天眼評分
I-Access · 一通
http://www.i-access.com/newstart_c.html
官方網址
評分指數
影響力
影響力
C
影響力指數 NO.1
聯繫方式
持牌機構:I-Access Investors Limited
監管證號:ALV032
- 經查證,該交易商當前暫無有效外匯監管,請注意風險!
瀏覽I-Access 一通 的用戶還瀏覽了..
VT Markets
fpmarkets
官網鑒定
i-access.com
69.197.18.188伺服器所在地美國
備案號--主要訪問國家/地區--功能變數名稱創建時間0001-01-01網站名稱WHOIS.DOMAINDISCOVER.COM所屬公司TIERRANET INC. DBA DOMAINDISCOVER
關係族譜
相關企業
公司簡介
| 一通 評論摘要 | |
| 成立年份 | 1999 |
| 註冊地區 | 香港 |
| 監管 | 無監管 |
| 市場工具 | 證券、股票、期貨、期權 |
| 模擬帳戶 | ✅ |
| 交易平台 | ISSNet |
| 客戶支援 | |
| 電話:2890 8019 | |
| 傳真:2850 5786 | |
| 電郵:info@i-access.com | |
| 地址:尖沙咀海港城海洋中心8樓801-3室 | |
一通 資訊
一通 是一家於1999年在香港成立的未受監管的頂級券商和金融服務提供商,提供證券交易、保證金交易、力量交易、新股交易、中國A股交易、股票借貸、沽空、期貨交易、期權交易、夜間交易、期權策略、高收益、展期、貴金屬、零股交易、月度計劃、網上新股認購、即時行情、櫃檯服務、資金進出和借貸等產品和服務。

優缺點
| 優點 | 缺點 |
| 營運時間長 | 缺乏監管 |
| 多樣化交易產品 | 收取佣金費用 |
| 提供模擬帳戶 |
一通 是否合法?
否。一通 目前沒有有效的監管。請注意風險!此外,其域名狀態顯示禁止客戶轉移。


我可以在一通上交易什麼?
| 交易工具 | 支援 |
| 證券 | ✔ |
| 股票 | ✔ |
| 期貨 | ✔ |
| 期權 | ✔ |
| 外匯 | ❌ |
| 大宗商品 | ❌ |
| 指數 | ❌ |
| 加密貨幣 | ❌ |
| 債券 | ❌ |
| ETFs | ❌ |

一通 費用
| 投資 | 佣金 | 市場訂單佣金 |
| 香港證券 | 交易金額的0.25%,最低收費為$100 | |
| 上海/深圳A股 | 每筆$5 | |
| 期貨 | 每張$5 | 每張$2 |
| 如果同一月份交易任何種類的期貨合約達到3,000張或以上,則在同一月份的下一個交易日每張$2 | ||
| 如果同一月份交易任何種類的期貨合約達到10,000張或以上,則在同一月份的下一個交易日每張$0 | ||
| 指數/貨幣期權 | 每張$5 | |
| 股票期權 | 5張或以下每張$5。超過5張,每張$5或總保費的0.1%(四捨五入至$1),以較低者為準,最低收費為$30 | |
| 股票連接期權 | 每張$5 | |
| 現貨貴金屬 | ❌ | |

交易平台
| 交易平台 | 支援 | 可用設備 |
| ISSNet APP | ✔ | 手機 |
| ISSNet web | ✔ | 電腦、筆記本電腦、平板電腦 |


存款和提款
至於最低存款金額,一通 沒有設定任何條件。除此之外,有關處理時間、付款選項和接受的貨幣等其他詳情尚不清楚。

企業畫像
- 5-10年
- 監管牌照存疑
- 展業區域存疑
- 香港證券交易已撤銷
- 涉嫌超限經營
- 高級風險隱患
Wiki問答
Could you give a comprehensive overview of the fees charged by I-Access, covering both commissions and spreads?
As an experienced trader, I always approach any broker’s fee structure with careful scrutiny, especially when transparency is a concern. With I-Access, what stands out immediately is their commission-based pricing model rather than spreads—in fact, forex and commodities trading aren’t even offered, so the familiar spread-based cost structure is not relevant here. Instead, I found that fees are clearly tied to commissions on securities, futures, and options transactions. For trading Hong Kong securities, the broker charges a 0.25% commission per transaction, with a minimum of $100 per trade. Shanghai and Shenzhen A-shares incur a flat $5 commission per order. Futures contracts are charged $5 per contract, though if you trade more than 3,000 contracts in a month, the rate drops to $2 for subsequent contracts, and there are further reductions for exceptionally high volumes. Options, whether stock or index-linked, generally carry a $5 per contract fee, although for stock options over five contracts, a 0.1% of total premium (with a minimum of $30) may apply if that proves to be lower. In my opinion, these commission levels are notably high, particularly the minimum charges. This structure may significantly impact smaller investors or those making frequent-but-small trades, as costs can quickly add up. I also couldn't find precise information regarding other incidental fees such as deposit or withdrawal charges, which leaves some uncertainty I personally find a bit unsettling. Ultimately, while their commission scheme is straightforward for the products offered, anyone considering I-Access should factor these sizeable charges and lack of regulatory clarity into their risk assessment.
What are the key advantages and disadvantages of using I-Access for trading?
Reflecting on my experience as a trader, I always weigh a broker’s track record and regulatory standing above all else. With I-Access, I noticed the company has operated since 1999, which is a sign of longevity in an industry where many fade quickly. They offer a fairly wide spectrum of products—ranging from Hong Kong and China A shares to futures and options. The availability of a demo account is another positive point for those who want to familiarize themselves with the ISSNet trading platform. However, for me, the disadvantages stand out as particularly significant. I-Access operates without any valid regulation, and its previous Hong Kong SFC license has been revoked. This immediately raises questions about oversight and client protection—issues I cannot ignore, especially as an independent trader responsible for managing my own risk. I also noted the warnings about a suspicious regulatory license and business scope, along with the fact that there was no office found at the listed Hong Kong address during a field check. These are warning signals that I personally treat with utmost seriousness. Additionally, fees seem on the higher side, with a minimum commission for Hong Kong securities and detailed charges for options and futures. While commission-based structures are common, the lack of transparency around deposits, withdrawals, and accepted currencies poses another layer of uncertainty for me. As someone who values oversight and clear operational practices, I find these issues make I-Access a high-risk choice. For my own capital and peace of mind, I prefer brokers with transparent, up-to-date regulation and robust client safeguards.
What documents do I need to provide in order to make my initial withdrawal through I-Access?
As an experienced trader, I’m always cautious when considering the withdrawal process, especially with brokers lacking clear regulatory status. In the case of I-Access, I found that their WikiFX profile provides very limited transparency about their withdrawal requirements and process in general. There isn’t any specific, detailed guidance available regarding what documents are necessary for an initial withdrawal. Typically, any legitimate broker would require standard verification documents—such as proof of identity (like a passport or government ID) and proof of address (such as a recent utility bill or bank statement)—to comply with anti-money laundering and KYC policies. However, the absence of published details from I-Access about their process and the lack of regulatory oversight deeply concern me. Without such clarity, the risk of delays, denials, or additional, unexpected requirements increases. To be prudent, I would recommend preparing the usual documents I mentioned, but I would also exercise extra caution: I would reach out directly to I-Access via their official contact methods and request written confirmation of the exact documentation and procedure before making any deposit or attempting a withdrawal. Personally, the lack of clear, regulated procedures would be a significant red flag for me, and I would be very hesitant to proceed without explicit information and guarantees in writing. In these situations, protecting my funds and personal data is always my paramount concern.
Are there any payment methods with I-Access that allow for instant withdrawals?
As an experienced trader, I approach every broker with a healthy amount of caution, particularly when it comes to deposits and withdrawals. With I-Access, my concerns are heightened due to several key issues. Based on my research, I-Access does not provide any clear information regarding their payment methods or withdrawal processing times. They don’t specify which options they support, what currencies are accepted, or how quickly withdrawals are handled. For me, this lack of transparency immediately signals a red flag and makes it impossible to confidently say if any instant withdrawal method exists with this broker. In addition, I-Access operates without any valid regulatory oversight and has had its key license revoked in Hong Kong. In my experience, brokers with regulatory issues often struggle to maintain trust and operational stability, which can result in unreliable or delayed handling of funds. When I cannot verify essential details like payment processes or withdrawal speeds with a broker, I simply do not risk my capital with them. My conservative approach stems from years of trading, having seen how often unclear processes can result in unnecessary complications or, worse, loss of funds. Given these uncertainties, I personally would not proceed with any deposits to I-Access until they publish clear, verifiable information about payment methods and withdrawal timings. Without such transparency and the presence of legitimate oversight, the risks are simply too high for me.
用戶評價 1
你要評價的內容
請輸入...


