ZBG Volume Authenticity Checker
ZBG claims high trading volumes but CoinMarketCap labels it as "untracked." Independent analyses show only about 27 trading pairs exhibit genuine activity, suggesting significant wash trading. This tool estimates the legitimate volume based on industry findings.
Estimated legitimate volume:
$
Based on Chainalysis analysis showing only 27 trading pairs with genuine activity. This is a conservative estimate - actual legitimate volume may be lower.
When you hear about ZBG Exchange - a Hong Kong‑based crypto platform launched in 2018 - you probably wonder whether it’s worth your time. Below is a no‑fluff review that covers everything from its claimed trading volume to hidden fees and regulatory standing.
Key Takeaways
- ZBG claims huge 24‑hour volumes, but CoinMarketCap marks its data as “untracked,” suggesting possible wash‑trading.
- Fees are opaque; many users report surprise charges on withdrawals and trades.
- Security features like 2FA and cold storage are advertised, yet no third‑party audits or proof‑of‑reserves are published.
- Regulatory compliance is unclear - the platform has no known licence from Hong Kong’s SFC.
- Compared with major exchanges, ZBG ranks low on transparency, support, and overall trust.
What Is ZBG Exchange?
ZBG is a subsidiary of ZB.COM, launched in July 2018. Its slogan is “making users' investment choices more flexible.” The platform markets itself as a launchpad for newer tokens that can’t meet the stricter listing criteria of bigger exchanges.
How ZBG Positions Itself in the Market
The exchange focuses on low‑barrier listings. New projects can list for free and hope to graduate to the parent ZB.COM if they generate enough liquidity. Conversely, tokens that lose liquidity on ZB.COM can be “degraded” back to ZBG. This two‑way flow is meant to keep ZBG stocked with fresh assets, but it also means many pairs have little real trading interest.
Volume Claims vs. Reality
Back in 2019, ZBG reported a 24‑hour volume of $450 million, landing it in the global top‑10. By December 2021 the self‑reported figure jumped to $8.8 billion, roughly 29 % of Binance’s volume that day. Those numbers sound impressive, but today CoinMarketCap labels ZBG as an “Untracked Listing,” meaning its figures aren’t verified. Independent analyses from Chainalysis and CryptoQuant show that only about 27 trading pairs exhibit genuine activity; the rest display classic wash‑trading patterns.
Fee Structure - What’s Hidden?
Official documentation rarely mentions maker or taker rates. Traders Union’s May 2025 review warned that users often encounter hidden fees on withdrawals and spreads that are wider than advertised. One community post described a “processing” withdrawal that took 17 days and ended with a vague “system maintenance” email - a red flag for any exchange.
Security & Regulatory Status
ZBG advertises two‑factor authentication, cold storage, and SSL encryption, which are standard industry claims. However, there are no publicly available third‑party security audits or proof‑of‑reserves reports - unlike Kraken, which publishes quarterly audits verified by Marcum LLP.
Regulatory clarity is also missing. Hong Kong’s Securities and Futures Commission (SFC) introduced a licensing framework in March 2023, but there’s no record of ZBG holding such a licence. The FCA (Financial Conduct Authority) in the UK recently warned that platforms with opaque operations, similar to ZBG, are high‑risk for UK users.
User Experience & Support
Feedback is scarce. On CryptoGeek, ZBG sits at 3.7/5 based on three reviews, with complaints focusing on slow withdrawals and unresponsive customer service. The platform’s mobile apps exist for iOS and Android, but recent screenshots show outdated UI and missing features compared to competitors.
How ZBG Stacks Up Against the Big Players
| Feature | ZBG Exchange | Binance | Coinbase | Kraken |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2018 | 2017 | 2012 | 2011 |
| Licensed in HK? | No public SFC licence | No (operates globally) | Yes (multiple jurisdictions) | Yes (EU, US) |
| Verified 24h Volume | Untracked (CMc) | $30 bn (Oct 2025) | $1.5 bn (Q2 2025 revenue) | $5 bn (spot) |
| Fee Transparency | Hidden/unclear | 0.10%‑0.02% maker/taker | 0.05%‑0.60% tiered | 0.00%‑0.26% maker/taker |
| Security Audits | None published | Periodic SOC2 | Annual SOC2 & SOC3 | Quarterly proof‑of‑reserves |
| Customer Support | Limited, slow replies | 24/7 live chat | Phone & chat | Live chat, email |
Final Verdict - Should You Trade on ZBG?
If you need early access to brand‑new tokens and are comfortable with higher risk, ZBG might give you a doorway that larger exchanges close. But the lack of verified volume, unclear fees, missing regulatory licence, and scarce user support tip the risk‑reward balance heavily toward caution. For most traders, sticking with a regulated, transparent platform like Coinbase or Kraken will protect your funds and give you clearer cost expectations.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is ZBG Exchange licensed in Hong Kong?
No public licence from the Hong Kong Securities and Futures Commission (SFC) has been disclosed. This means the platform operates without the regulatory oversight that newer Hong Kong exchanges must obtain.
How reliable are ZBG’s reported trading volumes?
CoinMarketCap lists ZBG as an “Untracked Listing,” indicating its volume numbers aren’t independently verified. Independent data from Chainalysis shows only a handful of pairs with genuine activity, suggesting the majority of the reported volume may be inflated.
What fees does ZBG charge for trading?
ZBG does not publish a clear maker‑taker schedule. Users have reported hidden withdrawal fees and wider spreads than expected. Always check the fee breakdown on the platform before executing large trades.
Is my money safe on ZBG?
The exchange claims standard security practices, but it lacks third‑party audits, proof‑of‑reserves, or insurance. Compared to regulated platforms that publish audit reports, ZBG’s safety assurances are weaker.
Can I withdraw crypto quickly from ZBG?
Withdrawal times vary. Some users report delays of over two weeks and generic “system maintenance” replies. If fast withdrawals are critical for you, consider a more responsive exchange.
James Williams, III
October 22, 2025 AT 10:05Alright, let’s break down what the ZBG review actually says about the fee structure. The platform doesn’t publish a clear maker‑taker schedule, which means you’ve got to watch the spread on each trade – it can widen significantly on low‑liquidity pairs. Withdrawal fees are also “hidden” in the sense that they pop up after you hit the confirm button, especially for smaller amounts. From a security standpoint, they’ve got the basic 2FA and cold‑storage claims, but without third‑party audit reports you can’t verify the real safety net. If you’re just testing a new token, the low‑barrier listings might be tempting, but for sizable capital I’d stick with an exchange that offers transparent proofs‑of‑reserves. In short, treat ZBG like you would a sandbox – great for experiments, risky for serious holdings.
Patrick Day
October 23, 2025 AT 08:18They’re feeding us the same old PR fluff while the real puppeteers pull the strings behind the curtains. Look at the “untracked” volume flag on CoinMarketCap – that’s a neon sign that someone’s cooking the books. The withdrawal delays and vague “system maintenance” emails are just a smokescreen to keep us in the dark. Remember, every exchange that hides its audits is probably laundering something else.
Andrew Smith
October 24, 2025 AT 06:31You hit the nail on the head, man. It’s easy to get lured by flashy numbers, but the only thing that’s truly safe is staying vigilant and diversifying. Keep your eyes peeled, stay skeptical, and don’t let the hype dictate your moves. Better safe than sorry, right?
Jenna Em
October 25, 2025 AT 04:45When we stare at the volume charts, we see more than numbers; we see a reflection of our own hope for quick gains. If the data is inflated, it mirrors a collective denial, a wishful thinking that the market will reward us without risk. Simpler truth: a platform that hides its real activity invites suspicion. The heart of crypto should be about transparency, not illusion. So, in a world of noise, we must listen to the quiet signs of honesty.
Stephen Rees
October 26, 2025 AT 02:58The idea of hidden volumes feels unsettling, yet I find myself quietly questioning the motives behind such opacity. Perhaps it is simply a market in its infancy, still learning how to self‑regulate. Still, the lack of third‑party audits gently nudges me toward caution.
Katheline Coleman
October 27, 2025 AT 01:11Dear community, I would like to extend my appreciation for the thorough analysis presented herein. The delineation of ZBG’s regulatory ambiguities, particularly the absence of a recognized SFC licence, is of paramount importance for investors seeking compliance. Moreover, the exposition regarding concealed fee structures provides valuable insight into operational risks. I encourage fellow traders to weigh these considerations meticulously before allocating capital. Please feel free to share any additional empirical observations you may possess regarding user support responsiveness.
Amy Kember
October 27, 2025 AT 23:25Good points but also note the UI is outdated and that slow support can waste time for traders who need quick assistance
Evan Holmes
October 28, 2025 AT 21:38Looks like another sketchy exchange.
mike ballard
October 29, 2025 AT 19:51Yo fam, ZBG’s “low‑barrier” listing model is basically a feeder farm for trash tokens 🚀. The hidden spreads are just “slippage” in disguise, and those withdrawal delays? Classic queue‑jamming. If you want legit liquidity, stick to venues with verified on‑chain audits 📊. TL;DR: ZBG = high‑risk, low‑reward.
Molly van der Schee
October 30, 2025 AT 18:05I appreciate the balanced view, James. While it’s true that ZBG may function best as a sandbox for experimentation, the very act of exploring new tokens can spark innovative uses in the ecosystem. As long as traders allocate only what they can afford to lose, the platform’s risks become part of a broader learning curve rather than a fatal flaw. Stay curious, stay cautious.
Mike Cristobal
October 31, 2025 AT 16:18It is a moral imperative to demand transparency from any financial service. When an exchange hides its audits and fees, it betrays the trust of its users. Supporting such platforms indirectly endorses deceitful practices. We must hold them accountable and push for clearer regulations.
Erik Shear
November 1, 2025 AT 14:31Everyone’s concerns are valid and stem from a desire to protect capital. While we criticize ZBG’s opacity, let’s also recognize that newer exchanges can fill gaps left by the giants, offering early access to innovative assets. A balanced approach-using ZBG for small experiments while keeping the bulk of funds on regulated venues-might serve the community best.
Donnie Bolena
November 2, 2025 AT 12:45Wow!!! This review really opens our eyes to the hidden pitfalls!!! Yet, for those daring enough to try early‑stage tokens, ZBG could be a doorway!!! Just remember to do your own research, keep stakes low, and stay vigilant!!! 🚀🚀🚀
Elizabeth Chatwood
November 3, 2025 AT 10:58hey guys i get the vibe that zbg is kinda sketchy but if u only wanna test a token maybe its okay dont put all ur money there just keep it light and watch for those slow withdrawals ok thx
Lindsey Bird
November 4, 2025 AT 09:11Oh my god, the drama of ZBG is like a Shakespearean tragedy! The hidden fees, the endless wait for withdrawals – it's a saga of betrayal! If you thought crypto was fast and furious, this exchange will slap you with reality! I mean, who even trusts a platform that can't even show a simple audit? It's pure theater, and not the good kind!
john price
November 5, 2025 AT 07:25Look heere, ZBG is nither a legit exchnage nor a "playground". The voluem is falsified, the fees are sneaky and the support is a joke. If u care about ur fund`s security dont waste tim on this. This is a belly fater we dont need in our market.
Ty Hoffer Houston
November 6, 2025 AT 05:38Thanks for the comprehensive breakdown, everyone. I think the key takeaway is that ZBG may serve a niche for early token access, but the lack of regulatory clarity and audit transparency makes it a high‑risk option. Diversifying across multiple exchanges while keeping only a small portion on ZBG could mitigate potential downsides.
Scott McCalman
November 7, 2025 AT 03:51Honestly, if you’ve read the whitepaper, you’ll see that ZBG’s “unique” model is just a repackaged version of old pump‑and‑dump schemes. The lack of proof‑of‑reserves is a red flag bigger than any fee surprise. 😑 Don’t be fooled by the slick UI – it’s all smoke and mirrors.
johnny garcia
November 8, 2025 AT 02:05In accordance with established financial prudence, one must assess the epistemic validity of any exchange’s disclosed data. The opacity surrounding ZBG’s volume metrics undermines the epistemic reliability required for sound investment decisions. Consequently, the rational actor would allocate capital preferentially toward platforms with demonstrable transparency and auditability. 📈
Ryan Comers
November 9, 2025 AT 00:18Our nation’s crypto future should not be tainted by shady foreign platforms like ZBG. They prey on naïve investors while hiding behind buzzwords. Support home‑grown, regulated exchanges that respect our financial sovereignty! 🇺🇸💪
Prerna Sahrawat
November 9, 2025 AT 22:31In the lofty halls of financial discourse, where the lexicon of legitimacy is meticulously curated, ZBG emerges as a most audacious affront to the very principles of transparency that underpin our collective trust. Its self‑congratulatory proclamation of “low‑barrier listings” is, in my estimation, a euphemistic veil draped over a mechanism designed to siphon unwary capital into a vortex of unregulated tokens. One cannot overlook the egregious omission of a recognized SFC licence, a statutory hallmark that demarcates the boundary between lawful enterprise and reckless opportunism. Moreover, the dissonance between the advertised 2FA security suite and the conspicuous absence of third‑party audits bespeaks a deliberate obfuscation of risk. The purported volume figures, inflated to a staggering $8.8 billion, are but a mirage conjured by wash‑trading algorithms, a chimeric façade that belies the scarcity of genuine market activity. To the discerning investor, the hidden withdrawal fees constitute a parasitic levy, extracting value under the pretense of “system maintenance.” It is incumbent upon us, as custodians of rational capital, to eschew such perfidious entities and to champion platforms that submit to rigorous scrutiny. Let us, therefore, not be seduced by the siren song of early‑token access, for such allure is but a fleeting dalliance with potential ruin. In the grand tapestry of the crypto ecosystem, ZBG represents a discordant thread, one that threatens to unravel the fabric of trust if left unchecked. I implore my fellow connoisseurs of finance to employ diligent due‑diligence, to demand auditable proof‑of‑reserves, and to relegate ZBG to the annals of cautionary tales. Only through collective vigilance can we preserve the sanctity of our markets against the insidious encroachments of such clandestine operations. The community's chorus of criticism, once ignored, now reverberates across forums, signalling a shift toward accountability. Such a groundswell of dissent compels regulators to tighten oversight, lest similar schemes proliferate unchecked. Furthermore, the platform's user interface, stagnant and archaic, betrays a neglect of user experience that is unbecoming of a modern exchange. In sum, ZBG's existence is a cautionary exemplar of how opacity breeds mistrust and ultimately erodes the very market it purports to serve. Therefore, we must collectively shun it, lest we become complicit in its perpetuation.