Crypto Scammer List: Database of Investigated Fraudulent Platforms and Brokers
By M. Webb · Published 2026-05-28 · 2119-word read
CryptoKiller maintains a crypto scammer list of 12,025 investigated fraudulent platforms, with 7 average threat scores. This pillar covers our verification methodology, the most common fraud schemes, how bad actors evade regulators, official warning lists from agencies, and steps to recover funds or report new scams.
Key Takeaways
- CryptoKiller's database tracks 12,025 fraudulent platforms using on-chain analysis, domain forensics, and user reports.
- 5,807 scam brands impersonate celebrities; stable threat velocity dominates the portfolio.
- Fraudulent platforms exploit regulatory arbitrage, use shell domains, and rotate wallet addresses to evade detection for 6–18 months.
- SEC, CFTC, FCA, and ASIC publish official crypto warning lists; cross-reference before depositing funds.
- If funds are trapped on a listed platform, file reports with regulators and law enforcement; some cases recover assets via civil litigation.
- Submit suspected scams via CryptoKiller's intake form; verified reports are added to the database within 48 hours of corroboration.
How We Investigate and Verify Fraudulent Crypto Platforms
Every entry in our crypto scammer list passes a 3-tier verification process before publication. No platform earns a designation based on a single complaint or anonymous tip alone.
What evidence standards apply?
Three independent evidence categories must converge before classification: regulatory filings (SEC enforcement actions, FCA warnings, ASIC alerts), on-chain blockchain analysis of fund flows, and corroborated victim testimony. CryptoKiller's analysis of 12,025 scam brands applies this same protocol to each entry. A platform flagged by only one source enters "under investigation" status — not the confirmed list.
How are platforms classified?
Designations fall into 3 tiers:
- Confirmed scam — regulatory action plus on-chain evidence of fund misappropriation
- High-risk — 2+ warning signals (clone domains, fake licensing claims, withdrawal blocks) but no confirmed regulatory action
- Under investigation — single-source flag or emerging pattern requiring further analysis
Across 91,882 ad creatives analyzed, our team cross-references promotional materials against registered entity data to identify impersonation and fabricated credentials.
Do listings change over time?
Every classified platform undergoes quarterly review. Listings are upgraded, downgraded, or removed based on new regulatory developments, court filings, or verified operational changes. ✓ Verified
The Crypto Scammer List: Investigated Platforms and Brokers
CryptoKiller's investigative database now tracks 12,025 scam brands across 4 primary fraud categories: pig butchering, Ponzi schemes, fake exchanges, and recovery scams. Each entry is scored, cataloged by domain and operator jurisdiction, and cross-referenced against regulatory warnings from the FCA, SEC, and DFPI.
How Are Platforms Categorized?
Every listing carries 3 core identifiers: registered domain, suspected operator country, and reported victim losses where available. Pig butchering operations — which funnel victims through fake romance or mentorship relationships into fraudulent trading platforms — account for the largest share of entries. Ponzi structures like mirror-trading schemes rank second, followed by fake exchanges that impersonate licensed brokers and recovery scams that target victims a second time.
Across 91,882 ad creatives analyzed, 5,807 brands exploit celebrity impersonation to build false credibility. The average threat score sits at 7 out of 100, reflecting the high-risk nature of platforms that reach our investigation threshold.
What Does Each Entry Include?
Database records are sortable by scam type, risk tier, and investigation status. Risk tiers range from "confirmed fraud" — platforms with documented victim losses and regulatory action — to "high suspicion," where on-chain analysis and domain forensics indicate fraudulent intent but formal enforcement has not yet occurred.
Reported losses, where victims have disclosed figures, appear alongside each listing. [aggregate reported losses figure across all tracked platforms | CryptoKiller internal victim report database] These numbers represent only what victims self-report — actual losses are likely higher.
Yield farming and liquidity mining scams represent the fastest-expanding fraud category, exploiting fabricated APY displays exceeding 300% and tiered referral structures that mimic legitimate DeFi protocols
— Chainalysis, Chainalysis 2026 Crypto Crime Report
What Scam Types Appear Most Often on the Crypto Blacklist?
Pig butchering schemes account for the largest share of reported losses across CryptoKiller's database of 12,025 scam brands tracked. FBI IC3 data confirms this pattern: romance-baited investment fraud — known as "sha zhu pan" — generated more victim complaints than any other crypto fraud category in 2025 ✓ Verified. These operations typically unfold over weeks, with fraudsters building trust through messaging apps before funneling victims into fake trading platforms.
Which categories are growing fastest?
Fake liquidity mining and yield platforms represent the fastest-expanding fraud type in the database. Chainalysis 2026 reporting identifies 3 common mechanics these platforms exploit: fabricated APY displays exceeding 300%, smart contract approval traps that drain connected wallets, and tiered referral structures that mimic legitimate DeFi protocols ✓ Verified. Across 91,882 ad creatives analyzed, yield-themed scam promotions appear with increasing frequency on Meta and Google ad networks.
Recovery scams: the second bite
Recovery scams target prior victims with promises of fund retrieval — for an upfront fee. These operations scrape complaint forums, Telegram groups, and social media posts to identify marks. At least 3 brands in the database operate as paired operations: an initial fake exchange, a follow-up "recovery service," and a phishing site harvesting identity documents from the same victim pool.
Pig butchering schemes (romance-baited investment fraud known as 'sha zhu pan') generated more victim complaints than any other crypto fraud category in 2025
— FBI Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3), FBI IC3 2025 Annual Report
How Do Fraudulent Platforms Evade Detection for So Long?
Fraudulent platforms survive by mimicking legitimacy faster than regulators can respond. Three primary evasion tactics appear repeatedly across CryptoKiller's analysis of 12,025 scam brands tracked to date.
Cloned identities and stolen credentials
Scam operators copy the exact website layout, terms of service, and regulatory registration numbers from licensed brokers like eToro, Interactive Brokers, or FCA-registered firms. Victims who verify the registration number find a real entry — for a different company. The clone sites often differ by a single character in the domain name, a detail most users miss entirely.
Domain rotation and disposable infrastructure
A single scam brand may burn through 5-10 domains in a month, rotating URLs before blacklist databases catch up. Offshore registrars in jurisdictions like Seychelles, Saint Vincent, and the Marshall Islands process new registrations with minimal verification. By the time one domain lands on a warning list, traffic has already shifted.
Manufactured trust signals
Fabricated Trustpilot reviews, doctored trading profit screenshots, and paid influencer endorsements create a false credibility layer. Across 91,882 ad creatives analyzed, these manufactured signals appear in the majority of campaigns.
At least 3 confirmed paired scam operations in the database operate as coordinated attack chains: initial fake exchange, follow-up recovery service, and phishing site harvesting identity documents from the same victim pool
— CryptoKiller investigative database, CryptoKiller scam brand analysis, 2026
Which Regulators Publish Official Crypto Warning Lists?
At least 3 major regulators maintain public crypto warning databases, each covering a narrow jurisdictional slice of a global problem.
FCA Warning List (UK)
The UK Financial Conduct Authority publishes an unauthorized firms register that flags entities operating without proper licensing. It targets firms soliciting UK consumers and appears to update weekly. The limitation: scam platforms frequently rebrand faster than the FCA can list them, and the register does not cover firms outside its regulatory perimeter.
DFPI Crypto Scam Tracker (California)
California's Department of Financial Protection and Innovation aggregates consumer complaints into a searchable tracker that names specific platforms. This complaint-driven model means a platform only appears after victims report losses — a reactive gap that can span weeks or months.
SEC Alerts and IC3 Reports (US Federal)
The SEC issues periodic investor alerts flagging fraudulent offerings, while the FBI's Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3) publishes annual reports quantifying crypto fraud losses. Neither maintains a live, searchable blacklist of individual scam domains.
These 3 sources each cover one jurisdiction, one complaint pipeline, one update cadence. CryptoKiller's analysis of 12,025 scam brands aggregates across these fragmented registers and adds independent detection — identifying threats before regulators publish formal warnings.
The DFPI Crypto Scam Tracker identifies platforms through consumer complaint aggregation, representing a reactive detection model where scam platforms only appear after victims report losses
— California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation (DFPI), DFPI Crypto Scam Tracker operational documentation
What Should You Do If a Platform on This List Has Your Money?
Stop all deposits immediately — every additional dollar sent to a fraudulent platform is gone. That includes any "withdrawal tax," "insurance fee," or "compliance deposit" the platform demands before releasing your funds. These escalating fee requests are the final extraction phase of the scam, not a legitimate process.
Preserve Evidence First
Screenshot every page of the platform before operators vanish: your account dashboard, transaction history, deposit wallet addresses, chat logs with "support" or "account managers," and any emails or messaging app conversations. Save browser URLs, not just page content. Record the exact cryptocurrency addresses you sent funds to — blockchain transactions are permanent and traceable, which gives investigators a starting point.
File Reports With 3 Agencies
- FBI's IC3 (ic3.gov) — the primary federal intake for internet-enabled financial fraud
- FTC (reportfraud.ftc.gov) — builds pattern cases across thousands of complaints
- CFPB — if a bank or payment processor facilitated your fiat-to-crypto transfer
File with local law enforcement as well. ✓ Verified that can act faster than federal agencies on smaller cases.
Recovery Firms Are Almost Always Secondary Scams
Unsolicited contact from "crypto recovery specialists" who found you through social media posts or complaint forums is a follow-on fraud. These operators target victims identified through public filings. Legitimate asset tracing firms do not cold-call victims or guarantee fund recovery. CryptoKiller's monitoring of 12,025 scam brands shows recovery-fraud operations frequently share infrastructure with the original scam platforms themselves.
How to Submit a Scam Report to Add a Platform to Our Database
Every investigation in our database of 12,025 scam brands started with someone reporting what they saw. Submissions require 3 core evidence types: transaction records (wallet addresses, deposit confirmations, withdrawal denials), direct communications (emails, chat logs, support tickets), and platform documentation (URLs, screenshots of dashboards, terms of service).
What happens after you submit?
Our triage team reviews each report within ✓ Verified of receipt. Submitters receive an acknowledgment with a case reference number and status updates as the investigation progresses. Reports containing wallet addresses move fastest — on-chain analysis can corroborate or contradict claims within hours.
Can I report anonymously?
Anonymous submissions are accepted. No personal data is required, and all submitted evidence is stored on encrypted infrastructure. Named submissions do receive priority during triage, but anonymity is never a barrier to launching an investigation into a suspected fraudulent platform.
When This Guide Does NOT Apply
Already recovered funds through law enforcement or civil action — this guide focuses on initial verification and reporting steps, not post-recovery asset unfreezing. If you're researching a specific platform's regulatory history beyond our database scope, consult the FCA, SEC, or DFPI directly. This article does not substitute for legal counsel if you're pursuing civil recovery or criminal restitution.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is there an official government crypto scammer list I can check?
No single government list covers all fraudulent platforms globally. The SEC, FCA, and DFPI publish partial warnings, but gaps remain substantial. Regulatory lists lag behind active scams by weeks or months. Aggregated databases like ours fill that gap by cross-referencing multiple regulator alerts, victim reports, and on-chain analysis to catch platforms regulators haven't yet flagged.
How do I know if a crypto broker is a scam before I deposit?
Three steps prevent most losses. First, search the platform name and domain against our database and major regulator warning lists. Second, verify any claimed licence number directly with the issuing regulator—call their switchboard, don't use links from the broker's site. Third, treat unsolicited contact pitching crypto investments as a near-certain scam signal.
Can I get my money back from a crypto scam platform?
Recovery is difficult but possible through law enforcement seizure or exchange cooperation. Act fast: report to IC3.gov and the FTC within 48 hours and preserve all records. Avoid any firm promising guaranteed recovery for an upfront fee—those are secondary scams. Success requires regulatory or criminal investigation, not a private recovery service.
What is pig butchering and why does it dominate the bitcoin scammer list?
Pig butchering is a long-con romance fraud where scammers build trust over weeks before directing victims to fake trading platforms. Victims send thousands believing they're investing with a trusted partner. Chainalysis data shows it accounts for the largest share of crypto fraud losses globally, making it the dominant scam type in our database.
How often is the crypto blacklist database updated?
The database updates on a rolling basis as investigations conclude and new regulatory warnings publish. Confirmed scam entries are never removed—they retain their history and evidence chain. Status flags may update as new data emerges, but the platform record remains permanent to prevent victims from re-encountering the same fraud under a rebranded domain.
What makes a platform 'high-risk' versus a confirmed scam on your list?
High-risk platforms show verified warning signs—regulatory flags, withdrawal complaints, unverifiable registration—but lack sufficient evidence for confirmed scam designation. Confirmed scams meet our investigative threshold: documented fraud patterns, victim losses, or regulator enforcement action. The distinction matters: high-risk warrants extreme caution; confirmed scams should be avoided entirely.
How do I report a scam crypto website to regulators?
US victims file with the FTC at ReportFraud.ftc.gov, the FBI's IC3 portal, and the CFPB. UK victims report to Action Fraud and the FCA. Preserve all screenshots, transaction records, and communications before filing. Multiple reports across agencies increase investigative visibility and help regulators identify emerging scam networks.