WikiFX

Rispondi

In my review of Master Door FX, I found that there is no available, reliable information regarding inactivity fees associated with their accounts. The broker’s transparency on key account terms—including inactivity policies—is notably lacking, which is an immediate concern for me as someone who prioritizes clear and full disclosure before committing funds. The lack of a published fee structure or detailed terms means I cannot confidently confirm whether they charge inactivity fees, under what circumstances such fees might apply, or how they would be calculated. In my experience with regulated brokers, critical account details like inactivity fees, minimum balances, and potential charges are always explicitly listed in client agreements or FAQs, which helps traders avoid unpleasant surprises. By contrast, Master Door FX operates without recognized regulation and has suspicious business and licensing red flags, according to the available context. This further underscores the need for caution: when a broker isn’t forthcoming about fees—or is unregulated—there’s a significant risk that unexpected costs could be imposed at any time. For me, the inability to verify the presence or absence of inactivity fees is an important signal to proceed very carefully. I would strongly prefer to use a broker with well-documented, transparent fee structures and solid regulatory oversight, so I know exactly what to expect as a client.