Investview settles Apex fraud with SEC for $375K
Investview has settled Apex fraud allegations with the SEC for $375,000.
The civil monetary penalty represents just 1.7% of the $21 million the SEC alleges Apex took in.
As alleged by the SEC, Investview offered unregistered securities through Apex.
In July 2019, Investview launched the Apex Program. The Apex Program purported to use “Apex Packs” to mine bitcoin and perform other technology-related functions to generate returns, described as “lease payments” to investors.
Investors purchasing interests in the Apex Program entered into contracts to buy Apex Packs from a wholly-owned subsidiary of Investview or a distributor of the Apex Program and simultaneously leased the Apex Packs back to a different Investview wholly-owned subsidiary, which would pay the investor, directly or through a distributor, a lease payment of $300-500 per month per Apex Pack for 36-60 months.
The interests in the Apex Program would generate passive income for investors.
Investview was involved in various aspects of offering and selling the interests in the Apex Program, including developing the structure of the program.
The wholly-owned Investview subsidiary to whom the equipment was leased was responsible for costs, operations and liabilities associated with running and maintaining the equipment that was supposed to generate returns for investors in the Apex Program.
Investview engaged in a general solicitation of investors when selling interests in the Apex Program through YouTube videos and a press release that described the program and noted that it was “available to everyone.”
Investview also enlisted distributors who engaged in general solicitation when offering and selling interests in the Apex Program.
Between July 2019 and June 2020, Investview raised approximately $21 million from more than 500 investors in various states from selling interests in the Apex Program.
The interests in the Apex Program were offered and sold as investment contracts, and thus were securities, under SEC v. W.J. Howey Co.
BehindMLM concluded the same in our Apex review, published October 2019.
In Apex, affiliates invest funds in a common enterprise (Apex itself), because they are “led to expect profits solely from the efforts of” Apex itself (via bitcoin mining).
Apex affiliates do nothing towards generating returns other than handing over thousands of dollars.
Despite clearly being a securities offering, Investview is adamant it isn’t because… well, for reasons that have nothing to do with the Howey Test or securities regulation.
We also noted Investview had failed to register its Apex investment scheme, which the SEC reaffirmed in its settlement notice;
Investview did not file or cause to be filed or in effect a registration statement with the Commission in connection with its offer and sale of the interests in the Apex Program.
No valid exemption or safe harbor from registration was available for the offers or sales of the interests in the Apex Program.
In addition to the $375,000 civil monetary penalty, Investview’s Apex settlement also prohibits further violations of the Securities Exchange Act.
Apex was founded in 2019 by then Investview Director Jeremy Roma (right).
After Apex collapsed, Roma left Investview and went on to launch the Daisy AI series of Ponzi schemes.
After the last iteration of Daisy AI collapsed in December 2023, Roma launched BioLimitless.
BioLimitless is currently soliciting investment in $5 million dollar clinics on the promise of passive returns.
While the SEC has filed suit against Apex promoters, at time of publication no charges have been filed against Roma.
The SEC’s Apex lawsuit marks Investview’s second run-in with US regulators. In 2018 the CFTC fined Investview $150,000 over commodities fraud pertaining to Wealth Generators.
A potential third US regulatory enforcement action remains pending with respect to iGenius, Investview’s current primary MLM offering.
Following a steady decline throughout 2024, what’s left of iGenius is now being openly raided by Be Club.
Be Club is an unregistered trading opportunity run by former OneCoin scammers hiding in Dubai.
Update 21st January 2025 – Why Investview wasn’t subject to restitution and disgorgement appears to be explained by way of a January 17th press-release;
Company President, James R. Bell, noted the proactive steps taken by current management in 2020 and 2021 to not only wind down the Apex Program, but through December 2024, to have fully returned to each customer their invested capital, together with a premium.
“Winding down” is a funny way of describing Apex collapsing.
Between the SEC claiming $21 million was misappropriated through Apex and Investview claiming they paid that back plus a “premium”, the implication is Investview paid out more than $21 million to Apex victims.
Where that money came from is not disclosed in Investview’s filing.
The only known business venture Investview has turned a profit on over the last few years is iGenius. Given Jeremy Roma ran Apex, it’s also possible Daisy Global was pillaged.
There was reporting on Apex to suggest that there was no mining going on. In other words, the entire thing was a fraud.
I guess the SEC couldn’t find enough evidence to suggest that this was the case.
Was impressive that the company returned every dollar taken back to investors, plus a premium. Great sign from the company to be honest.
Yeah except… that didn’t happen.
Oh dear, spambots are busy today.
@mike
This is false. I have read all of Investview’s forms 8-K, 10-K, and 10-Q, and there is no mention of returning stolen funds.
Guys, come on. Read the press release. It’s clear as day. Unless of course you’re accusing them of another SEC violation right after announcing the resolution of an SEC violation. Lol.
I get you may not like the company, but let’s at least give credit where credit its due. SEC issues resolved, and everyone reimbursed.
The press-release pertains to Apex. There’s another investigation pertaining to iGenius. And there’s nothing about “everyone reimbursed”.
The Apex violation was quietly resolved by Investview through settlement. The investigation was not public prior to settlement. The iGenius investigation, which is publicly known, remains pending.
Yeah, try reading please.
Seeing as you keep repeating falsehoods, if you don’t explicitly reference your falsehoods with cited quotes I’ll be marking future comments as spam.
Cope harder scambot, if you are barely functionally literate maybe don’t try scamming people for a living.
There is *nothing* there about iGenius in ANY presser, just you fuckwits trying to squeeze a few cents from more morons.
I may be wrong, but in this site previous article it mentioned the igenuis investigation was started in November 2021.
The recent press release mentions that the inquiry from November 2021 was resolved. Did they issue two different requests both in the same month?
“2021” does not appear on the Apex cease and desist settlement order or in the SEC’s press-release:
sec.gov/files/litigation/admin/2025/33-11355.pdf
sec.gov/enforcement-litigation/administrative-proceedings/33-11355-s
You are wrong.
My apologies Oz, let me be more clear. This website, when discussing the inquiry, referenced the igenuis was being investigated and clearly references November 2021.
The SEC letter does not mention it, but the company press release references the November 2021 inquiry has been resolved. Would you like the links? I just want to get a better understanding.
Was there two different inquiry letters in the same November 2021? Thanks.
“2021” does not appear anywhere in this article. BehindMLM published four Investview articles in 2021, none of which had anything to do with an SEC investigation.
This?
sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/862651/000149315225002791/ex99-1.htm
JFC we could have saved a lot of time if you just opened with that. I hadn’t seen that press-release before.
I can only take Investview at their word that they repaid Apex victims (no guesses as to where that money came from). That does explain there being no restitution order.
So basically when Investview learned they were under investigation for Apex they began paying back Apex victims, hoping to dodge a formal restitution order.
That’s great and I’ll make a note of Investview claiming they paid back Apex victims. I will say though that had Investview not have “proactively” paid back Apex victims, restitution and disgorgement would have been part of the settlement in any case.
“Returned customer funds with a premium” sounds better then “we agreed to disgorgement of the money we stole and a restitution order”. This is just PR, which if the end result is the same the SEC has let Investview have it.
None of this has anything to do with the SEC’s iGenius investigation tied to publicly disclosed iGenius specific subpoenas.
Again, Apex != iGenius.
I suppose the lingering question is whether Investview pillaged iGenius to pay back Apex victims or they worked out some deal with Jeremy Roma to pillage Daisy Global. Absent further SEC proceedings I suppose we’ll never know.
Finally, the SEC now has Investview on the books with an explicit “you agreed to stop committing securities fraud” agreement. One can immediately point to iGenius and point out securities fraud, which I’m sure will come in handy when the iGenius investigation wraps up.
Oz,
I must be missing something. On the BehindMLM article posted on Jan 6, 2022, it is titled “Investview subpoenaed by SEC over potential iGenius Fraud” (Ozedit: snip, see below)
You are and I’m having to mention this for a third time now:
Apex != iGenius.
Oz, you said this earlier, “ The press-release pertains to Apex. There’s another investigation pertaining to iGenius. “
Was it the same month in November 2021? What is the other SEC inquiry in to either APEX or Igenuis? This is what’s confusing me here. Thanks.
The Apex investigation wasn’t made public till the settlement was made public (Jan 2025).
iGenius only publicly disclosed it was under investigation for iGenius (SEC subpoena disclosure in Q4 2021 public filing).
iGenuis said they SUSPECT it was for the iGenuis.. (Ozedit: snip, see below)
Apex launched in 2019 and collapsed in 2020. iGenius wasn’t launched till Jan 2021.
Subpoenas typically mention a date-range so as not to be too broad to trigger an objection. Investview “believed” the then disclosed subpoena and investigation pertained to iGenius because it did.
Apex != iGenius.
Investview also received a request for “supplemental documentation” in May 2024. If this pertained to Apex they’d have known and disclosed as much.
Wait wait wait.. if Apex=Igenuis (Ozedit: No. See above.)
I believe it is more likely that all investigations in to Investview have been resolved based on todays PR and SEC update.
I believe it was only one investigation, and based on all of my research, I cant see the SEC deciding to settle with the company and accept a settlement amount for a mere 375K when they have an active open investigation in to the company.
Thats not typically how these things work. They dont settle until all issues resolved. Good luck to all!
Well yeah, anything is believable if you diverge from reality and start making things up.
There is no public confirmation the SEC’s iGenius investigation has been resolved.
I disagree, respectfully. I believe the only investigation was for Apex (previous ownership, which victims have been paid plus a premium), And it was never about iGenius.
Even in Investviews filing, they said they “suspected” the requests for documents was for iGenuis. It’s no coincidence that the month they received the request from the SEC (November 2021) is the same referenced request in the recent PR that the company said has been resolved.
That would be one heck of a coincidence! I don’t see the SEC settling with a company while still having an ongoing investigation in said company.
I may be wrong, but logically it just wouldn’t make sense.
That’s great. Reality and what has been publicly disclosed doesn’t support your beliefs.
There is nothing from the SEC or Investview to suggest the iGenius subpoenas and investigation had anything to do with Apex, although they could have very well learned of Apex through those subpoenas.
Logic leaves the room when you substitute beliefs for reality.
Investview has launched multiple fraudulent investment schemes over the years. Separate enforcement actions would be logical.
Oz, there is no other mention from the company or the SEC referencing any inquiry except for the November 21 inquiry, which has been resolved. Could you please share any information that suggests there was a “second” inquiry? Thank you!
The May 2024 second request for documents. At no time did Investview disclose anything about Apex, only iGenius.
You’re not going to get confirmation that investigation has been resolved unless an enforcement action or settlement is filed. That’s how US regulatory investigations play out.
Oz, I understand. But reasonable people will likely conclude that this was the same issue as the November 2021 issue, and they ended up resolving it this week.
Why in the world would they accept a settlement amount and issue a formal resolution if one was still pending. Are you just assuming they are?
Apex != iGenius kills that argument.
Apex != iGenius. Settling Apex fraud doesn’t preclude the SEC from bringing charges related to iGenius.
Had Investview not surmised they were under investigation for iGenius I’d take your point. Investview and Investview alone knows what the SEC subpoenaed them for and concluded it related to iGenius. That’s the sticking point as Apex != iGenius and the two fraudulent schemes didn’t overlap.
Within that context Apex, an investigation into which was not previously disclosed and the fraud took place prior to iGenius, being prosecuted first makes sense.
Get an order explicitly prohibiting Investview from committing further acts of securities fraud by prosecuting a smaller fraudulent investment scheme, then go after the much bigger fraud.
It’d be unfair of me to present that last sentence as fact because, and I’m repeating myself here, US regulatory investigations in the lead up to enforcement actions is non-public.
Bottom line: the SEC subpoenaed Investview for iGenius data, went after them for uncovered Apex fraud and whatever they were investigating with respect to iGenius remains open.
Investview can’t confirm an investigation into iGenius was closed because Investview is not the SEC.
I want to clarify this bit about Apex investors being made whole. James Bell’s assertion in a press release is the only claim I’ve seen that such reimbursements were made. There is no mention of them in any publicly offered document.
This is what happens when an MLM decides to go public: They are compelled to disclose where their money goes for the sake of disclosure to potential investors.
That no such disclosure was ever made suggests the refunds never happened.
Regarding any ongoing investigation, it is possible that Investview did not know specifically what the SEC was looking for, so they speculated that iGenius was being scrutinized. If so, then the investigation might be concluded. For the sake of future victims, I hope not.
The SEC can’t just subpoena a company with “Yo dawg, give us everything.”
The scope of the subpoena led Investview to believe it was iGenius they were investigating. Apex appears to just be a bonus (or premeditated preamble to taking down Investview’s biggest fraud to date).
Robert, I agree with you. It seems more likely than not that all inquiries have been put to rest this week.
It’s also important to note that it was previous management that were in control during the Apex debacle, and the new management made it right with those involved, plus a premium. I’m sure that went a long ways with the regulators.
@Mike Chad Garner was the president of Kuvera and is the president of iGenius. Some other managers have moved on, but the guy at the top is the same