Skip to main content

Security report for 1618am.com

1618 Investment Funds · Finance · Luxembourg

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

53/100

Risk levelMedium

0–100, higher is better. How it is calculated

1618 Investment Funds is a Luxembourg-based financial services company founded in 1992 and promoted by CBH Compagnie Bancaire Helvétique SA. It offers a comprehensive range of actively managed investment funds targeting institutional and private clients globally. The company emphasizes transparency and economic research, providing regular market insights to its clients. The website reflects a professional and consistent brand image with clear navigation and relevant content tailored to its target audience. Technically, the site is built on WordPress with modern plugins and SEO optimizations, delivering a moderate performance and good mobile experience. Security posture is adequate with HTTPS and reCAPTCHA integration, though improvements in DNSSEC and security headers are recommended. Privacy compliance is strong, featuring a comprehensive cookie policy and consent mechanism. Overall, the domain registration data aligns well with the business claims, supporting legitimacy and trustworthiness.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
50/ 100 · Medium
Checks completed
7of 7

NIS2 Art. 21(2)

  1. (a) Risk analysis and security policies: Not visible from outside
  2. (b) Incident handling: One indicator
  3. (c) Business continuity, backups and crisis management: Not visible from outside
  4. (d) Supply chain security: Not visible from outside
  5. (e) Secure acquisition, development and maintenance, including vulnerability handling: Partly checked
  6. (f) Assessing the effectiveness of security measures: Not visible from outside
  7. (g) Cyber hygiene and security training: Not visible from outside
  8. (h) Cryptography and encryption: Partly checked
  9. (i) HR security, access control and asset management: One indicator
  10. (j) Multi-factor authentication and secured communications: Not visible from outside

This scan rated NIS2 with an earlier keyword method that is no longer shown; rescan for the per-article view. Risk management, continuity, supply chain, training, MFA, management oversight (Art. 20) and incident reporting (Art. 23) need internal evidence, and Guard cannot tell whether NIS2 applies to this organisation.

GDPR is indicative only, based on publicly visible signals: Articles 7, 12, 13 and 32 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Article 5(3) of the ePrivacy Directive. Not a certification or legal assessment.

Priority findings

6 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. Security headers

    Security headers are instructions your web server sends to every visitor’s browser. Missing ones leave visitors more exposed to attacks such as clickjacking and injected scripts.

    • High

      Missing X-Frame-Options header

      Prevents clickjacking attacks

      What to do: Add "X-Frame-Options: DENY" or "X-Frame-Options: SAMEORIGIN"

    • High

      Missing Content-Security-Policy header

      Controls resources the browser is allowed to load

      What to do: Implement a Content-Security-Policy appropriate for your application

      • ASVS V3.4.3
      • OWASP Secure Headers: OWASP Secure Headers Project recommends Content-Security-Policy: default-src 'self'; form-action 'self'; base-uri 'self'; object-src 'none';…

  2. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • High

      No Privacy Policy found

      GDPR requires a clear and accessible privacy policy

      What to do: Add a comprehensive privacy policy page and link to it prominently

    • High

      No Cookie Consent Banner found

      GDPR requires explicit consent for non-essential cookies

      What to do: Implement a cookie consent banner that appears on first visit

    • High

      Third-party services without privacy policy

      Detected services: LinkedIn, Google APIs

      What to do: Document all third-party data sharing in your privacy policy

Need hands-on remediation? Email guard@offseq.com

Keep watching 1618am.com

This scan found 26 issues across 6 checks. Monitoring re-runs those checks daily, emails you when something material changes and records each fix, so you can show progress.

Daily monitoring

Recommended

€25per month

  • TLS certificates and expiry
  • DNS records
  • SPF, DKIM and DMARC
  • Security headers
  • GDPR and NIS2 posture
  • Exposed services
  • Third-party trackers
  • Security score drift

Email alerts on material changes and an exportable JSON history of every change.

Billed monthly to your card. Cancel anytime. The full timeline opens with your unlock code.

Full report

€39.90one-time

  • The complete analysis as a PDF you can cite
  • Email delivery with an unlock code
  • Lifetime access to this report

Prices incl. 21% VAT. Secure checkout by Mollie; sold by SEQ SIA, Latvia.

Results by check

Each check with its score, findings and the evidence it collected.

How this score is calculated

The security score runs 0–100, higher is better. It is the plain average of the security checks that completed in this scan, each counted equally. A check that could not run is left out: it counts neither as a pass nor as a fail.

Counted in this score

SSL/TLS
62
Security headers
25
Email security
70
DNS health
70
Network security
40
GDPR outside view
50
Average
53

Not counted

  • NIS2 outside view: Re-weights evidence from the TLS, email, DNS, network and hygiene checks, so counting it would count that evidence twice. Shown on its own.
  • OffSeq Observations: An AI reading of the site, useful context but not reproducible evidence. Shown on its own.

Findings that cap the score at 49

Each of these is serious on its own, so while any is present the site cannot rate better than high risk, however good the other checks are.

  • The certificate is not trusted by browsers
  • The website is not served over HTTPS
  • A database, remote desktop, file-sharing or Telnet service is reachable from the internet
  • The page loads a script from a compromised source
  • The domain registration has expired
  • SPF authorises every server to send mail as the domain

Partial scans

When the site blocks Guard or most checks cannot run, the score covers only the checks that ran (usually DNS and email), is capped at 75 and is shown as partial, without a risk level.

Risk levels

  • Critical0–25
  • High26–49
  • Medium50–75
  • Low76–100

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

The company operates in the finance sector, focusing on asset management and investment funds. Its business model revolves around active fund management and wealth management services, targeting both institutional and private investors. The firm leverages its Luxembourg base and affiliation with CBH Compagnie Bancaire Helvétique SA to position itself as a global active asset manager. The website content and structure indicate a mature business with a medium-sized operation. The presence of family office solutions and detailed publications suggests a diversified service offering. The LinkedIn presence of the parent company supports a credible partnership ecosystem. No direct revenue streams or pricing models are disclosed on the site, typical for investment fund managers. Growth indicators include regular publication updates and a broad fund portfolio.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate security maturity level with HTTPS enforced and Google reCAPTCHA protecting forms. Cookie consent is implemented with granular user controls, indicating GDPR awareness. However, the absence of DNSSEC and missing security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options represent gaps that could expose the site to certain attacks. No incident response or security policy information is provided, which limits transparency in handling security events. The site does not expose sensitive data or show signs of vulnerabilities in the HTML content. Overall, the security posture is adequate for a financial services website but could be enhanced by implementing recommended headers and publishing security policies.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to enhance DNS security and prevent spoofing.
  2. Implement key security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options, and Referrer-Policy to mitigate common web attacks.
  3. Publish a dedicated security policy and incident response contact information to improve transparency and trust.
  4. Regularly audit and update WordPress core, themes, and plugins to minimize vulnerability exposure.
  5. Enhance accessibility features to improve compliance and user experience for all visitors.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
1618 Investment Funds
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
1618 Investment Funds
Description
1618 Investment Funds, founded in 1992 in Luxembourg and promoted by CBH Compagnie Bancaire Helvétique SA, offers a comprehensive range of actively managed investment funds for institutional and private clients. The company has become a global active asset manager over the past 20 years.
Key services
Actively managed investment funds, Economic research and market analysis, Wealth management, Family office solutions
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, WPBakery Page Builder, Yoast SEO, Contact Form 7, Google reCAPTCHA, jQuery, jQuery UI, Popup Maker, Carousel Anything for VC
Frameworks
WordPress
Platforms
WordPress CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of Google reCAPTCHA for forms
  • Cookie consent popup with granular controls
  • Terms and disclaimers clearly stated

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Google reCAPTCHA
Transparency
basic

Site quality

Design
good
User experience
good
Content relevance
good
Navigation
good
Professionalism
good
Trustworthiness
high

Key observations

  1. Website is professionally designed and content-rich for a financial services firm.
  2. Clear cookie consent mechanism with granular controls is implemented.
  3. Terms and disclaimers are prominently displayed with user acceptance required.
  4. No security policy or incident response contact information found.
  5. No suspicious or malicious content detected.
  6. WHOIS data supports legitimacy and consistency with business claims.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS using WPBakery Page Builder and several plugins such as Yoast SEO, Contact Form 7, and Popup Maker. It uses Google Fonts and Google Maps API, and integrates Google reCAPTCHA for bot protection. The site loads multiple CSS and JS assets, including jQuery and jQuery UI components. Performance is moderate, with some optimization via WP Performance Score Booster plugin. Mobile optimization is good with responsive design and viewport meta tags. SEO is supported by Yoast SEO plugin and structured data in JSON-LD format. No explicit hosting provider is identified from the HTML content. The site uses canonical URLs and Open Graph metadata for social sharing. Overall, the technical infrastructure is modern but could benefit from enhanced security headers and DNSSEC.
Standards and sources

Reference chips under each finding point to the standard, regulation or specification the finding relates to. They are taken from the official datasets below and mapped conservatively: a finding with no defensible link shows none. NIS2 and GDPR references mark where a finding is relevant evidence, not a compliance verdict. Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690 binds digital infrastructure and digital service providers; for other entities it is the most detailed public reading of the Article 21 measures. WCAG, EN 301 549, European Accessibility Act and Web Accessibility Directive references name the requirement an automated accessibility rule relates to; they are not a conformance verdict.

Retrieved 2026-10-25

Reviews of this site

Share your experience with 1618am.com. Every review is verified by email and published after moderation.

Overall rating
Select a rating
4000 characters remaining

We’ll email you to confirm your review and keep your details private.

Community rating

No published reviews yet. Be the first to review 1618am.com.

Feedback on this report

Rate this report, add an optional comment, and tell us if you want a security specialist to follow up.

Overall report quality
Select a rating
2000 characters remaining

We only use your feedback to improve Guard reports. Contact details are never shared.