MTI claimed an AI trading bot; a court found it was a Ponzi scheme
Mirror Trading International · Crypto trading scheme (private)
The case in brief
Visible before detection
Checks that could have surfaced it, on hindsight
Document authenticity / direct pull
Would have demanded broker statements for the trading.
Can mislead when: The company can refuse consent, and a refusal is itself a flag. Some banks and co-op banks are not on AA yet.
Regulatory & litigation records
Would have found FSCA warnings.
Can mislead when: Court records lag and name spellings vary. A clean record can mean the problem has not reached court yet.
Unit economics & burn
Would have compared returns with real trading.
Can mislead when: Cost allocation is a judgement call. Kubr shows its assumptions and lets the user change them.
Where Kubr services would have helped
Financial diligence
Offered in India- C5 Would have demanded broker statements for the trading.
- C9 Would have compared returns with real trading.
IC note
Offered in India- C5 Would have demanded broker statements for the trading.
- C8 Would have found FSCA warnings.
Valuation context
Offered in India- C8 Would have found FSCA warnings.
- C9 Would have compared returns with real trading.
Verified Snapshot
Offered in India- C8 Would have found FSCA warnings.
Mapped from the checks each service runs. A hindsight reading of public records, not a promise that the failure would have been found.
Same pattern
A summary of public documents. It reports what the sources say. It is not Kubr's finding and not a statement of guilt.