[no KYC/AML] Jud-ex.com | CRYPTO ⇄ CRYPTO | XMR, ZEC, USDT, BTC, LTC, ETH ect.

[jud-ex]

💱 Jud-Ex.com — your trusted cryptocurrency exchange service

✌️ Hi, forum members! Introducing Jud-Ex.com — a fast and secure crypto exchange platform where you stay in control. Built for those who value privacy and time.

🏆 We do not store user assets:
• We do not store user assets.
• We do not hold balances.
• We do not freeze or block withdrawals.
• No wallet connection required — your wallet is never connected to our system.
• Atomic swaps — either success or an automatic refund; no holds possible.
• Support for XMR (Monero) and ZEC (Zcash) for privacy-focused users.
• Simple service with fees starting from 0.1% per swap.
• Output coins are exchange-grade and «clean».
• Support for most popular coins: BTC, ZEC, XMR, USDT, XRP, TRX, BNB and others.
Swaps happen instantly — no delays or unnecessary steps, perfect for everyday use. Thousands of users already choose us for speed and reliability.

 

🤝 Affiliate program:
We’re interested in long-term partnerships in the crypto exchange space, so we offer our partners:

  • 30% partner share of the exchange service profit;
  • Affiliate payouts available from $50 USD in any currency supported on our website.

🔝 Reviews about us:
Monitoring- OKchangert
Monitoring- Antiswap.io
Monitoring- Kurs.Expert
Forums - BitsMedia
Forums - MMGP
Forums - BitcoinTalk
Forums - CariGold


💬 Contacts:
Website: https://Jud-Ex.com
Email: info@jud-ex.com
Telegram: @Jud_ex

[rat03gopoh]

I would love it if you explained further the FAQ statement "Since we use decentralized exchange routing", Do you provide your own liquidity, or do you work with external liquidity providers?

I tried doing a light test with BTC for XMR, you don't seems to have some kind of address validator. If I enter the BTC address for receipt and return and the order proceeds, there is no warning that the address is wrong/not recognized/or anything. https://jud-ex.com/en/order/JW1JB

[jud-ex]

I would love it if you explained further the FAQ statement "Since we use decentralized exchange routing", Do you provide your own liquidity, or do you work with external liquidity providers?

I tried doing a light test with BTC for XMR, you don't seems to have some kind of address validator. If I enter the BTC address for receipt and return and the order proceeds, there is no warning that the address is wrong/not recognized/or anything. https://jud-ex.com/en/order/JW1JB

You are right, thank you, this is our oversight.

We added XMR to the list yesterday but did not update the FAQ.

XMR is an exception because the decentralized systems we are connected to do not work with it, so we use our own liquidity specifically for XMR exchange. 

We have now added this information to the FAQ.

[JeromeTash]

It appears that in the earlier years you were an exchanger before making a complete turnaround to deal with only cryptocurrencies (no fiat exchanges) and privacy focus, which is commendable. Only time will tell if you will live up to your word 

Back then you even had terms of service and a privacy policy, which you don't have now. I know it might seem minor, but I think it's necessary. A customer needs to read and know what exactly they are getting into.

[examplens]

XMR is an exception because the decentralized systems we are connected to do not work with it, so we use our own liquidity specifically for XMR exchange. 

Is there any way to prove the existence of your liquidity funds? Ok, maybe not XMR, but you definitely always have a certain amount in BTC or another currency.
Signed message is ok. Even if you don't want to do it publicly, you can always do it with a highly reputable member in private.

btw. I don't see what the minimum and what is the maximum amount for the swap. Do you have such conditions?

[Upgrade00]

Back then you even had terms of service and a privacy policy, which you don't have now. I know it might seem minor, but I think it's necessary. A customer needs to read and know what exactly they are getting into.

They do have terms of service on the website. If you're on mobile you'll have to switch to desktop site then click on the three dots besides Reviews to view the drop down option. Here are their terms; https://jud-ex.com/en/#tos

Op, your own posts on the forum or kucnot.me website does not count as a review. It's your own personal promotion content to give more details of your service. Reviews are ideally done by external sources.

[jud-ex]

It appears that in the earlier years you were an exchanger before making a complete turnaround to deal with only cryptocurrencies (no fiat exchanges) and privacy focus, which is commendable. Only time will tell if you will live up to your word 

Thank you 🙏 We chose this line because there is currently a lot of fraud in the field of anti-money laundering, when exchangers freeze customers' funds under the pretext of the need to undergo verification and confirm the origin of the funds, trying to keep the customers' money for themselves by any means necessary, and not because the money has a dirty history. We solve this problem with a model of either exchange or refund — no withholding of funds.

Back then you even had terms of service and a privacy policy, which you don't have now. I know it might seem minor, but I think it's necessary. A customer needs to read and know what exactly they are getting into.

As the user below mentioned, we do have them, but in the mobile version layout, the button was shifted to the right. We have already fixed this, and now the button is visible in the mobile version.

Is there any way to prove the existence of your liquidity funds? Ok, maybe not XMR, but you definitely always have a certain amount in BTC or another currency.
Signed message is ok. Even if you don't want to do it publicly, you can always do it with a highly reputable member in private.

We use several types of pools.

1) no XMR ⇄ no XMR - a decentralized exchange using the liquidity of a decentralized system provided by other users.

2) no XMR ⇄ XMR - To pay XMR users, we use our own pool of funds in XMR. This type of exchange is the most popular with us, since when paying with non-private cryptocurrency, people run the risk of encountering KYC checks on other exchanges, and most of our funds are in XMR. If there are ways to confirm that we have XMR, please let us know how to do this and we will be able to provide evidence if there is such a way.

3) XMR ⇄ no XMR - In this case, we use a decentralized exchange from point 1 to the customer's desired currency from the funds received by customers from point 2. This funds accumulated for operational purposes. This pair is rarely used then opposit pair as it more profitable to use centralized exchanges due to lower fees.

We have great respect for forum members and are confident in the honesty of those who have a good reputation on the forum. However, we cannot disclose the wallets to which funds from our clients are transferred, as we value their confidentiality, so we cannot disclose wallet details under point 3.

btw. I don't see what the minimum and what is the maximum amount for the swap. Do you have such conditions?

For each type of exchange, we have different minimum and maximum amounts depending on current liquidity pools and network fees, and these amounts are constantly changing.

They do have terms of service on the website. If you're on mobile you'll have to switch to desktop site then click on the three dots besides Reviews to view the drop down option. Here are their terms; https://jud-ex.com/en/#tos

Thank you for letting the user know while we were away. We have already fixed the layout and now the button is visible in the mobile version.

Op, your own posts on the forum or kucnot.me website does not count as a review. It's your own personal promotion content to give more details of your service. Reviews are ideally done by external sources.

Concerning kycnot.me, these are not our personal messages, but messages from our customers left at our request. We are currently trying to get into additional monitoring sites like kycnot.me, but in order for them to publish, we need feedback from our existing customers.

Regarding forums, I agree that our messages are not reviews, as you correctly noted, but our messages on Russian forums are needed to up in the thread, and it is not prohibited to do so there. But there are not only our messages there, but also customer reviews.

=================================================================

Dear forum members, thank you for testing our service and providing feedback. This is very important to us. Before publishing announcements and creating a company, we want to make the service as user-friendly as possible, and we can only achieve this with your help. We look forward to receiving your further comments so that we can perfect the service.

[Pmalek]

Do you have plans to create a TOR version of your exchange?

Jud-ex uses different protocols as liquidity providers for swaps. Does the user have the option to select which protocol to use when they perform an exchange? If not, could you list which ones you use?

You obviously can't guarantee what the future will hold for the third-party liquidity providers you use. Tomorrow, they might decide to perform AML checks, request KYC, and perhaps even start freezing user funds. You even mention in your TOS that you can't be blamed if something like that happens. That's another reason why I think users should know where the liquidity comes from, so they can accept or refuse to use that route.

[jud-ex]

Do you have plans to create a TOR version of your exchange?

We are currently working in this direction, and the TOR domain will be launched in the coming days.

Jud-ex uses different protocols as liquidity providers for swaps. Does the user have the option to select which protocol to use when they perform an exchange? If not, could you list which ones you use?

You obviously can't guarantee what the future will hold for the third-party liquidity providers you use. Tomorrow, they might decide to perform AML checks, request KYC, and perhaps even start freezing user funds. You even mention in your TOS that you can't be blamed if something like that happens. That's another reason why I think users should know where the liquidity comes from, so they can accept or refuse to use that route.

I want to clarify an important architectural point about how our exchange routes trades and why neither we nor any underlying liquidity source can arbitrarily “hold” user funds.

Here’s the key idea:

🔹 1. Your funds never go anywhere permanently 
When a user initiates a swap, the assets are not sent to any custody account owned by us or by the liquidity source. Instead, your assets are: 
• technically sent to a smart contract/liquidity pool 
• immediately used to execute the swap 
• then returned to you as the output asset without delay 
There is no “holding” period — the transaction is atomic, meaning it either succeeds and completes in one go, or it fails and reverts immediately.

🔹 2. Even if a blockchain protocol adds compliance, it can’t freeze funds mid-swap 
The decentralized liquidity protocols we use cannot seize or withhold funds solely because of AML/KYC policies, because: 
• The smart contract logic doesn’t grant them custodial power to confiscate assets. 
• They can filter access to their RPC/UI or block sanctioned addresses, but that doesn’t change the fact that the swap is executed as a single blockchain transaction. 
• In decentralized swaps, if a transaction is not valid (e.g., due to blocked address), it simply fails and is reverted — meaning the user keeps their original funds automatically.

There is no ability to sit on tokens or lock them up unless the user explicitly signs a transaction agreeing to such behavior (which ours does not).

🔹 3. Our architecture doesn’t give any third party control over assets 
We route swaps through decentralized liquidity — but we do not custody your funds at any point. That’s fundamentally different from a centralized exchange holding balances on its books.

🔹 4. Why we don’t name specific protocols 
For competitive and security reasons, we do not publicly disclose the individual liquidity protocols we integrate with. This ensures that: 
• competitors cannot easily copy or replicate our routing strategies 
• we maintain flexibility to swap or upgrade liquidity sources as needed 
• we avoid exposing sensitive technical details that do not affect users directly

So in short:

✔️ There is no mechanism for a third-party protocol in the swap pipeline to hold your funds 
✔️ If a protocol were to implement any kind of compliance blocking, the swap would simply fail & revert 
✔️ The user always either receives swapped assets OR keeps the original funds

You even mention in your TOS that you can't be blamed if something like that happens.

Our ToS include standard limitations of liability for the service, which explain that the platform does not control external systems or third-party policies and therefore cannot be held responsible if those external policies change in the future — for example, if certain centralized exchanges adopt stricter rules regarding funds coming from decentralized sources.

the disclaimer refers to general external conditions (such as policy changes on centralized exchanges), not to naming or requiring acceptance of particular liquidity sources.

[Yamane_Keto]

✔️ There is no mechanism for a third-party protocol in the swap pipeline to hold your funds 
✔️ If a protocol were to implement any kind of compliance blocking, the swap would simply fail & revert 
✔️ The user always either receives swapped assets OR keeps the original funds

That's true, but not all decentralized liquidity protocols are truly decentralized, nor do they all implement policies to prevent the seizure or blocking of funds. Thorswap is a good example for that Thorswap partner frozen 10 BTC?
provide a list of the liquidity providers you plan to use is better

jud-ex uses a short order ID, which can be easily compromised.

How will service fees be calculated? Will they go directly to the liquidity provider or will they be deducted from it?

[Pmalek]

@jud-ex
All that which you wrote above sounds nice but without knowing your liquidity partners, you are asking us to trust you that everything will be all right and will work exactly as you said. As Yamane_Keto explained, there have been examples where services that look like they are decentralized (and probably promote themselves as such) have turned out to posses freezing options. NEAR Intents, for example. In theory, the same can happen with your liquidity partner(s), which at this point remain a secret.

[Upgrade00]

Concerning kycnot.me, these are not our personal messages, but messages from our customers left at our request. We are currently trying to get into additional monitoring sites like kycnot.me, but in order for them to publish, we need feedback from our existing customers.

Regarding forums, I agree that our messages are not reviews, as you correctly noted, but our messages on Russian forums are needed to up in the thread, and it is not prohibited to do so there. But there are not only our messages there, but also customer reviews.

You should include it in your website as communication channels not reviews it doesn't matter if it was made by customers or users dropped replies on the thread. As I mentioned reviews should ideally be done independently by an external source. Reviews come naturally as your service grows and attracts more users.

About your liquidity providers. Without any info on them you are asking everyone to trust your word which no one should do when it relates to their finances.

[NotATether]

I would like to test your exchange for addition to BitMixList. Would you be available for contact?

[jud-ex]

That's true, but not all decentralized liquidity protocols are truly decentralized, nor do they all implement policies to prevent the seizure or blocking of funds. Thorswap is a good example for that Thorswap partner frozen 10 BTC?
provide a list of the liquidity providers you plan to use is better

I am currently discussing this issue with my superiors, and we may publish a list. The final decision on this matter will be made on Monday, as my superiors are currently on holiday.
The only thing I can say for sure right now is that we are currently connecting NEAR intens, which is mentioned in the article, for small amounts of money, as they have very low fees for small amounts, and for large amounts we will only use protocols that do not have the possibility of withholding.

We assume all risks associated with the use of NEAR intens, and in cases similar to the one described in the article, we will pay compensation from our own funds.
We are also preparing changes to the Terms of Use and FAQ, which will state that this protocol will be used for small amounts and that we will take responsibility in the event of funds being frozen.
If such cases with NEAR occur with small amounts, we will remove them from our system, despite the fact that they offer very favourable terms.

jud-ex uses a short order ID, which can be easily compromised.

No, it is not sufficient to know the order identifier to view the order ID. If you switch from another browser or device to this order, you will also need to enter the recipient's wallet to view the payment details.

How will service fees be calculated? Will they go directly to the liquidity provider or will they be deducted from it?

The most commonly used model is one where, when creating an order on the liquidity provider's side, we specify our commission, which is transferred to our wallet after a successful exchange.

However, there are also suppliers who have other remuneration models based on a percentage commission.

@jud-ex
All that which you wrote above sounds nice but without knowing your liquidity partners, you are asking us to trust you that everything will be all right and will work exactly as you said. As Yamane_Keto explained, there have been examples where services that look like they are decentralized (and probably promote themselves as such) have turned out to posses freezing options. NEAR Intents, for example. In theory, the same can happen with your liquidity partner(s), which at this point remain a secret.

No, there were no changes in NEAR Intens; they initially had built-in functions to hold funds in case of non-compliance with AML requirements. Thus, there are systems in which this function was built in initially, and there are systems that do not have fund holding functions, and all of this is documented.

You should include it in your website as communication channels not reviews it doesn't matter if it was made by customers or users dropped replies on the thread. As I mentioned reviews should ideally be done independently by an external source. Reviews come naturally as your service grows and attracts more users.

Thank you for clarifying. You are correct. We have made changes and removed kycnot.me from the ‘Reviews about us’ section.

I would like to test your exchange for addition to BitMixList. Would you be available for contact?

Thank you! Yes, we are interested. Please write to us at the contact details below or via private message on the forum.
Email: info@jud-ex.com
Telegram: @Jud_ex

[rat03gopoh]

XMR is an exception because the decentralized systems we are connected to do not work with it, so we use our own liquidity specifically for XMR exchange. 

We have now added this information to the FAQ.

Ok, so I exposed an oversight (even though there was no intention of that). It's good that the liquidity information is now more detailed. 
Anyway I would also like to request a dark mode display.

We assume all risks associated with the use of NEAR intens, and in cases similar to the one described in the article, we will pay compensation from our own funds.
We are also preparing changes to the Terms of Use and FAQ, which will state that this protocol will be used for small amounts and that we will take responsibility in the event of funds being frozen.
If such cases with NEAR occur with small amounts, we will remove them from our system, despite the fact that they offer very favourable terms.

I hope this statement is in accordance with your superior's instructions (even though you wrote it on a holiday). Quoted for future reference

[QI2FY]

Caution: Jud-EX.com Is Holding $70k of My Funds — Avoid This Service

After completing several successful BTC-to-XMR swaps, I initiated another transaction on Jud-EX.com on February 25 for 1.00662 BTC to XMR. I saved the order ID (QI2FY), sent the BTC, and the website initially confirmed the deposit. Unexpectedly, upon refreshing the page, the order status changed to "Order not found." Over a week later, despite multiple emails, I have not received the 200 XMR or a refund of my 1.00662 BTC. Jud-EX claims no record of the order exists, yet blockchain evidence confirms my funds were diverted with a 99.8% fee.

Analysis of the blockchain and Jud-EX’s JSON responses reveals the following:

• Jud-EX uses NEAR intents/1Click (Swap API) for swaps.
• NEAR intents/1Click does not support XMR swaps. Jud-EX admitted in this Bitcointalk thread that they maintain their own XMR pool.
• For BTC-to-XMR orders, Jud-EX creates a BTC-to-LTC swap via NEAR intents, then manually converts LTC to XMR. Jud-EX confirmed in this Bitcointalk thread using decentralized methods for this step. To verify, you can create a BTC-to-XMR order and inspect network packets; the JSON response includes terms like "manual:xmr", "destinationAsset":"nep141:ltc.omft.near", and "actual_wallet":"Lc5eqsKQMjsyACJkkpKNn7njZF6rTUGQHG".
• Lc5eqsKQMjsyACJkkpKNn7njZF6rTUGQHG is a Jud-EX-controlled LTC address. All NEAR intents transactions for purported XMR swaps (e.g. BTC, though unverified for other assets) route here. View this address on NEAR intents explorer (note the 1Click partnership): https://explorer.near-intents.org/?search=Lc5eqsKQMjsyACJkkpKNn7njZF6rTUGQHG&transactionType=swaps
• My BTC was swapped to LTC with a 99.8% fee. Confirm this via the NEAR intents explorer (check fee details): https://explorer.near-intents.org/transactions/19E4fRzjKZZW14xzjU4YWGCeCoogPqkVb3
• A prior order confirmed Jud-EX uses this LTC address for BTC-to-XMR swaps. Their fee account is also visible on NEAR intents explorer: ecb7782d5a1271b7daa5e509dbf10a8edf64ac4514b4212ae512a0669b92f643

Jud-EX is either incompetent or engaging in fraudulent activity. In either case, they continue to hold $70,000 of my funds, and I strongly advise against using their service.

[SageSwap]

Caution: Jud-EX.com Is Holding $70k of My Funds — Avoid This Service

After completing several successful BTC-to-XMR swaps, I initiated another transaction on Jud-EX.com on February 25 for 1.00662 BTC to XMR. I saved the order ID (QI2FY), sent the BTC, and the website initially confirmed the deposit. Unexpectedly, upon refreshing the page, the order status changed to "Order not found." Over a week later, despite multiple emails, I have not received the 200 XMR or a refund of my 1.00662 BTC. Jud-EX claims no record of the order exists, yet blockchain evidence confirms my funds were diverted with a 99.8% fee.

Analysis of the blockchain and Jud-EX’s JSON responses reveals the following:

• Jud-EX uses NEAR intents/1Click (Swap API) for swaps.
• NEAR intents/1Click does not support XMR swaps. Jud-EX admitted in this Bitcointalk thread that they maintain their own XMR pool.
• For BTC-to-XMR orders, Jud-EX creates a BTC-to-LTC swap via NEAR intents, then manually converts LTC to XMR. Jud-EX confirmed in this Bitcointalk thread using decentralized methods for this step. To verify, you can create a BTC-to-XMR order and inspect network packets; the JSON response includes terms like "manual:xmr", "destinationAsset":"nep141:ltc.omft.near", and "actual_wallet":"Lc5eqsKQMjsyACJkkpKNn7njZF6rTUGQHG".
• Lc5eqsKQMjsyACJkkpKNn7njZF6rTUGQHG is a Jud-EX-controlled LTC address. All NEAR intents transactions for purported XMR swaps (e.g. BTC, though unverified for other assets) route here. View this address on NEAR intents explorer (note the 1Click partnership): https://explorer.near-intents.org/?search=Lc5eqsKQMjsyACJkkpKNn7njZF6rTUGQHG&transactionType=swaps
• My BTC was swapped to LTC with a 99.8% fee. Confirm this via the NEAR intents explorer (check fee details): https://explorer.near-intents.org/transactions/19E4fRzjKZZW14xzjU4YWGCeCoogPqkVb3
• A prior order confirmed Jud-EX uses this LTC address for BTC-to-XMR swaps. Their fee account is also visible on NEAR intents explorer: ecb7782d5a1271b7daa5e509dbf10a8edf64ac4514b4212ae512a0669b92f643

Jud-EX is either incompetent or engaging in fraudulent activity. In either case, they continue to hold $70,000 of my funds, and I strongly advise against using their service.

SageSwap fix all your problems, there is no "holding funds" in our service. I hope your case will be solved soon.

[cLoazyL]

Caution: Jud-EX.com Is Holding $70k of My Funds — Avoid This Service

After completing several successful BTC-to-XMR swaps, I initiated another transaction on Jud-EX.com on February 25 for 1.00662 BTC to XMR. I saved the order ID (QI2FY), sent the BTC, and the website initially confirmed the deposit. Unexpectedly, upon refreshing the page, the order status changed to "Order not found." Over a week later, despite multiple emails, I have not received the 200 XMR or a refund of my 1.00662 BTC. Jud-EX claims no record of the order exists, yet blockchain evidence confirms my funds were diverted with a 99.8% fee.

Analysis of the blockchain and Jud-EX’s JSON responses reveals the following:

• Jud-EX uses NEAR intents/1Click (Swap API) for swaps.
• NEAR intents/1Click does not support XMR swaps. Jud-EX admitted in this Bitcointalk thread that they maintain their own XMR pool.
• For BTC-to-XMR orders, Jud-EX creates a BTC-to-LTC swap via NEAR intents, then manually converts LTC to XMR. Jud-EX confirmed in this Bitcointalk thread using decentralized methods for this step. To verify, you can create a BTC-to-XMR order and inspect network packets; the JSON response includes terms like "manual:xmr", "destinationAsset":"nep141:ltc.omft.near", and "actual_wallet":"Lc5eqsKQMjsyACJkkpKNn7njZF6rTUGQHG".
• Lc5eqsKQMjsyACJkkpKNn7njZF6rTUGQHG is a Jud-EX-controlled LTC address. All NEAR intents transactions for purported XMR swaps (e.g. BTC, though unverified for other assets) route here. View this address on NEAR intents explorer (note the 1Click partnership): https://explorer.near-intents.org/?search=Lc5eqsKQMjsyACJkkpKNn7njZF6rTUGQHG&transactionType=swaps
• My BTC was swapped to LTC with a 99.8% fee. Confirm this via the NEAR intents explorer (check fee details): https://explorer.near-intents.org/transactions/19E4fRzjKZZW14xzjU4YWGCeCoogPqkVb3
• A prior order confirmed Jud-EX uses this LTC address for BTC-to-XMR swaps. Their fee account is also visible on NEAR intents explorer: ecb7782d5a1271b7daa5e509dbf10a8edf64ac4514b4212ae512a0669b92f643

Jud-EX is either incompetent or engaging in fraudulent activity. In either case, they continue to hold $70,000 of my funds, and I strongly advise against using their service.

BRO IS SENDING 1BTC TO RANDOM ASS EXCHANGE AHHAAHAHAH

[Yamane_Keto]

Caution: Jud-EX.com Is Holding $70k of My Funds — Avoid This Service

Their poor design, new service and limited security options are all indicators of not trusting this exchange with $100.
scam cannot be proven as there is no letter of guarantee or way to prove that the address belongs to them.

[QI2FY]

way to prove that the address belongs to them.

I'm trying to message you to provide proof - "User 'Yamane_Keto' has not chosen to allow messages from newbies."