SECP investor alerts

The Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan publishes investor alerts naming companies and websites that it says are not authorised to offer a financial activity. The table above records each alert exactly as the source published it, with the date the SECP gave. A row is a public notice, not a finding by this site.

SECP investor alerts

The entity or website named and the date the SECP gave.

What an SECP investor alert is

An SECP investor alert is a public notice that a named company or website is not authorised to offer a financial activity. The SECP issues it under its mandate to protect investors, and it names the entity and the activity. The alert does not say that the entity has been convicted of anything, and it does not order the entity to stop operating.

An alert is not a court order. It is a warning from the regulator, published on its website. The SECP may issue an alert after receiving complaints, or after its own review. The alert remains on the website, but the SECP does not always update it, so a reader must check the date on each row.

What the table above records

The table above has columns for the name exactly as the source wrote it, the date the source published the alert, what the alert concerns, and a link to the original. Each row is a record of what the SECP published, not a finding of this site. The table is read once a week from the SECP's website.

The table does not add any interpretation. If the SECP wrote a name in a certain way, that is how it appears here. If the alert concerns a specific activity, that is what is shown. The reader can follow the link to see the original alert on the SECP's website.

What an alert does not mean

An alert does not mean that the named entity has been found guilty of fraud. It means the SECP has said the entity is not authorised to offer a financial activity. The alert does not state that the entity will be prosecuted, and it does not state that the entity has stopped operating.

The alert also does not mean that every other platform is safe. The SECP publishes relatively few alerts, so the reader cannot use absence from this table as a test of whether a platform is authorised. A platform may be unauthorised but not yet the subject of an alert.

Why the list is short

The SECP publishes few alerts, and the length of the list reflects what the regulator chose to publish, not how many platforms exist. The SECP does not publish a list of authorised apps or platforms, so there is no register to check an app against in the same way as the exchange list.

The short list means that a reader cannot rely on it as a complete warning system. The SECP may be slow to issue an alert, or it may not issue one at all for a platform that later turns out to be unauthorised. The reader must use other checks as well.

How to use the table

When a platform claims to offer investment services, a reader can look for its name in the table above. If the name appears, the alert tells what the SECP said and when. The reader should then read the original alert on the SECP's website to see the full text.

If the name does not appear, the reader cannot conclude that the platform is authorised. The absence means only that the SECP has not published an alert about it. The reader should then check the exchange list if the platform claims to trade shares, and should consider other sources.

What to do with an alert

If a reader sees a platform they use in the table, they should read the alert carefully. The alert may state what the platform offers and why the SECP considers it unauthorised. The reader can then decide what to do, but this site does not tell them to stop using the platform.

The reader can report the platform to the SECP if they have information, and they can use the complaint channels described on the page about where to report. The alert itself is a public record, and the reader can keep a copy of it for their own use.

An alert is a snapshot of one moment in the regulator's publication history

The SECP publishes an investor alert when its own process has reached a point that justifies a public notice. The alert carries the date on which it was issued, and that date fixes the regulator's knowledge at that time. Alerts are not updated in place when new information arrives. A platform that was the subject of an alert may later change its name, its operating model, or its ownership, and the original alert remains as it was.

This means a reader looking at the table sees a set of dated records, each tied to the day it appeared. Comparing an alert from last year with a platform operating today requires reading both the alert text and the current state of the platform. The table does not rank alerts by severity or currency; it orders them by date as published. The most recent alert is not necessarily the most relevant to a current offer.

A snapshot is not a verdict on everything the platform has ever done. It records that on the date shown, the SECP saw grounds to warn the public about a particular scheme, name, or practice. The reader's job is to match the alert to the app in front of them, not to assume that one alert covers every app with a similar interface or pitch.

The exchange's list records a licence, not a marketing channel

A brokerage firm that holds a trading right entitlement certificate is authorised to execute trades on the Pakistan Stock Exchange. That authorisation is attached to the firm's legal entity and its registered office, not to a mobile application, a website domain, or a social media page. The certificate does not list which apps the firm operates, which third-party platforms it partners with, or which payment wallets it accepts.

When a platform claims that it uses a licensed broker for share trading, the claim is about a relationship. The exchange's list shows only that the broker exists and holds the right to trade. It does not show whether any particular app is connected to that broker, whether the broker has agreed to clear trades for that app's users, or whether the platform's operators are authorised to act on the broker's behalf.

Checking the list is therefore a first step, not a final one. A platform may display the name of a licensed broker without any actual relationship. A broker may have its own app, but that app's name may differ from the broker's legal name. The reader must compare the platform's claim against the list and then, if the claim is specific, verify it directly with the broker through channels the broker itself publishes.

A deposit that moves through a wallet leaves a record the wallet provider can trace internally

When a reader sends money to an app, the payment usually moves through a mobile wallet or a bank account. The wallet provider records the sender, the receiver, the amount, and the time of the transaction. It also records the unique transaction identifier that appears in the sender's statement. That identifier is the anchor for any later dispute or complaint, because it lets the provider locate the exact movement of funds.

The receiver's name as shown in the wallet app may be a display name chosen by the account holder. It is not proof of the legal identity of the person or company operating the platform, nor is it proof that the account belongs to the platform at all. A single platform may use many receiving accounts, and the names on those accounts may change between deposits. The payment trail records the account that received the money, not the business that marketed the app.

What the wallet provider can do with that record depends on its own procedures and the rules it follows. A provider may freeze an account if it receives a complaint from a regulator or a law enforcement agency. It cannot reverse a transaction simply because a customer says the recipient was not what it seemed. The record is evidence, not a refund mechanism. Keeping the transaction ID and the full statement entry is the minimum a reader needs before making any complaint.

A platform can be outside the alert table and still be outside the trading-rights list

The absence of a platform from the SECP's investor alert table does not mean the platform is authorised to offer securities trading. The alert table records platforms that the SECP has specifically warned about. Many platforms that solicit deposits for 'tasks' or 'packages' never appear in the alert table because the SECP has not yet issued an alert about them, or because their activity falls outside the SECP's direct jurisdiction.

The trading-rights list on the exchange's register is a positive list: it names the firms that may trade. If a platform claims to trade shares on the exchange, the reader should find the platform's claimed broker on that list. A platform that is not on the alert table but also cannot show a connection to a listed broker occupies a gap between the two registers. That gap is not a safe zone; it is simply a space the two registers do not cover together.

The two tables answer different questions. The alert table answers: has the SECP warned about this specific platform? The trading-rights list answers: which firms are licensed to trade? Neither table alone tells a reader whether a platform is honest, solvent, or likely to return deposits. A platform that appears on neither table has not been cleared by either; it has merely not been recorded by either at the time of checking.

The money a reader sends to a task app is not held in the reader's name

When a reader deposits money into a task or package app, the money moves from the reader's wallet or bank account into an account controlled by the app's operators. The balance shown inside the app is a number in the app's own database, not a balance in a bank account that the reader owns. The app may call it a wallet, a balance, or an account, but the reader has no direct claim on the underlying funds.

The app's ledger can be changed by the operator without any movement of real money. A task completed, a referral bonus added, or a package unlocked may increase the number shown in the app while no corresponding deposit arrives in any account the reader controls. The reader sees a number rise and interprets it as money earned. The operator sees a liability on its own books, which it may or may not honour when the reader asks to withdraw.

Withdrawal requests often trigger a further demand for a deposit, a fee, or a verification payment. The app may say the additional payment is needed to release the balance, to verify the account, or to upgrade the wallet. Each such demand is a new transfer of real money from the reader to the operator. The visible balance does not move; it remains a number in the app. The real money, once sent, is gone.