycle — deposit, trade, and withdraw. Do not add large sums until you have successfully withdrawn at least once. Record all communication and screenshot your account balances and withdrawal requests.

If you encounter delays, escalate formally in writing and reference your consumer rights under FCA rules if you are under the UK entity. For non-UK clients, the Mauritian or Bahamian protection may be more limited, so exercise heightened caution. Be vigilant, too, about clone sites: always double-check the domain and verify registration numbers directly with the regulator.

INFINOX has the regulatory infrastructure to be a safe broker, but its real-world funding performance places it in a gray zone. Treat any deposit as money at risk until it is back in your own bank account.