FAQ Section | Frequently Asked Questions

1. actor clarity 

Is it clear who is behind the offer? 

☐ Legal entity clearly named 

☐ Responsible persons identifiable 

☐ Roles (platform, intermediary, provider) clearly separated 

☐ Use of anonymous or diffuse structures 

Classification: Unclear actor structures make any well-founded classification of interests difficult. 

2. business model & monetization 

Is it clear how the provider earns money? 

☐ Fees transparently disclosed 

☐ Commissions disclosed 

☐ Performance-based remuneration clearly explained 

☐ Monetization only implicit or hidden 

Classification: If you don't understand the business model, you can't evaluate incentives 

3. Incentive structure 

What is the economic benefit for the provider? 

☐ Long-term user success 

☐ Activity / trading frequency 

☐ Subscriptions / signals / volume 

☐ Unclear or contradictory 

Classification: The more activity is rewarded, the greater the potential conflict with user interest. 

4. Conflicts of interest Are potential conflicts of interest openly disclosed? 

☐ Proprietary trading of the provider disclosed 

☐ Participations / partnerships transparent 

☐ Third-party commissions clearly marked 

☐ No or only general information Classification: It is not the conflict that is problematic - but its invisibility. 

5. Origin of results & representations 

Is it clear where performance data comes from? 

☐ Real money, demo, backtest clearly separated 

☐ Time periods traceable 

☐ Cancellations / restarts visible 

☐ Results without context 

Classification: Figures without origin are marketing, not information 

6. Presentation of risks & losses 

Are risks communicated realistically 

☐ Drawdowns visible 

☐ Loss phases explained 

☐ Volatility named 

☐ Focus almost exclusively on profits 

Classification: Transparency is more evident in losses than in successes. 

7. Role of influencers & third parties 

Is it clear what role external actors play? 

☐ Advertising clearly marked 

☐ Remuneration disclosed 

☐ Separation of opinion and marketing 

☐ Emotionalized success narratives 

Classification: Reach does not replace neutrality 

8. Control & freedom of choice 

How much control remains with the user? 

☐ Clear intervention options 

☐ Risks individually adjustable 

☐ Automation optional 

☐ Loss of control by design 

Classification: Transparency also includes the question of who stops in case of doubt 

9. Language & Tonality How is communication done? 

☐ Factual, explanatory 

☐ Differentiated 

☐ Restrictions clearly named 

☐ Simplifying, emotionalizing 

Classification: The more emotionalized the communication, the more important critical distance is 

10. Expectation management 

How are results classified 

☐ Marked as historical 

☐ Marked as non-transferable

☐ Without promises of success 

☐ Implicit assumptions of repetition 

Classification: Transparency is shown by what is not promised.

1. affiliate model

Compensation per referral or completion 

How does it work? 

The finfluencer receives compensation when users use a personalized link to: 

• open an account 
• subscribe 
• register a product 

Payment is typically made: 

• per click (CPC) 
• per registration (CPA) 
• or per subscription 

Why is this attractive? 

Easy to implement Scalable with reach Independent of users' actual trading success 

Where is the conflict of interest? 

The economic incentive lies before the actual use: Motivation for activation, not for suitability testing Success of the model does not depend on whether users benefit in the long term 

Critical classification 

Affiliate models reward persuasiveness, not quality of results. The more emotional and simplified the presentation, the higher the conversion 

2. Commission model on current sales 

Compensation dependent on activity or volume 

How does it work? 

The finfluencer receives: 

• a share of trading fees 
• or a volume-based commission 

As long as the referred user is actively trading, compensation flows. 

Why is this attractive  

• Recurring income 
• Long-term monetization of the community 
• Strong leverage with active users 

Where is the conflict of interest? 

A direct conflict of interest arises here: 

• User interest: Act selectively or pause 
• Supplier & influencer interest: Trigger action 

Inactivity is often rational from a user perspective - but economically disadvantageous from a commission perspective. 

Critical classification 

This model favors: frequent action permanent market presence low inhibition thresholds Not because it delivers better results, but because activity itself is monetized. 

3. "Order book share" / flow-based participation 

Compensation via order flow or indirect market effects 

How does it work? This model is less visible, but structurally relevant. 

The finfluencer benefits indirectly when: 

• Order flow is bundled 
• Trading volume is directed to certain counterparties 
• Liquidity or spread effects arise 

The remuneration is not always explicitly per user, but via: 

• revenue sharing 
• institutional agreements 
• volume-based rebates 

Why is this attractive? 

• High scaling with a large reach 
• No direct dependence on user success 
• Often low transparency obligation 

Where is the conflict of interest? 

The user believes they are following a strategy or opinion. In fact, their order behavior is economically exploited without: 

• decision quality 
• result 
• or risk profile 

playing a role. 

Critical classification 

This model shifts the focus completely: from the outcome of the user to the usability of their behavior This mechanism is usually not recognizable to outsiders.

These constellations mentioned here in relation to the respective models are not illegal and not problematic per se

They become problematic when:

• they are not made transparent
• they are perceived as a neutral recommendation
• conflicts of interest are not recognizable

The user judges content according to its message -
the provider is remunerated according to its effect. This is the core of information asymmetry.

Rule of thumb: If remuneration is linked to activation, volume or order flow, every recommendation should also be read as a business model.

Conflict of interest is mitigated if the decision-making process of a prospective customer 

• is carried out without direct influence
• no dark patterns are applied
• information asymmetries are prevented through targeted clarification or warnings
• no one-sided presentation and omission of information
• is mirrored: sufficient context is provided to make informed and, above all, risk-based decisions independently