Introduction: An Exchange That “Lives More in Legends Than Reality”
In previous episodes, we investigated HashKey (the compliance role model), HTX (the sanctions hotspot), UZX (the DAO penny stock), Phemex (the Wall Street elite team), Tapbit (the MSB license sticker king), Coincheck (Japan‘s survivor), Deepcoin (El Salvador’s new regulatory disguise), and Upbit (South Koreas national exchange).
Todays subject is another “offshore registration specialist” — Azbit.
Its resume looks surprisingly impressive:
- “Bitcoin.com founder Roger Ver serves as an advisor”
- “Founded in 2018, headquartered in Estonia”
- “Listed more than 400 projects”
- “Offers spot trading, margin trading, futures, staking, savings, IEO, and other one-stop crypto services”
Sounds like a full-featured major exchange, right？
But on the other side of the story — this offshore exchange, whose corporate entity is registered in Seychelles, was publicly warned by the Seychelles Financial Services Authority (FSA) on August 7, 2026.
The regulator stated that Azbit:
- “has never obtained any authorization”
- the company was in “not good standing” due to failure to pay annual fees
Meanwhile, after years of operation, Azbit has accumulated negative reports involving withdrawal disputes, promotional traps, and regulatory uncertainty.
So how did an exchange endorsed by the “Bitcoin Jesus” become the target of a public regulatory warning？
Today, we will break it down layer by layer.
1. Regulatory Compliance: Seychelles FSAs Public Warning Is More Damaging Than Any User Complaint
Seychelles FSA: A Public Regulatory “Slap” on August 7, 2026
This is Azbits most serious warning sign.
This is not a user complaint.
This is a regulator personally stepping in and publicly questioning the platform.
On August 7, 2026, the Seychelles Financial Services Authority (FSA) issued a public warning:
“The FSA alerts the public regarding the website https://azbit.com/, which is purportedly operated by AZ Markets Limited. The company is registered under the International Business Companies Act (IBC Act). The FSA wishes to inform the public that the company has never been granted, and does not currently hold, any authorization under the Virtual Asset Service Providers Act, 2024. The company is merely an International Business Company (IBC) registered under the IBC Act. The company has been classified as being in ‘not good standing’ due to failure to pay annual fees to the FSA.”
Translated into plain language:
The company registered by Azbit in Seychelles is called AZ Markets Limited — it is not a licensed cryptocurrency exchange, but simply an ordinary International Business Company (IBC).
The company has never obtained authorization as a virtual asset service provider in Seychelles — meaning it does not hold an exchange license there.
The company failed to pay annual fees and was marked as “not good standing” by the FSA — meaning it failed even basic corporate compliance obligations.
What is Seychelles？
It is one of the worlds most famous offshore registration jurisdictions.
The country is known for relatively flexible regulatory requirements.
Even the Seychelles FSA — a jurisdiction often considered relatively offshore-friendly — publicly stated:
You do not have a VASP license.
You have not fulfilled annual payment obligations.
Your company status is not in good standing.
That sends a very negative signal: Azbit could not even maintain basic compliance under one of the worlds more relaxed offshore regulatory environments.
Even more problematic is that Azbits official website claims it is “regulated by the Estonian Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU).”
However, according to WikiBits investigation:
“No valid regulatory information has been found.”
Azbit‘s name does not appear on the official list of licensed virtual asset service providers published by Estonia’s FIU.
Azbit Exchange Regulatory Risk Assessment (Source: WikiBit)
An exchange that claims to be “regulated by Estonia,” registered in Seychelles, and publicly called out by the Seychelles FSA for being “never authorized” — Azbits compliance status is not a “gray area.” It is closer to pure black.
Risk Rating: High Risk
Azbits regulatory situation is among the worst in this series.
The public warning from the Seychelles FSA is not merely a “reminder” — it is an official confirmation that:
Azbit does not hold a license in Seychelles;
Azbit has never obtained VASP authorization;
The company even failed to pay required annual fees.
This level of regulatory red flag is far more serious than any number of negative user reviews.
2. Account Security and Withdrawals: Trustpilot Score 1.6 — “Withdrawals？ They Simply Dont Exist”
According to Trustpilot data, Azbit has a rating of around 1.6/5, with a large number of reviews receiving only one star.
User complaints mainly focus on the following issues:
Withdrawals stuck in “Processing” status for extended periods
Users reported that withdrawal requests remained marked as “processing” for days without completion.
The platform allegedly failed to provide transaction IDs (TxIDs), while customer support responses were slow.
For example:
One user reported withdrawing 148 USDT. The account showed the withdrawal as “processing,” but no corresponding blockchain transaction could be found, and no TxID was provided.
Withdrawals frozen, requiring additional verification
Some users reported that when attempting to withdraw funds, they were required to:
provide additional personal documents;
explain their trading history;
submit wallet addresses;
complete additional review procedures.
Customer support response problems
Multiple users reported:
- slow email responses;
- complaints being deleted after being posted in Telegram communities;
- Technical issues remain unresolved for long periods.
When similar problems continue to appear, users naturally lose confidence in the platforms ability to manage customer assets.
On-chain wallet tracking assessment
Azbit claims that user assets are stored in offline cold wallets.
However:
- The exchange has never publicly disclosed a complete and verifiable list of cold wallet addresses;
- On-chain monitoring shows that exchange wallet fund flows involve complex transfer routes, frequently moving through multiple intermediate wallets;
- External analysts cannot clearly determine whether these funds represent user reserves or the platforms own operational funds.
At present, there are no clear on-chain signs of a large-scale asset drain, such as:
- massive wallet emptying;
- coordinated withdrawal of large amounts of assets.
However, the continued increase in withdrawal delays is often an early warning signal of tightening liquidity inside an exchange.
Risk Rating: High Risk
This is not simply a case of “poor withdrawal experience.”
This resembles a classic exit scam pattern:
The account balance shows that users have money, but when they try to withdraw, they encounter endless restrictions and excuses.
The 1.6 Trustpilot score is only the surface.
The deeper concern is:
Once your money goes in, getting it back may become extremely difficult.
3. Reserve Transparency: No Regular Proof of Reserves (PoR), Asset Backing Remains a Black Box
Since launch, Azbit has never regularly published third-party audited 1:1 Proof of Reserves (PoR) snapshots.
The platform only claims on its website that assets are stored using hot/cold wallet separation, but it has never released publicly verifiable wallet addresses that allow users to independently confirm reserves on-chain.
Additional problems:
- No publicly listed parent company financial reports;
- No mandatory regulatory asset audits;
- No independent verification mechanism proving that the exchange holds sufficient assets to process all customer withdrawals.
Azbit has also failed to disclose major cold wallet addresses.
Users therefore cannot independently verify the platforms asset coverage capability.
This creates a critical unanswered question:
“Are the digital assets shown in exchange accounts actually backed by real assets？”
Azbits reserve data is extremely inconsistent across different platforms:
- CoinMarketCap: Shows total assets but states that reserve information is unavailable.
- CoinPaprika: Reports a 24-hour trading volume of approximately RMB 13.4 billion, but estimates actual trading volume at 0, with a confidence score of 0.00%.
- An unknown third-party website: Claims Azbit holds $1.546 billion in assets and $8.961 billion in “risk reserves.”
An $8.9 billion “risk reserve”？
That would exceed many major exchanges reserves.
Who would actually believe that？
Risk Rating: High Risk
An exchange whose reserve data cannot even be verified through CoinMarketCap raises a fundamental question:
Where exactly are the assets？
Nobody knows.
A 0% confidence score from CoinPaprika is not random — its algorithm reportedly evaluates Azbit poorly across four dimensions:
- credibility;
- liquidity;
- website traffic;
- regulatory compliance.
Azbit received the lowest possible score.
4. Asset Strength: Roger Ver‘s Endorsement Sounds Impressive, But How Much Capital Does Azbit Actually Have？ Nobody Knows
Azbit’s biggest marketing advantage is:
Bitcoin.com founder Roger Ver serving as an advisor.
Who is Roger Ver？
Known in the crypto world as “Bitcoin Jesus.”
In the cryptocurrency industry, his name itself represents attention and influence.
But the key question is:
How much is Roger Vers endorsement actually worth？
In 2019, Azbit conducted an ICO and reportedly raised approximately $4 million.
After that, there have been no publicly disclosed fundraising rounds.
According to Tracxn, the company had only 13 employees as of June 30, 2026.
A $4 million ICO + 13 employees + Roger Ver as advisor:
This looks like the configuration of a “celebrity-backed crypto project.”
But what does $4 million mean in the crypto industry？
Compared with exchanges like Binance and Coinbase, which raised funding at the hundreds of millions to billions of dollars level, $4 million is barely enough to build a serious compliance and security team.
Compared with the multi-billion-dollar reserve scale of leading exchanges, Azbit is clearly a small-to-mid-sized exchange.
Its revenue model appears heavily dependent on:
- spot trading fees;
- IEO listing fees;
- staking and savings products.
However, it lacks:
- backing from major financial institutions;
- investment from publicly listed companies;
- strong external capital support.
If a large number of users attempt withdrawals simultaneously, the platform may lack sufficient liquidity buffers.
Trading Volume: $13.4 Billion vs $0 — Which One Should You Believe？
Azbits trading volume data is equally controversial.
Different platforms show dramatically different numbers:
- CoinMarketCap: 24-hour spot trading volume of approximately RMB 37.4 billion.
- CoinPaprika: 24-hour trading volume of approximately RMB 13.4 billion, but estimated real trading volume is 0.
- CoinGecko: 24-hour trading volume of approximately $2 billion.
RMB 37.4 billion vs RMB 13.4 billion vs $2 billion.
The difference is more than tenfold.
More importantly:
CoinPaprikas estimate of “actual trading volume = 0” suggests that a significant portion of reported volume may be artificially inflated.
Risk Rating: High Risk
Roger Vers endorsement certainly has marketing value.
But an exchange that:
- raised only about $4 million in 2019;
- reportedly has only 13 employees;
- relies heavily on questionable trading volume data;
cannot withstand serious scrutiny when evaluating its true financial strength.
5. Internal Operations and Team: Four Founders, but Almost Nobody Knows Who They Are
Founders: Sergei Ermolitski and His Partners
According to Tracxn data, Azbit has four founders:
Sergei Ermolitski — CEO
Azam Khodzhaev — Co-founder
Maksim Zmitrovich — Co-founder (early CEO)
Mikhail Yermalitski — Co-founder
Sergei Ermolitski has served as CEO since 2019. Before that, he worked as Vice President of Marketing at FXCASH OÜ (2009–2019).
But here comes the problem.
First, these individuals have almost no public presence in the crypto industry.
These are:
no active LinkedIn profiles;
no conference speeches;
no major media interviews;
no visible industry influence.
For an exchange founded in 2018 that claims to serve users globally, the founding team is almost completely “invisible” in the public domain.
Second, the company registration information is inconsistent.
According to Tracxn, Azbit is based in Tallinn, Estonia.
CoinGecko lists its registration location as Seychelles.
Meanwhile, the official website claims the platform is available in more than 200 countries.
An exchange that cannot clearly explain where it is actually registered raises a fundamental question:
Would you really trust it with your money？
Third, the relationship between the online operating team and the offshore corporate entity remains unclear.
A hidden team structure means that if the platform suddenly shuts down or disappears, the cost for core personnel to vanish is extremely low.
Risk Rating: High Risk
6. Product Experience and Trading Depth: Fully Equipped on Paper, Empty in Reality
Azbits product lineup does appear comprehensive:
- spot trading;
- margin trading (leveraged positions through borrowing);
- futures trading;
- staking;
- savings products.
Since launch, more than 400 crypto projects have reportedly been listed on the platform.
But most of this exists only on paper.
Problems include:
- Large numbers of obscure altcoins are listed, but liquidity for these tokens is extremely poor, making them vulnerable to price manipulation, sudden spikes, and market crashes.
- Third-party market data shows suspicious trading volume patterns, suggesting possible wash trading.
- Bid-ask spreads for major cryptocurrencies occasionally widen significantly.
- The rules for staking and savings products are complicated, with lock-up periods, redemption restrictions, and hidden clauses buried in lengthy agreements. New users can easily fall into traps.
Risk Rating: High Risk
7. Community Feedback: Negative Sentiment Increasing Year After Year, “SCAM” Claims Flooding Reviews
Azbit has a 1.6/5 rating on Trustpilot.
The core accusations in negative reviews are highly consistent:
“This is absolutely a scam. Several people in their Telegram group are employees pretending to be traders and convincing users they can withdraw. It is all lies.”
“Do not trust any reviews. Try it yourself and you will lose your money here.”
“Azbit.site is full of scam victims... You will never, ever, ever get a single penny back from them.”
Common complaints include:
- withdrawal delays;
- poor customer support;
- promotional lock-up schemes;
- account risk-control freezes;
- losses from failed IEO projects.
Over the past 2–3 years, complaints involving withdrawal problems and asset disputes have continued to increase.
Scamadvisers assessment of azbit.com states:
- “very low trust score”;
- “highly likely to be a scam.”
Risk Rating: High Risk
Trustpilot 1.6 + Scamadviser‘s “highly likely scam” assessment + Seychelles FSA’s “not in good standing” warning.
Under this triple blow, Azbits community reputation has fallen to an extremely low level.
8. Comprehensive Exit Risk Assessment
| Dimension | Risk Level | Summary |
| Regulatory Compliance | High | Seychelles FSA publicly warned that Azbit was “never authorized” and in “not good standing”; regulatory status highly questionable |
| Account Freezing / Withdrawals | High | Trustpilot 1.6 rating; users claim they “can never withdraw funds” |
| Reserve Transparency | High | CoinMarketCap reserve information unavailable; CoinPaprika confidence score 0% |
| Asset Strength | High | $4 million ICO + 13 employees + suspicious trading volume |
| Team Operations | High | Founders have almost no public footprint; registration information inconsistent |
| Product Experience | High | No fiat deposit/withdrawal support; weak liquidity |
| Community Feedback | High | 1.6 rating + Scamadviser scam warning + official regulatory criticism |
Overall Rating: Extremely High Exit Risk
Azbit is, so far, the highest-risk exchange analyzed in this series.
Its risk profile looks almost like a textbook exit scam case study:
Regulators publicly exposed problems
The Seychelles FSA officially warned that Azbit:
had never received authorization;
was not in good standing.
This is not a user complaint.
It is an official regulatory warning.
Withdrawals appear extremely difficult
Trustpilots 1.6 rating is filled with complaints such as:
“You will never get your money out.”
Some users also reported that certain deposit and withdrawal functions were suspended for months without clear explanations.
Trading volume appears highly questionable
CoinPaprika estimates Azbits actual trading volume at 0.
A reported trading volume of billions versus an estimated real volume of zero:
The difference is astronomical.
The team is almost invisible
The founders have limited public exposure.
The company registration story moves between Estonia and Seychelles.
Users cannot clearly identify who is actually operating the exchange.
Roger Vers endorsement is the only major marketing highlight
But how much is that endorsement really worth？
A project that raised only around $4 million in a 2019 ICO and later operated with a small team cannot rely forever on a celebrity advisor.
Furthermore, Roger Ver himself faced legal trouble in 2024 after being arrested and charged by U.S. authorities over alleged tax-related offenses.
Whether his former “Bitcoin Jesus” reputation still provides meaningful credibility is now questionable.
This is not simply a case of “high exit risk.”
The real question is:
Could Azbit shut down tomorrow？
9. Recommendations for New and Existing Users
For New Users
Stay away.
This is one of the clearest conclusions in this series:
Seychelles FSA officially confirmed “not authorized” and “not in good standing”;
Scamadviser classified it as highly suspicious;
Trustpilot gave it only 1.6/5.
Why would anyone choose such a high-risk platform？
If you have already registered:
Withdraw your assets immediately. Withdraw whatever you can.
Do not worry about small fees — protecting your principal comes first.
Be cautious about the “Roger Ver endorsement”
Celebrity endorsement does not equal regulatory backing.
An advisor involved during a 2019 ICO does not guarantee the current platforms security.
Be cautious about high-yield products
Azbit offers staking and savings products.
The golden rule of crypto:
The higher the promised return, the faster the platform may disappear.
For Existing Users
Immediately evaluate your exposure
If your Azbit holdings represent more than 5% of your total crypto assets, consider reducing your position immediately.
Move out whatever you can.
Withdraw now — do not wait
Many users complaining on Trustpilot that they “can never withdraw” once believed:
“It should probably be fine.”
Waiting is the biggest risk.
If withdrawals fail, do not pay for “unlocking”
Do not participate in any form of paid withdrawal release.
This is a classic secondary scam tactic:
You pay more money, but the withdrawal problem never disappears.
Consider legal action carefully
However:
the company is registered offshore in Seychelles;
corporate information is unclear;
founders are difficult to identify.
The chances of successful recovery may be extremely limited.
Do not deposit another dollar
This may be the simplest — and most important — advice.
Final Recommendation
Azbit is not suitable for anyone.
HashKey at least has regulatory compliance.
HTX at least has significant trading volume.
Phemex at least has a strong technical team.
Upbit at least dominates the Korean market.
But what does Azbit actually have？
A public warning from Seychelles FSA;
A “highly likely scam” assessment from Scamadviser;
A Trustpilot score of 1.6;
A large number of withdrawal complaints;
A company that raised only $4 million in 2019 and has limited financial backing;
Estimated real trading volume of zero.
This is not a “high-risk investment.”
This is actively sending money into danger.
Next Episode Preview: WikiBit Exchange Exit Risk Ranking Issue #9 — Deepcoin Exchange. Stay tuned.
Risk Disclaimer:This article represents personal analytical opinions only and does not constitute investment advice. Cryptocurrency investment carries significant risks. Please conduct your own research and invest cautiously.
The information in this article was updated on August 28, 2026. Please verify the latest information through multiple independent sources before making any decisions.
