Wonderinterest Trading Penalized €100K as CySEC Tightens Grip on CFD Brokers
What Did CySEC Find During Its Review?
CySEC has imposed a €100,000 administrative fine on Wonderinterest Trading Ltd later than identifying governance, product-governance, and conduct-related breaches spanning 2022 to 2024. The board approved the decision on October 13, 2025, and published it on December 17.
The firm, licensed under CIF number 307/16 and linked to the retail trading brands Investago and Zetano, offers leveraged products including CFDs to both retail and professional clients. CySEC said the case reflects “non-continuous compliance” with the Investment Services and Activities and Regulated Markets Law of 2017, which implements the EU’s in Cyprus.
The regulator cited fragilenesses across internal controls, product distribution, client treatment, and marketing communications. While CySEC did not report fraud or intentional misconduct, it said the failings cut across multiple areas that are central to investor protection.
Investor Takeaway
How Was the €100,000 Penalty Structured?
The largest component, €50,000, relates to Section 22(1) of the law, which requires CIFs to comply at all times with the conditions attached to their authorisation. CySEC concluded that Wonderinterest did not maintain adequate internal policies and procedures to meet these obligations.
Product governance was a central concern. The firm did not set or document a defined target market for each instrument it distributed and did not show that it had assessed the risks of those instruments in relation to those intended clients. Under MiFID II, these steps form a core secureguard to prevent mis-tradeing and ensure products reach only appropriate client segments.
A further €30,000 fine relates to Section 25(1), which requires firms to act fairly and professionally in the best interests of clients. CySEC said operational shortcomings fell short of this standard even if no deliberate wrongdoing was alleged.
The final €20,000 penalty concerns Section 25(3)(a), covering the quality of information given to clients and prospective clients. CySEC found that marketing communications and other materials were not always fair, clear, or not misleading as required under Article 44 of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2017/565.
Why Does This Case Fit Into CySEC’s Current Supervisory Focus?
Although the fines are modest by European enforcement standards, the themes involved—product governance, marketing, and treatment of clients—sit squarely within CySEC’s recent priorities. The regulator has been concentrating less on headline capital metrics and more on conduct-of-business issues that shape client outcomes, especially in the retail CFD sector.
protection depends on continuous application of internal policies and controls. That includes defining a target market for each product, ensuring distribution channels match that target, and presenting information that assists clients understand risks. Failures in these areas often point to structural fragilenesses rather than one-off mistakes.
The reference to “non-continuous compliance” suggests the issues persisted for a meaningful period rather than arising from isolated lapses. This aligns with a growing trend across EU regulators: firms are expected to embed MiFID II standards into daily operations, not treat them as administrative exercises.
Investor Takeaway
What Comes Next for Wonderinterest and the Wider Sector?
CySEC did not impose licence suspensions or activity restrictions, but enforcement decisions of this type generally lead to remediation requirements. Wonderinterest will likely need to update its product-governance framework, refine target-market definitions, strengthen oversight of marketing across its brands.
For the broader sector, the case is a reminder that operating under the MiFID II regime. Firms that offer leveraged products to retail clients—particularly through online channels—remain under pressure to demonstrate that internal systems and client-facing disclosures match regulatory expectations.
