Compare fixed term deposits: Platform source review

Compare fixed term deposits appears in a source record attributed to Financial Markets Authority. The identity, jurisdiction and finding below define the scope of this review.

The identity in the source

Recorded name

Compare fixed term deposits

Source authority

Financial Markets Authority

Source jurisdiction

New Zealand

Recorded category

Unregistered/Unlicensed entity offering financial products or services

Source validation date

2023-06-09

Source modification date

2023-06-09

Additional source context

FMA are concerned that Compare Fixed Term Deposits (CFTD) may be operating a scam. It operates a website claiming to offer consumers a way to compare all registered and regulated fixed income investments in New Zealand and find the highest rates. This website states that it is “fully insured and asset backed by the provider,” however no such scheme is currently offered in New Zealand.There is also no evidence to support the claim that its “recommended partners” are authorised or regulated by the Financial Markets Authority (FMA). We have seen an increase in the number of investment scam victims reporting that they have put personal details into comparison websites such as CFTD and then been contacted by individuals purporting to be from well-known banking institutions such as Citibank or HSBC. We believe this website site is a front used to collect personal information from New Zealanders, which then enables the overseas scammers to contact them with fictitious investment opportunities.Some victims have lost hundreds of thousands of dollars to these schemes.We recommend New Zealanders exercising extreme caution when dealing with this entity and not provide it with any personal information. Entity name: Compare fixed term depositsWebsite: comparefixedtermdeposits.net/

Read the primary authority source

Read the finding in context

The recorded category is reproduced above. Read the linked authority’s finding in its own terms. An authorization warning, restriction or other regulatory notice does not by itself establish every allegation about an entity or prove a particular person’s loss.

Match the record to your experience

Compare the complete website or profile address, payment destination and communications you used. A similar name is not enough to identify the same operator. Retain original messages, payment references and dates so that any differences remain visible.

Follow the evidence and payment route

CryptoDac investigates cryptocurrency fraud, traces digital assets and develops evidence to pursue appropriate lawful recovery routes. For a matter relating to Compare fixed term deposits, the starting questions are which identity presented the service, how payments were sent, which records support the sequence and which relevant platform or authority may be able to act.

A useful chronology separates amounts actually sent from displayed balances or advertised returns. Public transaction records can show movement between addresses, while ownership and legal responsibility may require further evidence. Recovery strategy depends on the facts and the actions of the relevant parties.

Preserve what can support a review

Keep exact website addresses, dated correspondence, transaction IDs, network details and the original records of payment and withdrawal requests. Describe uncertainty honestly. Do not send seed phrases, private keys, passwords or one-time codes.

Dates and source scope

Source dates are labelled separately above. The publication date on this article records its CryptoDac release and is not a claim that CryptoDac published the authority’s warning on its original date. Source records may change; consult the linked authority for its current notice and distinguish its jurisdiction from other countries.

Source and investigation methodology · Request a correction · Return to Scam Brokers