“Scams don’t survive because nobody warned anyone.
They survive because hope feels safer than evidence — until it doesn’t.”

People often assume scams succeed because information is hidden. That victims simply didn’t know. That the warning signs weren’t obvious until it was too late.

BG Wealth Sharing breaks that assumption.

In this case, the warnings are not buried. They are public, documented, and issued by governments and regulators across multiple countries. They exist on official websites. They name the entities involved. They describe the risks clearly.

And yet, Zoom meetings are still happening.
People are still being recruited.
Friends and family are still being encouraged to invest.

This article is not written in hindsight. It’s written while all of that is still going on.

There is also a broader context that matters. New Zealand has seen this pattern before with CR Group LLC (UICEX) — private messaging apps, community-based recruitment, promises of trading profits, and eventually collapse. The New Zealand Financial Markets Authority (FMA) later documented those behaviours publicly. What is confronting now is watching the same playbook reappear under a new name.

This article is for people who haven’t lost everything — yet. For those who feel uneasy but keep being told to “trust the process”. For those standing at the edge, telling themselves they’ll pull out after the next withdrawal.

Before that next decision is made, it’s worth slowing things down and looking at what governments around the world are already saying.

What BG Wealth Sharing claims to be

Before going any further, it’s important to be clear about what BG Wealth Sharing actually claims to be, because this isn’t the first time it has been examined. I’ve already documented BG Wealth Sharing and its linked platform DSJ Exchange in a previous investigation, “BG Wealth Sharing & DSJEX: A Deep-Dive Exposé Into a Manufactured Dream and a Very Real Scam.” In that article, the mechanics were laid out in detail: fake leadership, fabricated certificates, illegal securities offerings, and a classic “click-a-button” Ponzi structure dressed up as crypto trading.

In simple terms, BG Wealth Sharing sells the idea that ordinary people can access guaranteed daily profits, often quoted as 1.3% to 2.6% per day, by following supposed “AI-powered trading signals” inside a private platform. Participants are told they don’t need trading experience, that risk has been engineered out, and that the system can run indefinitely. Small deposits, visible daily returns, occasional withdrawals, and constant encouragement to scale up create the illusion that trading is taking place, when there is no independently verifiable trading at all.

This isn’t speculation — it’s their own marketing. In a promotional video circulated on Facebook, BG Wealth Sharing openly tells people the system is “so simple you just copy and paste twice a day, seven days a week,” while promising deposits will double every six to eight weeks with the freedom to withdraw anytime. The same pitch claims backing from a major global hedge fund, a 10-year partnership, levels 1–12 with monthly income, and commissions for inviters — all while insisting recruitment is optional. When a scheme’s own sales material combines manual busywork, guaranteed returns, fake institutional backing, and multi-level rewards, it’s telling you exactly what it is.

That manufactured dream is what hooks people in. This article isn’t here to re-prove that BG Wealth Sharing is a scam — that groundwork has already been done. What matters now is something else entirely: despite all of that evidence, governments around the world have since issued formal warnings, and people are still investing.

Claims Versus Reality

On its active website, BG Wealth Sharing dramatically escalates its narrative. It presents itself as “the world’s largest hedge fund”, a subsidiary of Investing.com, a government-licensed global operation, and a project founded in 2018 by Professor Stephen Beard on behalf of major international institutions. It claims millions of users, partnerships with regulators, licences across dozens of countries, guaranteed monthly returns of at least 60%, and a so-called “zero-risk” investment model powered by AI, blockchain, and advanced contract trading.

None of these claims withstand independent verification.

Instead of evidence, the platform relies on overwhelming scale and authority language, designed to discourage scrutiny. The more complex and grand the story sounds, the harder it becomes for ordinary people to challenge it.

When an opportunity claims to be everything at once — hedge fund, exchange, government partner, and poverty-eradication program — it is usually none of them.

The website’s Video Zone reveals how belief is reinforced in practice. Members are shown attending group dinners, celebrations, and meet-ups, encouraged to film themselves holding up their phones, interacting with the “professor,” and posting proof of participation. These events are not incidental — they are incentivised. Participants receive bonuses credited to their accounts for attendance, visibility, and recruitment, turning social interaction into a reward mechanism.

What this creates is not transparency, but behavioural conditioning:

  • Social proof replaces evidence
  • Participation replaces understanding
  • Rewards replace questions

People aren’t just investing money — they are investing identity, friendships, and social standing within the group. That emotional buy-in makes it far harder to step back and ask whether the platform itself is real.

Strip away the videos, the jargon, and the promises, and what remains is a familiar pattern: extraordinary claims, no independent proof, and a social system designed to keep people engaged long after common sense should have intervened.

A pattern, not an isolated opportunity

One of the most effective ways schemes like BG Wealth Sharing protect themselves is by fragmenting the story. Different websites. Different names. Different explanations, depending on who you talk to.

Regulators don’t look at fragments.
They look at patterns.

Across multiple jurisdictions, authorities have independently linked BG Wealth Sharing to DSJ Exchange (DSJEX) and a rotating list of domains. This isn’t speculation from bloggers or critics — it’s written directly into official government warnings.

That matters, because it removes the most common defence promoters rely on:

“That warning isn’t about us.”

When multiple governments name the same aliases, the same infrastructure, and the same behaviours, coincidence stops being a reasonable explanation.

The UK: an early warning that didn’t stop promotion

One of the earliest formal warnings came from the UK Financial Conduct Authority (FCA).

In May 2025, the FCA warned the public to avoid BG Wealth Sharing / dsjex.net, stating that the firm may be providing or promoting financial services without authorisation and was not authorised to operate in the UK.

The FCA went further than a generic alert. It listed associated websites, email addresses, and Telegram accounts, and explained what this meant in practical terms: no access to the Financial Ombudsman, no compensation scheme protection, and little chance of recovery if things went wrong.

This warning did not appear after a collapse. It existed while promotion and recruitment were still active.

That’s an important distinction.

Australia: a different regulator, the same conclusion

In Australia, the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) placed BG Wealth Sharing Investment Group, linked to tradewithnick.com, on its Investor Alert List in January 2026.

ASIC stated plainly that the entity was unlicensed and unauthorised, and listed DSJ Exchange as an alias — directly tying the two together.

This shows something important: regulators weren’t just reacting to a brand name. They were tracing how people were being brought in, including the promotional infrastructure being used.

Different country.
Different legal system.
Same outcome.

Canada: formal investor alerts and domain tracking

In Canada, the Alberta Securities Commission (ASC) issued an Investor Alert for BG Wealth Sharing Ltd. in January 2026, published nationally through the Canadian Securities Administrators.

The alert explicitly named DSJ Exchange as another operating name and documented the most recent websites associated with the scheme, including bg662.com and dsjex.net.

Canada also placed BG Wealth Sharing on its Investment Caution List, warning that the company was not registered to trade or advise on securities, and that dealing with unregistered firms means there are no investor protections.

This wasn’t about opinion. It was about registration — or the lack of it.

Tonga: when a central bank calls it a scam

Perhaps the clearest language came from the National Reserve Bank of Tonga.

In December 2025, the central bank issued a public press release warning about a Cryptocurrency Investment Scam operating under the name “BG Wealth Sharing / DSJEX”. It described fake trading platforms, fabricated profits, blocked withdrawals, and demands for additional “fees” before funds could supposedly be released.

Crucially, the warning stated that the scheme was targeting the Tongan diaspora, including people living in New Zealand and Australia, primarily through social media.

This was not framed as a risky investment.
It was described as fraud.

New Zealand: behaviour before branding

In New Zealand, the Financial Markets Authority (FMA) has spent years warning about WhatsApp- and Telegram-based investment scams that rely on mentors, trading signals, recruitment, and small withdrawals to build trust.

In its TXEX Warning, updated as recently as January 2026, the FMA explicitly lists BG Wealth Sharing group among fraudulent investment platforms.

The behaviours described by the FMA will sound familiar to anyone watching BG Wealth Sharing unfold:

  • private group chats
  • pressure to recruit friends and family
  • early withdrawals to build confidence
  • escalating deposits
  • sudden “fees” when withdrawals are requested

This is also where the link back to CR Group LLC (UICEX) becomes impossible to ignore. The mechanics are the same, even if the branding is not.

How BG Wealth Sharing is promoted — and why Zoom is failing to enforce its own rules

A basic search for BG Wealth Sharing across Facebook, Instagram, Linkedin and YouTube reveals hundreds of posts directing people into private Zoom meetings where they are told they can “learn more” about the opportunity. This is the recruitment funnel in plain sight: social media creates curiosity and credibility, and Zoom becomes the room where the pitch is delivered at scale.

These calls regularly run with hundreds of attendees and often up to the 1,000-person limit, and they follow the same playbook. Cameras are usually off. Chat is often disabled or tightly restricted. Participants are muted. Questions are reframed as “negativity.” Doubt is gaslit into silence. And the message is repeated: recruit friends and family, scale up, don’t listen to outsiders.

Here is the critical point that cannot be ignored: Zoom’s own Acceptable Use Guidelines explicitly prohibit the use of its platform to promote unauthorised multi-level marketing businesses. BG Wealth Sharing fits that description — it’s recruitment-driven, regulator-warned, and pitched as an income opportunity tied to deposits.

Zoom does not need new laws to act.
Zoom already has the rules.

Yet these meetings continue to operate. Accounts stay active. Subscriptions stay paid. And when people challenge the pitch inside the call — including those who gate-crash to raise government warnings — they are muted or removed while the presentation rolls on.

Section 230 does not force Zoom to allow this. It simply limits Zoom’s liability as a publisher of user content. It does not excuse Zoom from enforcing its own policies. If Zoom won’t enforce its own guidelines against meetings used to recruit and financially groom people into a regulator-warned scheme, then it is not neutral — it is enabling.

The trading story that replaces common sense

The language is always impressive: advanced trading, signals, AI, proprietary systems. It sounds complex enough that people stop asking obvious questions.

But then you look at what participants are actually doing.

People are told they’re part of a sophisticated, AI-driven trading system — yet their daily role is to log in and cut-and-paste text or click buttons multiple times a day to qualify for rewards. That alone should stop anyone in their tracks.

Real trading systems execute orders in milliseconds, often colocated next to exchange servers to eliminate latency. They do not wait for thousands of people to wake up, log in, and manually perform actions on cue. Human involvement is removed precisely because it slows things down and introduces error.

So ask the simplest question of all: why would a system advanced enough to generate consistent profits every day rely on something so manual?

The answer is uncomfortable but obvious. The action isn’t there because the system needs it. It’s there to keep people busy, compliant, and emotionally invested — a daily routine that creates the illusion of participation and “earning” rather than waiting.

When technology claims grow more sophisticated while behaviour becomes more primitive, complexity turns into camouflage. Confusion is mistaken for intelligence, and common sense quietly exits the room.

That isn’t trading.
It’s conditioning.

The moment questions start, people disappear

There is always a turning point.

It usually begins with something reasonable. Someone asks about registration. Someone mentions a government warning. Someone wants clarity around withdrawals.

That’s when the tone changes.

The questions aren’t answered — they’re reframed. The person asking is told they’re negative, that they “don’t get it,” or that they’re spreading fear. In many cases, they’re quietly muted, removed from groups, or cut off entirely.

This reaction matters.

Legitimate businesses don’t fear scrutiny. They document it, explain it, and withstand it.
Schemes can’t — because once questions are allowed to linger, the story unravels.

Living on a fake exchange feels like winning — until it doesn’t

We all trust our screens. We read news on our phones, manage money on apps, and watch entire worlds unfold on tablets and TVs. So when an exchange looks real — when you can log in, see balances, move numbers around — it’s easy to assume it is real.

That’s the trap.

Many people start small. They see numbers going up. They might even manage a small withdrawal. Confidence grows. The platform feels legitimate. They increase their deposit.

At that point, the interface becomes the reality. Progress feels like success. Activity feels like control. But just because something exists on a screen doesn’t make it real. When someone steps back and looks technically at what’s happening — the lack of real market connection, the unverifiable trades, the controlled withdrawals — it becomes obvious the exchange itself is bogus.

It’s just a game board.

Like Monopoly, everything feels exciting and convincing while you’re playing. You can buy, sell, move money around, even “win.” But the moment you try to leave the table and cash out, the illusion collapses.

By the time withdrawals are blocked or denied, people aren’t just financially invested — they’re emotionally committed to believing the game was real.

A pause before the next decision

This article is not for people who have already lost everything.

It’s for those still telling themselves they’ll stop after the next payout.
For those avoiding regulator websites because they don’t want the answer.
For those trusting noise, screenshots, and friends over evidence.

By this point, the warnings are not subtle.

Governments have warned.
Central banks have warned.
Financial regulators have warned.

The information is public, dated, and verifiable.

If someone continues after this point, it won’t be because no one told them. It will be because they chose to believe they were cleverer than the scammers, while being cheered on by people who jump from one Ponzi to the next, fully aware of how these games end.

This is the moment to stop listening to the noise.

If you find yourself repeatedly drawn to schemes like this, that’s not bad luck — it’s a signal to step back and get professional help, whether that’s financial advice, counselling, or simply removing yourself from the environments that keep pulling you in.

Otherwise, you already know how this story ends.

You’re not an investor.
You’re the mouse.
The returns are the cheese.
And the trap doesn’t care how smart you think you are.

And hope is always loud —
right before it goes quiet.

Disclaimer: How This Investigation Was Conducted

This investigation relies entirely on OSINT — Open Source Intelligence — meaning every claim made here is based on publicly available records, archived web pages, corporate filings, domain data, social media activity, and open blockchain transactions. No private data, hacking, or unlawful access methods were used. OSINT is a powerful and ethical tool for exposing scams without violating privacy laws or overstepping legal boundaries.

About the Author

I’m DANNY DE HEK, a New Zealand–based YouTuber, investigative journalist, and OSINT researcher. I name and shame individuals promoting or marketing fraudulent schemes through my YOUTUBE CHANNEL. Every video I produce exposes the people behind scams, Ponzi schemes, and MLM frauds — holding them accountable in public.

My PODCAST is an extension of that work. It’s distributed across 18 major platforms — including Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Music, YouTube, and iHeartRadio — so when scammers try to hide, my content follows them everywhere. If you prefer listening to my investigations instead of watching, you’ll find them on every major podcast service.

You can BOOK ME for private consultations or SPEAKING ENGAGEMENTS, where I share first-hand experience from years of exposing large-scale fraud and helping victims recover.

“Stop losing your future to financial parasites. Subscribe. Expose. Protect.”

My work exposing crypto fraud has been featured in: