天眼评分
ADM · 亚达盟
http://www.admis.com.hk/zh-cn/home
官方网址
评分指数
影响力
影响力
B
影响力指数 NO.1
联系方式
外汇监管 2
单核
1G
40G
1M*ADSL
- 该交易商WikiFX实勘差评已达到4条,请注意风险,谨防受害!
浏览 ADM 亚达盟 的用户还浏览了..
VT Markets
Fortune Prime Global
官网鉴定
admis.com
75.2.20.154admisi.com
75.2.20.154admis.com.sg
99.83.237.141admis.com.hk
54.182.1.12
关系族谱
相关企业
企业简介
| 亚达盟 评论摘要 | |
| 成立时间 | 2010 |
| 注册国家/地区 | 香港 |
| 监管 | SFC |
| 市场工具 | 谷物、金属、软商品和外汇期货 |
| 模拟账户 | / |
| 杠杆 | / |
| 交易平台 | CQG、TT |
| 最低存款 | / |
| 客户支持 | 电话:+65-6632-3000 |
| 电子邮件:sales@admis.com.sg | |
| 地址:新加坡188024维多利亚街武吉士大厦#11-06 | |
亚达盟于2010年在香港注册,是一家专门从事期货交易的经纪商。它使用CQG和TT作为其交易平台,并受SFC监管。然而,它并未透露关于账户和交易细节的太多信息。

优点和缺点
| 优点 | 缺点 |
| 操作时间长 | 没有实体办公室 |
| 费用结构不清晰 | |
| 没有MT4或MT5 | |
| 支付方式未知 |
亚达盟是否合法?
是的,亚达盟受到香港证券及期货事务监察委员会(SFC)的监管。
| 监管国家 | 监管机构 | 当前状态 | 受监管实体 | 许可证类型 | 许可证号码 |
![]() | 香港证券及期货事务监察委员会(SFC) | 受监管 | 亚达盟香港有限公司 | 从事期货合约交易 | ACP509 |


WikiFX实地调查
WikiFX实地调查团队访问了亚达盟在香港的监管地址,但我们没有找到其实体办公室。

我可以在亚达盟上交易什么?
亚达盟 提供了广泛的期货产品。此外,它还提供与谷物、金属、软商品和外汇相关的市场信息。

交易平台
亚达盟 使用CQG和Trading Technologies (TT)作为其交易平台,不支持MT4或MT5。
| 交易平台 | 支持 | 可用设备 | 适用于 |
| CQG | ✔ | PC,Web | / |
| Trading Technologies | ✔ | PC,Web | / |
| MT4 | ❌ | / | 初学者 |
| MT5 | ❌ | / | 有经验的交易者 |

企业画像
- 20年以上
- 英国监管
- 香港监管
- 全牌照 (MM)
- 衍生品交易牌照 (AGN)
- 高级风险隐患
Wiki问答
Can I trust ADMIS as a reliable and secure broker for trading?
Drawing on my own experience as a trader, evaluating whether ADMIS is trustworthy and secure requires a careful, measured approach. First, I look for regulatory oversight, and here, ADMIS is regulated by both the SFC in Hong Kong and the FCA in the UK. While this is generally positive, I notice WikiFX surveys did not find a physical office at their regulatory addresses, which makes me pause—transparency and traceability matter greatly for security. Another key point from my perspective is the distinct lack of essential trading details. ADMIS does not disclose crucial information like minimum deposit, leverage or fee structures, and offers no support for mainstream platforms like MT4 or MT5, instead using CQG and TT. For me, the absence of such baseline data means I can’t evaluate trading costs or risks thoroughly, and this ambiguity is a concern. User reviews are mixed. Some report fast withdrawals and good customer service, but there are also worrying “exposure” reports about issues with fund withdrawals and procedural hurdles that may indicate complications or delays—issues I personally weigh very seriously. Finally, I’m wary that despite their longevity, clear risk management practices were not evident. In summary, while ADMIS is technically regulated, my trust as an experienced trader would be reserved until clarity around operations, physical presence, and basic trading conditions is improved. Risk-averse traders should proceed with caution and consider the transparency gaps before committing significant funds.
What are the key advantages and disadvantages of choosing ADMIS for trading?
From my experience as a trader looking into ADMIS, there are distinct advantages and disadvantages worth considering carefully before making a commitment. What stands out most in ADMIS's favor is its long operational history—over twenty years—which often suggests a certain level of industry resilience. Being regulated in both the United Kingdom and Hong Kong by reputable authorities like the FCA and SFC provides an extra degree of reassurance around compliance, although I know that regulation is not a guarantee against all risk. ADMIS focuses on futures trading, particularly in commodities like grains, metals, and softs, and offers specialized trading platforms such as CQG and Trading Technologies. This is potentially attractive for advanced traders looking for specialized futures exposure. Additionally, some user reviews note quick deposit and withdrawal processing as well as responsive customer service, which can be significant for managing trading operations. However, I am cautious for several reasons. There are red flags regarding the lack of a physical office in both Hong Kong and the UK, as found in on-site verifications. This absence undermines trust for me, given that physical presence still often reflects a broker’s operational legitimacy. There is also a worrying lack of clear information about fee structures, minimum deposit amounts, and payment methods. For me, transparency on costs and funding is a non-negotiable requirement. Furthermore, ADMIS does not support MetaTrader 4 or 5—platforms many traders are comfortable with—which could be a real hurdle if you value flexibility or are accustomed to those platforms. There have also been mixed user experiences, including complaints about withdrawal delays and customer support inconsistencies. Because capital safety is paramount, any unresolved reports about withdrawal issues demand extra caution, regardless of positive feedback elsewhere. In short, while ADMIS may suit experienced futures traders comfortable with CQG or TT platforms, the opaque details and uncertainty around its physical operations are significant disadvantages that keep me very conservative about recommending it for most traders.
Are there any inactivity fees imposed by ADMIS, and if so, under what circumstances do they apply?
Based on my detailed review of the available information, ADMIS does not provide clear or transparent details regarding its fee structure, including whether inactivity fees are imposed or under what conditions they might apply. As an experienced trader, I find this lack of clarity concerning—especially since fee transparency is crucial for risk management and cost assessment. In my own approach, I always prioritize brokers who openly disclose all account charges, as even a seemingly small inactivity fee can unexpectedly erode capital over time, particularly for those who trade less frequently. The absence of concrete information about account maintenance or inactivity fees at ADMIS makes it difficult for me to fully evaluate the ongoing costs of maintaining an account with them. In my opinion, whenever key details like these are unclear, it’s prudent for traders to proceed with caution and, if seriously considering the broker, to contact their support directly for written confirmation before opening or funding an account. For me, full fee transparency is a basic requirement for trustworthiness in any broker, and the current ambiguity around ADMIS’s inactivity fee policy is a significant consideration in my risk evaluation.
Is ADMIS overseen by any regulatory bodies, and if so, which financial authorities are responsible?
As an experienced trader evaluating ADMIS, I always prioritize regulatory oversight before considering any broker. In my research, I found that ADMIS is indeed overseen by recognized financial authorities. The broker is regulated by the Securities and Futures Commission (SFC) in Hong Kong, specifically under a license for dealing in futures contracts. This type of regulation can provide a degree of client protection and suggests some level of operational scrutiny from the authorities involved. Additionally, ADMIS is linked to operations in the United Kingdom and is regulated there by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) as a market maker. From my perspective, dual regulation from well-known bodies like the SFC and FCA does give me some reassurance regarding transparency and oversight. However, it is important to recognize that field investigations reported on WikiFX did not find a physical office at their official UK and Hong Kong addresses, which raises some cautionary flags for me. In the end, while regulatory licenses exist and can signal legitimacy, I personally would not base my entire trust in regulation alone, especially when transparency issues or operational oddities appear. For me, careful due diligence—beyond verifying licenses—is always essential.
用户反馈2
评价 2








