Abinger Investments presents itself as an international financial-services firm offering wealth management, investment advice and access to global markets. Its website, abinger-investments.com, describes a business serving private individuals, financial institutions, governments and enterprises while operating from Hong Kong and maintaining a trading presence in Tokyo.
That corporate presentation now conflicts with an unusually direct regulatory warning.
On 21 September 2026, New Zealand’s Financial Markets Authority (FMA) added Abinger Investments, the exact domain abinger-investments.com and contact@abinger-investments.com to its warning concerning unsolicited telephone calls promoting fake investment platforms.
The wording used by the regulator is significant. The Financial Markets Authority (FMA) does not simply say it could not locate a licence. It describes a scam in which victims are contacted unexpectedly, persuaded by professional-sounding investment information, directed to fake trading platforms and ultimately prevented from withdrawing their money.
The regulator also says the operation is being conducted through several duplicate websites. Abinger Investments is one of the platforms the regulator has specifically identified within that warning.
What the FMA Identified About Abinger Investments
The Financial Markets Authority (FMA) warning was originally published in July 2025 and has been updated as additional websites and investment identities have been identified.
On 21 September 2026, the regulator added several new operations. The entry concerning Abinger Investments identifies:
- Platform: Abinger Investments
- Website: abinger-investments.com
- Email: contact@abinger-investments.com
- Date added: 21 September 2026
The exact-domain identification is important. This investigation concerns the operation using abinger-investments.com. It should not automatically be extended to an unrelated business merely because it uses a similar name.
The regulator’s warning is broader than Abinger alone. Other platforms added on the same date include Acota Investments, Balham Investment, Capital Focus, Falcon International Limited and Wynson Securities Limited. Earlier entries include operations explicitly identified as imposters.
However, the fact that multiple websites appear in the same warning should not be stretched beyond the regulator’s evidence. It does establish that the Financial Markets Authority (FMA) considers these websites part of the scam pattern it describes. It does not necessarily establish the legal identity of every individual controlling each domain.
The Scam Starts With an Apparently Innocent Phone Call
One of the most revealing parts of the warning is the regulator’s explanation of how victims are approached.
According to the Financial Markets Authority (FMA), the initial telephone call may not immediately look like an investment solicitation. A caller can instead ask the target to participate in a survey concerning confidence in the New Zealand economy.
The purpose, according to the regulator, is to gather personal information.
Days or weeks later, another caller may contact the same person from a different telephone number. This time the conversation shifts toward an investment opportunity. The caller may provide detailed and professional-sounding financial information intended to establish credibility.
The target is eventually directed to an online trading platform and encouraged to transfer money.
The Financial Markets Authority (FMA) is explicit about what those platforms are: fake trading platforms.
This staged acquisition process is important because a victim may not connect the original survey with the investment representative who contacts them later. Retrieve Lost Token examined another multi-stage acquisition method in its investigation into FMA deepfake investment scams, where fake advertisements and fabricated news material were used to establish credibility before victims reached fraudulent trading platforms.
Abinger Investments Presents a Very Different Public Image
The Abinger Investments website portrays the business as an established international financial organisation.
Its homepage says the firm offers investment, banking, financial assets and investment-management services. It promotes personalised portfolios, financial planning and risk management and says its advisers help clients build long-term wealth.
The site identifies a Hong Kong contact location at 99 Queens Road Central, Central, Hong Kong Island and lists a trading desk at 1 Chome-9-2 Ōtemachi, Chiyoda City, Tokyo.
It also displays the same contact@abinger-investments.com email address identified in the regulatory warning.
That matching email provides a direct connection between the website examined here and the operation named by the Financial Markets Authority (FMA).
Elsewhere, however, the site has displayed another Hong Kong address—Gloucester Tower, 15 Queen’s Road Central—together with a different telephone number and inquiry@abinger-investments.com. Anyone who dealt with the platform should preserve whichever contact details appeared during their own interaction.
The Website Claims Decades of Financial Experience
The history promoted on abinger-investments.com deserves particular scrutiny.
Its company page says Abinger Investments has extensive financial-services experience leading to decades of high-yielding returns. More strikingly, its asset-management page states that it has been at clients’ disposal “since 1985.”
The website therefore presents Abinger as a business with approximately four decades of investment-management history.
Public domain records, however, indicate that abinger-investments.com was registered in January 2024.
A younger domain does not by itself prove that a business is young. Established financial firms can change domains or launch new websites. But when a website claims a history extending back to 1985, investors should be able to independently trace the corporate and regulatory history connecting the present domain to that earlier business.
This becomes substantially more important once the exact domain has been identified by the Financial Markets Authority (FMA) as one of the fake investment platforms covered by its scam warning.
Similar questions about whether a polished corporate identity can be independently traced were central to Retrieve Lost Token’s Federal Associate Commission investigation.
A Hong Kong Company Claim Is Not the Same as Financial Regulation
Abinger Investments also makes an unusual statement about its regulatory standing.
Its asset-management page says the company is “supervised by the government of Hong Kong” and is a member of the Integrated Companies Registry Information System, or ICRIS.
This wording can create confusion between corporate registration and financial-services authorisation.
A companies registry records information about incorporated businesses. That does not automatically mean a company is authorised to provide regulated investment advice, securities dealing, portfolio management or other financial services.
The website promotes activities including stocks, bonds, commodities, high-dividend funds, forex and cryptocurrencies. It also says private retail customers are assigned personal brokers who provide research, technical analysis and fundamental analysis, while account options include advisory, execution and discretionary services.
Those are substantial financial-service representations. Investors should therefore verify the relevant permissions with the actual financial regulator rather than treating registration in a corporate database as equivalent to an investment licence.
The FMA Describes What Happens When Victims Try to Withdraw
The most consequential part of the regulatory warning concerns what happens after money has been transferred.
The Financial Markets Authority (FMA) says the scammers involved understand New Zealand’s banking system and may coach victims through making their first investment.
The online account may subsequently appear to show trading activity or investment value. But according to the regulator, when victims attempt to withdraw their money, no money is returned.
Instead, victims may be asked to make further payments or pay additional fees supposedly required to release their funds. The regulator warns that even when those additional payments are made, the money is still not returned.
This is why figures displayed inside an investment dashboard should never be confused with independently held assets. The crucial test is whether the investor can actually withdraw funds.
Retrieve Lost Token has addressed that distinction in its BitNest investigation, where transaction evidence and withdrawal behaviour became more meaningful than balances shown inside an online account.
Why the “Duplicate Websites” Finding Matters
The Financial Markets Authority (FMA) states that this scam is operated through several duplicate websites.
That finding changes how investors should preserve evidence.
If an Abinger Investments representative later directs a customer to another company name, trading portal, payment website or supposed recovery service, the new domain should not be treated automatically as an unrelated organisation.
Record every URL, email address and telephone number used throughout the relationship. Preserve redirects and login portals as well as the original marketing website.
Likewise, do not assume that a platform is legitimate merely because its website contains lengthy company profiles, compliance terminology, AML policies or sophisticated financial content. Those materials need to be connected to a verifiable legal and regulatory identity.
The importance of following digital infrastructure rather than relying solely on branding was also discussed in Retrieve Lost Token’s TOOLS4SEALS investigation.
Already Paid Abinger Investments? Preserve the First Contact
People who have already transferred money should preserve more than the final payment receipt.
Because the regulator describes a staged telephone approach, reconstruct how the relationship began. Save details of any initial survey call, even if it did not mention Abinger Investments. Record the telephone number, approximate date, questions asked and information provided.
Then preserve subsequent calls, emails, WhatsApp or Telegram conversations, account-opening forms, broker names, investment proposals, trading statements and withdrawal requests.
For bank transfers, keep the beneficiary name, receiving institution, account or IBAN, SWIFT details, transfer reference, amount and date. If the beneficiary was not Abinger Investments, record the discrepancy.
For cryptocurrency payments, preserve the asset type, destination wallet address, transaction hash, amount and transfer date for each transaction.
Blockchain tracing may help reconstruct subsequent asset movements and identify exchanges or other services appearing along the transaction path. It cannot guarantee recovery, but it can preserve evidence after a website or representative disappears.
Be particularly cautious about new payments described as tax, AML clearance, insurance, security deposits, wallet activation or withdrawal charges. The Financial Markets Authority (FMA) specifically warns that additional payments demanded to release money in this scam do not result in funds being returned.
The risks of continuing to pay after access to an investment becomes conditional were also examined in Retrieve Lost Token’s Mutual Care Vault Trader investigation.
What the Regulatory Evidence Establishes About abinger-investments.com
The strongest evidence against Abinger Investments does not come from anonymous customer reviews or automated website-scoring systems.
It comes directly from New Zealand’s Financial Markets Authority (FMA).
The regulator identifies Abinger Investments, abinger-investments.com and contact@abinger-investments.com in its warning concerning unsolicited telephone calls promoting fake investment platforms. The entry was added on 21 September 2026.
The regulator says the scam uses unsolicited survey calls to collect information, follows up with professional investment solicitations, directs victims to fake trading platforms and may demand additional payments when withdrawals are attempted. It further states that the scam is being operated through several duplicate websites.
Against that regulatory record, Abinger Investments’ claims of decades of financial experience, international wealth management, government supervision and operations dating to 1985 require substantially more than statements published on its own website.
Lost Funds Through Abinger Investments (abinger-investments.com)?
If you lost cryptocurrency, bank-transferred funds or other assets through Abinger Investments (abinger-investments.com), Retrieve Lost Token can assess the transaction trail, investigate payment recipients and connected infrastructure, trace digital assets where applicable, preserve relevant evidence, and assist with efforts to recover lost funds or assets.
Preserve the initial telephone contact as well as later investment communications, bank beneficiaries, wallet addresses, transaction hashes, account statements and withdrawal demands. These records can help establish how the approach developed, where the money was sent and what recovery options may be available.
Never provide a cryptocurrency seed phrase or private key to anyone claiming it is required to trace or recover funds.
No upfront recovery fees. Fees apply only after a successful recovery outcome.
Disclaimer
This investigation is based primarily on information published by New Zealand’s Financial Markets Authority (FMA), which lists Abinger Investments, abinger-investments.com and contact@abinger-investments.com within its warning concerning unsolicited telephone calls promoting fake investment platforms. Statements concerning Abinger Investments’ services, history, addresses and claimed Hong Kong supervision are representations published on the platform’s own website and are distinguished from the regulator’s findings. A regulatory warning is not, by itself, a criminal conviction or court judgment.
Discussion