KnightPips.com marketed leveraged contracts for difference (CFDs) and is named in an FCA warning. The latest published Snyfer availability check records the .com offline on 10 November 2026. FCA warning; Snyfer record.
If you have already paid KnightPips
If you have sent money and cannot withdraw, or suspect you were misled, contact the bank, card issuer or payment service you used promptly through its official channels. Ask what options apply to your payment. The available options depend on how you paid and the circumstances. FTC guidance after a scam.
Pause requests to send more money to unlock an existing balance. Be especially cautious if an unexpected caller claims your funds have already been recovered and asks for a tax or release payment. Scamwatch guidance; FCA recovery-room warning.
Prepare a payment and withdrawal record
Keep the originals privately and organise:
- The exact website and login address, with dated copies of relevant pages.
- Payments actually sent: dates, amounts, method, recipient and receipts.
- The withdrawal request, any approval, responses and subsequent demands for payment.
- Messages and the balance displayed, kept separate from money actually paid or received.
IC3 evidence guidance; Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre guidance.
You can also use the official reporting route relevant to your situation:
| Country | Official starting point |
|---|---|
| United States | The FTC guide and IC3 complaint guidance |
| Canada | The Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre and local police |
| United Kingdom | Report Fraud for England, Wales and Northern Ireland; Police Scotland for Scotland |
| Australia | Scamwatch, including its linked online police-reporting route |
A report is separate from asking your payment provider for help.
Before you send money
The FCA published its warning on 19 May 2026 and updated it on 1 July. It names knightpips.com and client.knightpips.io, says Knight Pips is not authorised by the FCA, and warns that it may target people in the UK. FCA: Knight Pips.
The warning describes the Financial Ombudsman Service and Financial Services Compensation Scheme protections unavailable when dealing with this firm. That does not decide what options your own bank or payment provider may offer. The warning concerns UK authorisation; it does not establish every similarly named domain's status, including knightpips.co.
Match the exact website and claimed entity, rather than relying on a familiar name, a message, a favourable article or a review score. The media presentations compared below do not establish authorisation or a tested withdrawal.
Trustpilot has separate profiles for knightpips.com and knightpips.co. On 11 November 2026, both displayed Trustpilot notices saying reviews could no longer be posted because the company's website had closed. Those notices give no exact closure date. The recommendation link between the profiles does not establish a common operator or a transfer of accounts. Trustpilot .com profile; Trustpilot .co profile.
In its 27 August 2026 investigation, Which.co.uk reported that 80% of the Trustpilot reviews were one-star when it checked, and that negative reviews had been removed after KnightPips flagged them. These are historical observations, not current profile statistics. Which.co.uk investigation.
What the withdrawal reports and terms show
Reported customer outcomes
In its 27 August 2026 investigation, Which.co.uk described Kate, a pseudonym, who encountered a manipulated political video on Instagram and was contacted about KnightPips. She reportedly paid £200 by card. Further attempted payments totalling £17,000 were stopped with her bank; that amount was not reported as a completed loss. Which.co.uk, Faye Lipson.
Kate said the £200 had not been recovered when the report was published. Which.co.uk also described unsuccessful searches for matching store apps, no response to its request for comment, and the website becoming unavailable after its outreach. Those are the publication's observations and one customer's account. They do not establish that Kate accepted the archived credit terms, or that her payment matched the March Intro offer.
On the .com profile, Tony's 30 June 2026 review reports a first withdrawal received and a second blocked. Finlay's review, updated 2 July 2026, says his initial deposit was returned in full. These are reviewers' accounts, not payment records authenticated for this article or a withdrawal success rate. Original .com reviews.
Archived withdrawal and credit terms
The 24 January 2026 terms, section 13.3, required verification documents and generally returned withdrawals to the deposit source. Section 13.6 aimed for completion within 5–10 business days after approval, with possible additional processing delays. It was not a deadline measured from submission. Archived terms, section 13.
Section 33 required trading volume of 25,000 times the promotional credit amount, in the account's currency. Before meeting it, withdrawing deposited funds carried a 25% cancellation charge on total deposits, with profits also restricted. This was a credit condition, not a universal withdrawal fee.
Section 23.1 allowed monthly inactivity charges of $10 after three months, $15 after six months and $30 after twelve months, with no deposits, withdrawals or trading. These January rules do not establish which version an individual customer accepted. Archived terms, sections 23 and 33.
What KnightPips offered
The risk disclosure captured on 6 March described KnightPips as an intermediary providing access to CFD products. That description does not identify the actual product provider or establish how a customer's orders were executed. No execution or withdrawal test was performed for this review. Archived risk disclosure.
The account page captured on 6 March 2026 displayed these offers:
| Account | Advertised investment | Spread advertised from |
|---|---|---|
| Intro | $300 | Not specified |
| Basic | $1,000 | Not specified |
| Plus | $2,500 | 1.6 pips |
| Extra | $5,000 | 1.6 pips |
| Advanced | $10,000 | 1.2 pips |
| Premium | $25,000 | 1.2 pips |
| Exclusive | $100,000 | 1 pip |
| VIP | $250,000 | 0.8 pips |
Every card showed maximum leverage of 1:200. The dollar symbol was displayed without consistently identifying an ISO currency, and the spread figures did not identify a reference instrument. The introduction referred to five tiers, although eight account cards followed. Archived account comparison.
The page also promoted trading signals, an algorithm and credits for certain trades. Those advertised benefits do not establish performance or protection against a loss.
Published claims about costs, interest and platform access
A 30 January 2026 TechTimes article and an 18 March 2026 Business Insider Africa #FeaturedPost link to KnightPips.com. Both appeared before the FCA warning. They describe the service's features; neither documents a customer withdrawal test. TechTimes presentation; Business Insider Africa FeaturedPost.
| Published claim | Documentary comparison | What remains unverified |
|---|---|---|
| Commission-free trading | The archived accounts list spreads; the January terms address inactivity and promotional-credit withdrawals. | No per-trade commission would not mean every account operation is free. |
| Interest on eligible balances | Both presentations describe earning interest while retaining access to funds for trading. | The articles do not establish a rate, complete eligibility rules or verified interest payments. |
| MetaTrader 5 access, in Business Insider Africa | The FeaturedPost names MT5; the archived risk disclosure leaves the execution provider unnamed. | Access remains a published claim, not a working connection or broker server verified for this review. |
Identity and site history
Platformoneya, MISA and the Moonetrix domain
The 24 January 2026 About page described a service aimed at UK residents. It named Platformoneya Ltd and licence BFX2025145. It said trading was executed through an unnamed third-party liquidity provider. Archived About page.
The company name and licence number on the archived website can be compared with a Mwali International Services Authority record retained on 6 November 2026. It listed Platformoneya Ltd, registration HV01125481 and licence BFX2025145, with an Active status and expiry date of 26 November 2026. However, the domain on that record was moonetrix.com, not KnightPips. The page carried a 19 August 2026 date. MISA verification record 567.
The page could not be reopened on 8 November, so the earlier status was not reconfirmed. The matching name and licence number connect the website's claim to that company record, but do not explain the relationship between the two domains. They do not establish that Moonetrix took over KnightPips accounts, funds or obligations.
A MISA entry also does not supply FCA authorisation. The two records concern different permissions and must be read within their respective scope.
Availability observations and original dates
Snyfer's published daily availability checks add this timeline for knightpips.com. Snyfer availability history.
| Date or interval (UTC), 2026 | Published observation |
|---|---|
| 9 June | Online, HTTP 200 |
| 10–27 June | No observation listed |
| 28 June | First offline observation |
| 28 June–26 August | Offline observations on all 60 dates |
| 10 November | Latest offline observation listed |
The report's main scan is dated 2 July 2026; its later availability entries belong to a separate series of checks. The gap before 28 June prevents pinpointing an exact closure date, and these observations do not establish the cause.
The 8 November 2026 .com registry record lists a registration date of 4 December 2025 and a client hold status. It does not explain the hold's cause or identify who received customer payments. A technical domain status and the earlier Which.co.uk observation cannot establish an operator's intentions or prove an exit scam. Verisign RDAP record.