Skip to main content

Security report for convexityshares.com

ConvexityShares · Finance · United States

Medium risk. 8 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

56/100

Risk levelMedium

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

ConvexityShares is a small ETF issuer based in the USA, founded in 2020, currently without active products in the market. The company operates under the parent company Teucrium and targets investors interested in exchange-traded funds. The website provides basic business information, tax package support resources, and contact options primarily through a contact form and physical address. The digital infrastructure employs modern web technologies including Google Tag Manager and Twitter tracking pixels, indicating moderate digital maturity. However, the site lacks comprehensive privacy and cookie policies, which impacts privacy compliance ratings. From a security perspective, the website benefits from HTTPS encryption and domain transfer protection, enhancing trustworthiness. Nonetheless, it lacks advanced security headers and explicit incident response contacts, which are recommended for improved security posture. No critical vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected during analysis. The website is accessible without any WAF or blocking mechanisms, allowing full content inspection. Overall, ConvexityShares presents a basic but functional online presence consistent with a small financial services business. Strategic improvements in privacy compliance, security headers, and incident response transparency would enhance trust and regulatory alignment. The company’s partnership with tax package support services adds value to its investor audience.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
35/ 100 · High
Checks completed
6of 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

8 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 Strict-Transport-Security header

      Forces HTTPS connections

      What to do: Add "Strict-Transport-Security: max-age=31536000; includeSubDomains; preload"

      • CWE-319
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V3.4.1
    • 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 Policy found

      GDPR requires clear information about cookie usage

      What to do: Add a dedicated cookie policy explaining cookie usage and purposes

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

Keep watching convexityshares.com

This scan found 23 issues across 5 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. See sample alerts.

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
15
Email security
70
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
35
Average
56

Not counted

  • DNS health: did not complete in this scan.
  • 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

ConvexityShares occupies a niche position as an ETF issuer with no current market products, indicating a startup or transitional phase. The business model focuses on ETF issuance and related investor support services. The presence of tax package support links suggests attention to investor needs beyond product offerings. The company leverages social media channels for outreach but lacks direct contact emails or phone numbers on the site, which may limit immediate customer engagement. The domain registration details align well with the business timeline, supporting legitimacy. The partnership ecosystem includes tax support services, enhancing the value proposition. Growth indicators are limited due to the absence of active products, but the foundational infrastructure is in place for future expansion.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate security maturity level with mandatory HTTPS and domain transfer lock status. However, the absence of DNSSEC and security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options represents gaps that could be exploited. No privacy policy or cookie consent mechanisms are present, which is a compliance risk under GDPR and similar regulations. Incident response readiness is not evident, with no dedicated security or abuse contact channels. The use of third-party tracking scripts introduces moderate user tracking but without transparent privacy disclosures. Overall, the security posture is adequate for a small business but requires enhancements to meet higher compliance and security standards.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to protect against DNS spoofing and improve DNS security.
  2. Publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with clear GDPR compliance statements.
  3. Implement security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security.
  4. Add explicit security incident response contact information such as security@ or abuse@ email addresses.
  5. Review and minimize third-party tracking scripts to enhance user privacy and transparency.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
ConvexityShares
Description
ConvexityShares is an ETF issuer and currently does not have any products in market.
Key services
ETF issuance, Tax package support resources
Content quality
basic
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Google Tag Manager, Twitter Universal Website Tag, Font Awesome, Bootstrap Icons, Google Fonts, Bootstrap CSS, jQuery (implied by bootstrap modal usage), PDF.js
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Domain status clientTransferProhibited to prevent unauthorized transfers

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Ad networks
Twitter Ads
Tracking pixels
Twitter Universal Website Tag
Transparency
basic

Site quality

Design
basic
User experience
basic
Content relevance
basic
Navigation
basic
Professionalism
basic
Trustworthiness
moderate

Key observations

  1. Website is accessible with no blocking or WAF challenges.
  2. No privacy policy, cookie policy, or terms of service pages found.
  3. Contact information includes physical address and contact form but no direct emails or phone numbers.
  4. Website uses modern tracking and marketing technologies but lacks explicit privacy compliance disclosures.
  5. Business is a small ETF issuer with no current products in market.
  6. Security posture is good with HTTPS and domain transfer protection but lacks advanced security headers and policies.
  7. Branding is consistent with clear company logos and social media presence.
  8. No critical vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data detected.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern but basic technology stack including Google Tag Manager, Twitter tracking pixels, Font Awesome icons, Bootstrap icons, and Google Fonts. The presence of PDF.js indicates support for embedded PDF content. The site is mobile responsive with basic accessibility features but lacks advanced SEO optimizations and structured data markup. Hosting details are not explicit but DNS is managed via name-services.com with domain registered at eNom, LLC. Performance is moderate with asynchronous loading of scripts. There is no detected CMS or advanced web framework. Technical debt appears low but opportunities exist to improve SEO, accessibility, and security headers to reduce risks and improve user experience.
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 convexityshares.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 convexityshares.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.