HighLow Binary Options Broker Review (Updated 2025)

Executive Summary

This report provides a comprehensive analysis of HighLow Binary Options Brokers, examining its historical operations, regulatory status, service offerings, and current viability. Established in 2013 and operating under the ownership of Realtime Capital Markets Pty Ltd, HighLow was based in Sydney and regulated by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC).¹ It historically offered a simplified binary options trading experience, primarily focused on major currency pairs via an intuitive platform provided by MarketsPulse.¹

However, significant regulatory changes have fundamentally altered HighLow’s operational landscape. Facing increasing scrutiny from ASIC regarding the high risks associated with binary options and cross-border client onboarding, HighLow ceased services for overseas clients in mid-2019.² Subsequently, ASIC utilized its product intervention powers to implement a market-wide ban on the issuance and distribution of over-the-counter (OTC) binary options to retail clients, effective May 3, 2021.³ This decision was based on findings of significant client detriment, including documented high loss rates (approximately 80% of retail clients losing money) and substantial aggregate financial losses.³

Consistent with these regulatory actions, HighLow’s official website (highlow.net) is currently inaccessible.⁵ This, combined with the ASIC ban prohibiting its core product offering to retail clients in its home jurisdiction, strongly indicates that HighLow Markets is no longer operational in its previous capacity as an ASIC-regulated retail binary options provider. The inherent risks of binary options trading, underscored by ASIC’s intervention, remain a critical consideration. This report concludes that HighLow is not a viable broker for retail clients seeking binary options trading and warns against engaging with any platform potentially impersonating the defunct brand.

related posts : Best Binary Options Brokers (in 2025)

I. HighLow Broker: Background and Operational Viability

A. Corporate History and Ownership

HighLow Markets entered the binary options brokerage scene in 2013, positioning itself as a relatively new participant at the time.¹ The broker was owned by Realtime Capital Markets Pty Ltd and operated out of Sydney, Australia.¹ Its establishment placed it directly under the regulatory purview of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC), the primary financial services regulator in Australia. From its inception, HighLow focused specifically on the binary options market, differentiating itself through a simplified approach rather than offering a broad spectrum of financial instruments.¹ This focus shaped its service offerings, platform choice, and, ultimately, its susceptibility to targeted regulatory changes concerning binary options.

B. Website Accessibility and Current Operational Status Assessment

A critical indicator of HighLow’s current status is the inaccessibility of its official website, highlow.net.⁵ This lack of online presence aligns with a sequence of events driven by regulatory pressures. Notably, in July 2019, HighLow Markets proactively informed its clients based outside Australia that it would cease supporting offshore accounts and stop registering new overseas traders, citing “recent regulatory changes”.² This action occurred months before ASIC formally released its consultation paper proposing a ban on retail binary options ³, suggesting HighLow was responding to earlier, perhaps less public, regulatory directives or increasing pressure from ASIC regarding the onboarding of clients in jurisdictions where the broker might not have held specific licenses.² This sequence—initial regulatory scrutiny on cross-border activities, followed by HighLow’s withdrawal from overseas markets, leading eventually to the domestic product ban—illustrates a phased response to mounting regulatory headwinds.

The subsequent implementation of ASIC’s ban on the sale of binary options to retail clients, effective May 3, 2021 ³, directly prohibited HighLow’s core business activity within its regulated Australian market. The combination of the prior cessation of international services and the domestic ban provides a clear context for the currently inaccessible website.⁵ It demonstrates the definitive impact that targeted product intervention by regulators can have, effectively nullifying the business model of firms specializing in the prohibited products. While a sustainability tracking website lists the Highlow Markets brand and its URL, it also notes the brand is not currently tracked, further supporting the assessment of non-operation.⁶ Therefore, the evidence strongly indicates that HighLow Markets is no longer operational, particularly concerning the retail binary options services it historically provided under ASIC regulation.

II. Regulatory Framework and Compliance

A. Historical ASIC Regulation

HighLow Markets, through its owner Realtime Capital Markets Pty Ltd, operated historically as an entity regulated by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC).¹ ASIC derives its authority from legislation including the Australian Securities and Investment Commission Act 2001 and the Corporations Act 2001.¹ Its mandate includes overseeing financial services, markets, and corporations. Entities providing financial products or advice in Australia are generally required to hold an Australian Financial Services (AFS) licence or be authorized by a licensee.⁸ HighLow operated within this framework, which, at the time of its operation, permitted the offering of binary options to retail clients, subject to disclosure and conduct requirements. ASIC also oversees derivative transaction reporting under the Corporations Act.¹⁰

B. ASIC Product Intervention: The Ban on Retail Binary Options

The regulatory landscape for binary options in Australia shifted dramatically with ASIC’s exercise of its product intervention power, granted under Part 7.9A of the Corporations Act.⁴ This power allows ASIC to intervene directly in the market if it determines that a financial product available to retail clients has resulted in, or is likely to result in, significant detriment.³

On April 1, 2021, ASIC announced it had made a product intervention order specifically banning the issue and distribution of OTC binary options to retail clients, with the ban taking effect from May 3, 2021.³ This decision followed extensive reviews and consultation (including Consultation Paper 322 released in August 2019 ³). ASIC’s justification was based on compelling evidence of significant harm to retail consumers ⁴:

• Widespread Client Losses: ASIC reviews in 2017 and 2019 found approximately 80% of retail clients lost money trading binary options.³
• Substantial Financial Detriment: Estimated aggregate net losses for Australian retail clients were around $490 million in 2018 alone.³ Although this figure dropped significantly to $6.7 million in 2019 following ASIC’s earlier warnings about servicing foreign clients, the potential for large losses remained a core concern.³
• Inherent Product Flaws: ASIC concluded that the structural characteristics of binary options—the ‘all or nothing’ payoff structure, extremely short contract durations (average under six minutes with one provider), and negative expected returns (payoff value less than initial investment)—made them unsuitable for genuine investment or risk management purposes by retail clients.³
• Misleading Marketing: Concerns were raised that these products were often marketed deceptively as simple or low-risk, masking their complexity and high probability of loss.⁴
• Ineffectiveness of Disclosure: Traditional disclosure documents (like Product Disclosure Statements) were deemed insufficient to protect consumers from the inherent risks and complexity of binary options.⁴

The ban aligned Australia with numerous international regulators in jurisdictions like the UK and EU, which had already implemented similar prohibitions due to investor protection concerns.³ The initial duration of ASIC’s ban was set at 18 months, with the possibility of extension or being made permanent.³

ASIC Binary Options Ban Timeline & Rationale

Date/Period	Event	Key Rationale/Finding	Source Snippet ID
2017/2019	ASIC Reviews	Found ~80% of retail clients lost money trading binary options.	3
2018	ASIC Loss Estimate	Estimated $490 million in net losses for Australian retail clients from binary options.	3
April 2019	ASIC Warning	Warned against providing unlicensed/unauthorised services to clients in foreign jurisdictions.	3
July 2019	HighLow Action	Closed overseas accounts, citing “regulatory changes”.	2
August 2019	ASIC Consultation	Released CP 322 proposing product intervention for binary options and CFDs due to significant detriment.	3
2019	ASIC Loss Estimate (Updated)	Estimated net losses dropped to $6.7 million after warnings and broker actions.	3
April 1, 2021	ASIC Order Announcement	Announced the final product intervention order banning retail binary options.	3
May 3, 2021	ASIC Ban Effective Date	Ban on the issue and distribution of OTC binary options to retail clients commenced.	3

Table Value Rationale: This timeline clearly maps the sequence of ASIC’s investigations, warnings, consultations, and ultimate ban, alongside HighLow’s responsive actions. It illustrates the escalating regulatory pressure and the data-driven basis (significant client losses) for the final product intervention, providing a concise narrative of the events leading to the cessation of HighLow’s retail operations in Australia.

C. Consequences for HighLow’s Operations

The ASIC product intervention ban had direct and terminal consequences for HighLow’s regulated business in Australia. By prohibiting the core product offered to its primary retail client base, the regulation effectively eliminated the broker’s main revenue stream within its home market. The earlier closure of overseas accounts in 2019 ², driven by separate ASIC concerns about cross-border licensing, had already significantly curtailed its operations and likely its revenue, as evidenced by the dramatic drop in aggregate client losses reported by ASIC between 2018 and 2019.³

The HighLow case exemplifies the potent impact of modern regulatory tools like product intervention powers. It demonstrates that regulators can move beyond traditional disclosure-based frameworks to proactively remove products deemed inherently harmful from the retail market.³ Even though HighLow operated under ASIC regulation historically, compliance with the rules applicable at that time did not shield it from the impact of these new powers when ASIC determined the product itself posed unacceptable risks. The culmination of ASIC’s multi-faceted pressure—addressing both cross-border operations and the product’s inherent risks—created an environment where HighLow’s regulated retail binary options model became unviable.

III. Trading Services Analysis (Historical Perspective)

A. Range of Tradable Assets

Based on reviews from its operational period, HighLow’s offering of tradable assets was notably limited, particularly when compared to more diversified brokers.¹ A 2014 review specified that the broker offered only nine currency (Forex) pairs for trading at that time.¹ The review explicitly mentioned the absence of more “exotic” assets, and there was no indication of other asset classes like indices, commodities, or stocks being available.¹ This contrasts sharply with brokers offering access to hundreds or even thousands of instruments across global markets.¹¹

This narrow focus on major FX pairs may have been a strategic choice to simplify the platform and appeal to traders primarily interested in currency movements or those new to trading who might find a vast array of choices overwhelming. However, this limitation also restricted opportunities for diversification and meant clients could not trade based on events impacting other asset classes. It concentrated client exposure within the Forex market and relied heavily on the specific mechanics of the binary options contracts offered.

B. Binary Option Contract Specifications

HighLow’s core offering consisted of several types of binary option contracts, based on historical reviews ¹:

• Digital (High/Low): The most common type, requiring the trader to predict whether the asset’s price would finish above or below the initial price (strike price) at a specific expiry time.¹
• On Demand (Turbo): These likely referred to options with very short expiry times, catering to high-frequency speculation.¹ Nadex, a US-based exchange, also highlights short-term options (minutes to a week) as a key feature of binary trading.¹⁶
• Spread Options: A variation where a spread was applied to the strike price. To win, the price had to finish beyond the strike price by the amount of the spread. These options offered a higher payout of 100%, compared to the standard payout.¹

Payouts were advertised as up to 80% for the standard High/Low and Turbo options.¹ The Spread options offered a 100% payout.¹ Critically, binary options operate on an ‘all-or-nothing’ basis: a correct prediction yields the fixed payout, while an incorrect prediction results in the loss of the entire amount staked on the trade.⁴ This structure is central to the high-risk profile identified by regulators.

The structure of the “spread” options warrants closer examination. While a 100% payout appears more attractive than 80%, the requirement for the price to move beyond the strike by a specific margin (the spread) significantly decreases the probability of a winning trade compared to a standard High/Low option where only direction matters.¹ This mechanism likely allowed the broker to maintain or even enhance its statistical advantage, as the higher payout was counterbalanced by the lower odds of the trader winning.

Expiry Times offered by HighLow were predominantly short-term: 15 minutes, hourly, and daily options were available according to the 2014 review.¹ Notably, the 15-minute options reportedly had expiry points every 5 minutes, allowing for effective trading durations as short as 5 or even 2 minutes.¹ Long-term options were explicitly mentioned as unavailable.¹ This focus on very short durations aligns with the speculative, high-frequency trading style often associated with binary options and flagged as a concern by ASIC due to its resemblance to gambling.³

Summary of HighLow’s Historical Trading Parameters (circa 2014)

Parameter	Details	Source Snippet ID
Asset Classes	Forex (Currencies)	1
Number of Assets	9 FX Pairs	1
Option Types	Digital (High/Low), On Demand (Turbo), Spread High/Low	1
Standard Payout	Up to 80%	1
Spread Option Payout	100%	1
Expiry Times	15 min (with 5min intervals), Hourly, Daily (No long-term available)	1
Minimum Investment	$10	1

Table Value Rationale: This table provides a clear, concise summary of HighLow’s specific product characteristics based on available historical data. It allows for quick understanding of the broker’s limited scope, short-term focus, and unique payout structures, highlighting features central to the analysis of its business model and the subsequent regulatory actions.

IV. Platform Usability and Features (Historical)

A. Platform Provider and Interface Design

HighLow utilized a trading platform powered by MarketsPulse, identified in a 2014 review as one of the leading binary options trading software providers at that time.¹ This choice underscores HighLow’s specialization in the binary options niche. The platform’s interface was described positively in terms of usability, being characterized as very easy and intuitive to navigate.¹ Aesthetically, it adopted a business-oriented look with black and orange as primary colors, focusing functionally on displaying assets, option types, and charts rather than incorporating elaborate visual elements or “eye candy” often seen on competitor platforms.¹ This simple, functional design may have contributed to its ease of use, particularly for less experienced traders.

B. Key Features and Trading Tools

A standout feature highlighted was the QuickDemo functionality.¹ This allowed prospective users to access a demonstration version of the trading platform almost immediately (“with the second click on the website”) without undergoing the typical registration and account setup process.¹ While offering convenience and a low barrier to exploring the platform, this ease of access could potentially encourage users to engage in simulated trading without adequate preparation or understanding of the inherent risks, possibly leading to a quicker transition to live trading with insufficient knowledge.

Beyond the demo, the platform’s core functionality involved displaying the necessary elements for binary options trading: the available assets (primarily the limited FX pairs), the different option types (High/Low, Turbo, Spread), and associated price charts.¹ However, the historical reviews lack mention of more sophisticated trading tools often provided by other brokers, such as advanced charting packages with multiple indicators, analytical tools, integrated news feeds, or automated trading capabilities.¹¹ The focus appeared to be solely on facilitating the execution of basic binary option trades.

C. Limitations Noted in Reviews

The most significant limitation emphasized in the historical review was the lack of educational materials.¹ Unlike many brokers that offer resources like tutorials, webinars, market analysis, or trading guides ¹¹, HighLow reportedly provided little to no such support. This absence is particularly concerning given the complex, high-risk nature of binary options and the platform’s apparent appeal to potentially inexperienced traders (suggested by the simple interface and low minimums). Offering a product associated with high loss rates without providing resources to help clients understand the risks represents a significant mismatch and aligns with the concerns later raised by ASIC about uninformed retail participation.⁴

Other limitations stemmed directly from the service offering itself: the restricted range of tradable assets limited trading strategies ¹, and the absence of longer-term option expiries precluded certain types of trading approaches.¹

V. Account Structure and Funding (Historical Context)

A. Account Types and Minimum Requirements

HighLow was notable for its low entry barriers. The minimum deposit required to open an account was just $10, and the minimum amount required for a single trade (investment) was also $10.¹ While making the platform highly accessible to individuals with limited capital, these low minimums also increased the risk of rapid account depletion, especially given the ‘all-or-nothing’ nature of binary options where a few losing trades could wipe out a small initial deposit. The 2014 review even cautioned against depositing only the minimum amount.¹

As an incentive, HighLow offered a cashback promotion at that time: new clients could receive cashback on their first $50 traded if those initial trades resulted in losses, provided they signed up before a specific date (December 31st, 2014).¹ The available information does not detail whether HighLow offered different account tiers with varying features or conditions, a common practice among other brokers.¹¹

B. Deposit and Withdrawal Mechanisms (Industry Context)

Specific details regarding the deposit and withdrawal methods supported by HighLow, beyond the minimum deposit amount, are not available in the provided materials. However, examining common practices across the brokerage industry provides necessary context. Brokers typically offer a range of funding options, including:

• Credit and Debit Cards: Visa, MasterCard are common.¹⁹
• Bank Wire Transfers: Both domestic and international transfers.¹⁹
• Electronic Wallets (E-wallets): Services like Skrill, Neteller, and PayPal are frequently supported.¹⁹
• Cryptocurrencies: Some brokers accept deposits and process withdrawals in various cryptocurrencies.¹⁹
• Local Payment Solutions: Region-specific methods are also sometimes offered.²²

A standard industry practice, often mandated by anti-money laundering regulations, is that withdrawals must typically be processed back to the original source of the deposit, at least up to the amount deposited via that method.¹⁹ Profits beyond the initial deposit amount may sometimes be withdrawn via alternative methods.¹⁹ Account verification is almost universally required before withdrawals can be processed.²³

C. Associated Fees and Processing Times (Industry Context)

Similarly, specific fee schedules and processing times for HighLow’s funding operations are undocumented in the source materials. General industry practices, however, reveal common patterns:

• Fees: Many brokers advertise $0 internal fees for deposits and withdrawals.¹⁹ However, traders may still incur external costs. These can include fees charged by their own bank or intermediary banks for wire transfers (especially international wires) ¹⁹, currency conversion fees applied by card providers or payment processors ¹⁹, percentage-based fees levied by some e-wallet services ¹⁹, or network (blockchain) fees for cryptocurrency transactions.¹⁹ Some brokers might charge inactivity fees or fees if deposited funds are withdrawn without sufficient trading activity.²¹
• Processing Times: Deposits via cards and e-wallets are often processed instantly or within minutes.²⁰ Bank wires typically take longer, ranging from 1 to 5 business days or even more for international transfers.¹⁹ Withdrawal processing times vary significantly by method: e-wallets can be instant or same-day ²², while card withdrawals often take 2-10 business days ¹⁹, and bank wires can take 1-5 business days or longer.¹⁹ Many brokers have daily cut-off times for withdrawal requests, which can affect the processing day.²¹

Withdrawal processes, associated fees (both internal and external), and processing times are frequent points of complexity and potential friction for traders across the industry. These aspects often feature prominently in user reviews and complaints.²⁵ While HighLow’s specific performance in this area is unknown from the available data, it is highly probable that these factors were relevant considerations for its clients during its operational period.

Common Broker Funding Methods & Considerations

Method	Typical Broker Fees (Internal)	Potential Third-Party Fees	Typical Deposit Time	Typical Withdrawal Time	Common Issues/Notes	Example Snippets
Credit/Debit Card	Often $0	Currency conversion, Issuer fees	Instant/Minutes	2-10 Business Days	Withdrawals often limited to deposit amount, Card expiry/cancellation issues, Verification needed.	19
Bank Wire (Domestic)	Often $0	Receiving bank fees possible	1-3 Business Days	1-3 Business Days	Minimum amounts may apply.	19
Bank Wire (International)	Often $0 (but may cover some)	Intermediary & Beneficiary bank fees (can be significant)	2-5+ Business Days	3-14 Business Days	Higher minimums likely, Fees can reduce received amount.	19
E-Wallets (Skrill, etc.)	Often $0	E-wallet provider fees (e.g., % based), Currency conversion	Instant/Minutes	Instant / Same Day	Must withdraw to same e-wallet account used for deposit, Account verification.	19
PayPal	Often $0	PayPal fees possible, Currency conversion	Instant/Minutes	Instant / Same Day	Availability varies by broker/region.	20
Cryptocurrency	Often $0	Blockchain network fees (variable)	Network dependent	Network dependent / 1 Day	Volatility risk, Ensure correct network/address, Regulatory uncertainty.	19

Table Value Rationale: As specific data for HighLow’s funding methods is unavailable, this table provides crucial context based on documented industry standards from the provided sources. It outlines the typical options, potential costs (both broker-side and external), processing times, and common procedural requirements or issues that traders generally encounter. This helps frame the likely operational environment HighLow clients experienced regarding funding and withdrawals.

VI. Client Feedback and Market Reputation

A. Analysis of Available User Sentiment

The provided research materials do not contain specific, independent user reviews of HighLow Markets from platforms like Trustpilot, Forex Peace Army, or other common forums.²⁶ Therefore, a direct assessment of widespread client satisfaction or common complaints based on user-generated feedback is not possible from this dataset.

However, indirect indicators exist. The most concrete evidence relates to the broker’s communication regarding the closure of overseas accounts in July 2019.² The reported email stated, “We apologise for having to take this action and thank you for choosing HighLow Markets,” suggesting an awareness of the negative impact on affected clients and an attempt to manage the relationship during this regulatory-driven service change.² Furthermore, the stark findings by ASIC regarding high loss rates among retail binary options traders (80% losing money) serve as a powerful, albeit indirect, indicator of likely negative financial outcomes for a significant portion of HighLow’s client base during its operation.³ Widespread losses often correlate with client dissatisfaction, even if not explicitly captured in reviews here.

B. Industry Context (Forex Peace Army, etc.)

To understand the landscape of broker reviews, it is useful to consider platforms like Forex Peace Army (FPA). FPA is a well-known online community where traders discuss brokers and share experiences.²⁸ It employs a “Traders Court” system to investigate user complaints against brokers, potentially leading to brokers being labeled as “scams” if issues remain unresolved after the broker is invited to respond.²⁸ However, FPA itself is controversial; some brokers accuse the platform of bias, running negative PR campaigns, or even engaging in blackmail to extract payments.¹⁸ Conversely, some brokers actively promote positive reviews or ratings found on FPA.²⁹ This contentious environment underscores the difficulty in relying solely on such platforms for objective assessments of any broker’s reputation. User reviews on these platforms often cover aspects like ease of use, customer support responsiveness, spreads, and particularly the speed and reliability of withdrawals.²⁵ Positive feedback often highlights fast payouts and helpful support, while negative comments frequently center on withdrawal difficulties or disputes.²⁵ This context suggests the types of issues HighLow clients might have encountered, even if specific reviews are absent here.

VII. Client Support and Educational Offering (Historical)

A. Customer Service Availability

Specific details regarding the customer support channels (e.g., phone, live chat, email), operating hours, or responsiveness of HighLow’s support team are not documented in the provided materials. Industry standards typically involve multiple support channels, with many brokers offering 24/5 or even 24/7 assistance, recognizing the global and continuous nature of financial markets.¹² The quality and accessibility of customer support are frequently cited as important factors in user reviews and overall client satisfaction.²⁵

B. Educational Resources Assessment

A key deficiency identified in historical reviews of HighLow was its lack of educational resources.¹ While many brokers, especially those dealing with complex derivative products, invest in providing trading academies, webinars, video tutorials, glossaries, market analysis, and detailed guides ¹¹, HighLow reportedly offered minimal or no such materials. This omission is significant, particularly as the broker offered high-risk binary options and appeared accessible to novice traders due to its simple platform and low minimum deposit. Failing to provide educational support for clients engaging with such complex and risky products raises serious questions about responsible business practices and potentially contributed to the high levels of client detriment later identified by ASIC.³

VIII. Risk Profile: Binary Options and HighLow

A. Inherent Risks of Binary Options Trading

Binary options carry substantial inherent risks, which were central to ASIC’s decision to ban them for retail clients. These risks stem from the product’s fundamental structure:

• ‘All-or-Nothing’ Outcome: Trades result in either a fixed payout (often less than 100% of the stake) or the loss of the entire investment amount on that trade. This binary outcome leads to asymmetric risk and can cause rapid capital depletion.⁴
• Short Expiry Times: The prevalence of very short durations (minutes or hours) encourages frequent trading, which can resemble gambling and lead to impulsive decisions without proper analysis.¹
• Negative Expected Return: The payout structure (where the potential win is typically less than the potential loss for a roughly 50/50 outcome) creates a statistical edge in favor of the broker over the long term, making sustained profitability highly challenging for the trader.³ Spread options, while offering higher payouts, introduce hurdles that likely maintain this edge.¹
• Complexity vs. Perceived Simplicity: While presented as simple “yes/no” propositions, predicting short-term price movements accurately requires understanding complex market dynamics. The apparent simplicity can mask the underlying difficulty.⁴
• Over-The-Counter (OTC) Market: Binary options offered by brokers like HighLow are typically OTC derivatives, meaning they are not traded on a public exchange. This can raise concerns about price transparency and the potential for conflicts of interest between the broker (often the counterparty) and the client.⁴ Skepticism about the viability of consistently profiting from binary options is also present within the trading community.³⁰

B. ASIC’s Findings on Client Detriment

ASIC’s investigation provided empirical evidence supporting these inherent risks. The regulator concluded that binary options resulted in, and were likely to continue resulting in, significant detriment to retail clients.³ Key findings included the documented 80% loss rate among retail clients and aggregate losses reaching hundreds of millions of dollars in a single year.³ ASIC explicitly stated that these products were incompatible with genuine investment or risk management needs for retail clients due to their characteristics.³ These market-wide findings were directly applicable to the operations of ASIC-regulated brokers like HighLow.

C. Specific Risk Factors Associated with HighLow (Historical and Current)

Based on the analysis, specific risk factors associated with HighLow historically included:

• Its core business was centered entirely on a high-risk product class (binary options).
• The limited range of assets concentrated client risk within Forex binary options.¹
• The emphasis on very short-term expiries encouraged high-frequency, potentially gambling-like behavior.¹
• The significant lack of educational resources failed to equip clients to understand or manage the high risks involved.¹
• The low minimum deposit made the platform accessible to potentially under-capitalized traders ill-prepared for potential losses.¹

Currently, the primary risk associated with HighLow is its non-operational status for regulated retail trading.³ Any entity now claiming to be HighLow and offering binary options (or other financial products) to retail clients, particularly in jurisdictions like Australia, would be operating outside the regulatory framework established by ASIC and should be treated with extreme caution. There is a residual risk that unregulated or fraudulent entities might attempt to impersonate the HighLow brand, leveraging any remaining name recognition to attract unsuspecting individuals. Engaging with such entities carries immense counterparty risk, including the potential loss of all deposited funds with little to no recourse. Furthermore, attempting to trade binary options as a retail client in jurisdictions where they are banned involves dealing with unregulated offshore entities, which is inherently risky.

IX. Conclusion and Strategic Recommendations

A. Consolidated Findings on HighLow

HighLow Markets operated as an ASIC-regulated binary options broker from 2013, offering a simplified trading experience focused on short-term Forex binary options via the MarketsPulse platform.¹ Key characteristics included very low minimum deposit and trade sizes, limited asset selection, and a notable lack of educational resources.¹ Facing regulatory pressure, HighLow ceased onboarding overseas clients in mid-2019.² The broker’s operations were ultimately rendered non-viable by ASIC’s market-wide ban on the sale of OTC binary options to retail clients, effective May 2021, which was implemented due to findings of significant consumer detriment associated with the product.³ HighLow’s official website is now inaccessible, confirming its cessation of operations in its former regulated capacity.⁵

B. Implications for Potential Traders/Researchers

Based on these findings, HighLow Markets is not a viable or operational broker for retail clients seeking to trade binary options under its previous ASIC-regulated structure. Individuals researching brokers should be aware that the regulatory landscape has shifted significantly, with binary options being prohibited for retail sale in Australia and restricted or banned in many other major jurisdictions.³ Extreme caution is warranted regarding any platform currently operating under the “HighLow” name, as such platforms are highly unlikely to be the original, regulated entity and likely pose substantial risks associated with unregulated operations or potential fraud.

C. Guidance on Navigating High-Risk Trading Products

The case of HighLow and the broader regulatory actions against binary options underscore the significant risks associated with speculative OTC derivatives. Individuals considering trading such products should:

1. Prioritize Regulation: Only engage with brokers that are properly licensed and regulated by a reputable authority within the trader’s own jurisdiction (e.g., ASIC in Australia, CFTC in the US, FCA in the UK). Always verify a broker’s license status directly through the regulator’s official register.⁸ Be wary of brokers regulated only in offshore jurisdictions with weak oversight.
2. Understand the Risks: Fully comprehend the mechanics and inherent risks of the product being traded. Recognize that high loss rates are documented for retail clients trading speculative OTC products like binary options and CFDs.³ Understand the ‘all-or-nothing’ nature and negative expected return of binary options.⁴
3. Seek Education: Utilize educational resources provided by reputable brokers or independent sources to understand trading strategies, risk management, and market analysis.¹³ Avoid brokers that lack comprehensive educational support, especially for complex products.
4. Practice with Demo Accounts: Use demo accounts extensively to familiarize oneself with the platform and test strategies without risking real capital.¹¹
5. Manage Capital Prudently: Only trade with capital that one can afford to lose completely without impacting essential finances. Be aware that low minimum deposits do not negate the potential for significant losses.
6. Be Skeptical of High Returns: Be wary of marketing promising easy or guaranteed high returns, particularly with high-risk instruments.
7. Consider Alternatives: Evaluate whether high-risk speculative trading aligns with personal financial goals and risk tolerance. Consider alternative, potentially more transparent or less risky forms of investment or trading if appropriate.

Works cited

1. Review: HighLow Binary Options – It’s All in the Name – Finance Magnates, accessed April 20, 2025, https://www.financemagnates.com/forex/brokers/review-highlow-binary-options-name/
2. Aussie Binary Broker HighLow Markets Closes Overseas Accounts | Finance Magnates, accessed April 20, 2025, https://www.financemagnates.com/forex/brokers/aussie-binary-broker-highlow-markets-closes-armenian-accounts/
3. 21-064MR ASIC bans the sale of binary options to retail clients, accessed April 20, 2025, https://asic.gov.au/about-asic/news-centre/find-a-media-release/2021-releases/21-064mr-asic-bans-the-sale-of-binary-options-to-retail-clients/
4. download.asic.gov.au, accessed April 20, 2025, https://download.asic.gov.au/media/svsl5ljg/ris-product-intervention-otc-binary-options-published-1-april-2021.pdf
5. accessed December 31, 1969, https://www.highlow.net/
6. Highlow Markets Sustainability – SustainabilityTracker.com, accessed April 20, 2025, https://www.sustainabilitytracker.com/brand/highlow-markets/
7. ASIC issues new regulatory guidance to directors on insolvent trading and safe harbour protection – Corrs Chambers Westgarth, accessed April 20, 2025, https://www.corrs.com.au/insights/asic-issues-new-regulatory-guidance-to-directors-on-insolvent-trading-and-safe-harbour-protection
8. Search Company and Other Registers – ASIC, accessed April 20, 2025, https://connectonline.asic.gov.au/
9. ASIC updates its guidance on regulated emissions units (RG 236), accessed April 20, 2025, https://www.mccullough.com.au/2024/10/08/asic-updates-its-guidance-on-regulated-emissions-units-rg-236/
10. ASIC Reporting Regulation – LSEG, accessed April 20, 2025, https://www.lseg.com/en/post-trade/regulatory-reporting/regulation/asic-reporting
11. Trading Made Simple: The Top Binary Options Platforms for Beginners – The Daily Illini, accessed April 20, 2025, https://dailyillini.com/sponsored/2024/08/29/trading-made-simple-the-top-binary-options-platforms-for-beginners/
12. Best Binary Options Brokers and Trading Platforms of 2025 – Slashdot, accessed April 20, 2025, https://slashdot.org/software/binary-options/
13. Forex Trading Online – No. 1 Forex Broker in the US* – FX Markets – FOREX.com US, accessed April 20, 2025, https://www.forex.com/en-us/
14. Binary options – Financial Markets Authority, accessed April 20, 2025, https://www.fma.govt.nz/consumer/investing/types-of-investments/binary-options/
15. What is Binary Options? Definition of Binary Options, Binary Options Meaning – The Economic Times, accessed April 20, 2025, https://m.economictimes.com/definition/binary-options
16. What are Binary Options and How Do They Work? – Nadex, accessed April 20, 2025, https://www.nadex.com/learning/what-are-binary-options-and-how-do-they-work/
17. Advanced Backtesting Software – Forex Tester Online, accessed April 20, 2025, https://online.forextester.com/en/
18. Be aware of Forex Peace Army Scam – InstaForex, accessed April 20, 2025, https://www.instaforex.com/forexpeacearmy.php
19. Withdraw Funds from your Account – FP Markets, accessed April 20, 2025, https://www.fpmarkets.com/funding/withdraw-funds/
20. Frequently Asked Questions – Fusion Markets, accessed April 20, 2025, https://fusionmarkets.com/FAQ
21. Fund Withdrawal – IC Markets, accessed April 20, 2025, https://www.icmarkets.com/global/en/trading-accounts/withdrawal
22. Withdrawal Options | Fusion Markets, accessed April 20, 2025, https://fusionmarkets.com/Trading/Withdrawal-options
23. Do you charge any deposit or withdrawal fees? – XM, accessed April 20, 2025, https://www.xm.com/help-center/deposits-withdrawals/faq-any-deposit-withdrawal-fees
24. Effortless Deposits and Withdrawals | Markets4you, accessed April 20, 2025, https://www.markets4you.com/en/deposits-withdrawals/
25. Moneta Markets Review 2025 – Comparing Pros & Cons – FXStreet, accessed April 20, 2025, https://www.fxstreet.com/brokers/reviews/moneta-markets
26. NVIDIA Geforce RTX 5070 Graphics Cards | SCAN UK, accessed April 20, 2025, https://www.scan.co.uk/shop/computer-hardware/gpu-nvidia-gaming/geforce-rtx-5070-graphics-cards
27. Nobody’s Child at M&S, accessed April 20, 2025, https://www.marksandspencer.com/l/brands/nobodys-child
28. ForexPeaceArmy.com – Forex Awards Nominee, accessed April 20, 2025, https://www.forex-awards.com/nominees/?id=24505
29. Global Prime: #1 Rated* Forex and CFD broker, accessed April 20, 2025, https://globalprime.com/
30. Exposing Binary Options Trading (with DATA) – YouTube, accessed April 20, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oa-IMY89OE4&pp=0gcJCdgAo7VqN5tD