OptionFX: a domain linked to a clone warning needs proof, not reassurance
OptionFX.trade has a specific historical regulatory issue that should be part of any decision about it. Estonia's Financial Supervision and Resolution Authority included support@optionfx.trade in a December 2019 notice about an entity presenting itself as a clone of a licensed firm. That is a concrete record tied to the domain, not a generic internet rumour.
The age of the warning matters, but it does not make it irrelevant. Domains can go quiet, change presentation or be reused. It would be wrong to assume that every current page or person using a similar name is necessarily the same operation. It would be equally wrong to ignore the record and accept a current claim of legitimacy without checking who is actually behind the offer.
The practical route is simple: do not deposit while the legal identity is uncertain. Obtain the company name, incorporation jurisdiction, licence reference and client agreement. Check the licence on the named regulator's own website and confirm that the regulated firm's published domain matches the one you are being asked to use. If the seller says the brand works under a different entity, that entity must be independently verifiable too.
This is especially important with options and leveraged products, where the platform controls both the account interface and the withdrawal path. A familiar platform name, a professional trading terminal or an introduction through social media does not provide protection if the counterparty cannot be verified.
My view: keep your distance unless an independently confirmed entity can explain the connection to the historic warning and provide a current, matching authorisation. That burden belongs with the provider, not the customer.