Skip to main content

Security report for fusionam.com

Fusion Group · Finance · United Kingdom

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

68/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Fusion Group is a UK-based financial services group specializing in investment management, wealth management, financial planning, and corporate risk advisory services. Established in 2004 and headquartered in London, the company serves institutional, corporate, and private clients with a range of advisory and investment platform services. The website presents a professional and clear depiction of their offerings and market positioning. Technically, the site is built on WordPress using Elementor, with modern technologies and good mobile optimization. Security posture is solid with HTTPS and no exposed sensitive data, though security headers and incident response policies are absent. The lack of WHOIS domain registration data is a notable concern that impacts trust and legitimacy assessment. Overall, the website is functional and professional but would benefit from enhanced transparency and security documentation.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
68/ 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

5 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 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

  3. SSL/TLS

    TLS encrypts the connection and proves the site is really yours. Weak or expiring certificates trigger browser warnings and put traffic at risk.

    • High

      Weak Protocols Supported

      Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1

      What to do: Disable TLS 1.0, TLS 1.1, and all SSL versions

      • CWE-327
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V12.1.1

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

Keep watching fusionam.com

This scan found 22 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
67
Security headers
15
Email security
85
DNS health
70
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
68
Average
68

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

Fusion Group operates in the competitive financial services sector, targeting a diverse client base including institutional and private investors. Their business model focuses on providing investment management and advisory services, supported by a financial advice and investment platform. The company has an established presence since 2004 with multiple UK offices and international reach. The website reflects a medium-sized enterprise with consistent branding and clear service segmentation. Social media presence on LinkedIn and Facebook supports their professional outreach. Absence of explicit contact emails or phone numbers may limit direct client engagement. The missing WHOIS data raises questions about domain ownership consistency, which should be clarified to strengthen business credibility.

Security posture

The website enforces HTTPS and uses up-to-date WordPress and Elementor versions, indicating a baseline security maturity. No sensitive data is exposed in the HTML, and no vulnerable libraries were detected. However, the absence of key security headers (such as CSP, HSTS, X-Frame-Options) and lack of published security or incident response policies suggest room for improvement. Cookie policy exists but lacks a consent mechanism, which may affect GDPR compliance. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt files are present. Overall, the security posture is moderate but could be enhanced by implementing recommended headers, formalizing incident response, and improving privacy controls.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive security headers including Content Security Policy, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options to harden the site against common web attacks.
  2. Publish explicit security and incident response policies to improve transparency and readiness.
  3. Add a cookie consent mechanism to comply fully with GDPR and enhance user privacy controls.
  4. Clarify domain registration status and ensure WHOIS data is accurate and publicly available to improve trustworthiness.
  5. Provide explicit company contact emails and phone numbers on the website to facilitate client communication and support.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Fusion Group
Description
Fusion Group is a group of financial services companies specialising in investment & wealth management, financial planning and corporate risk advisory services, headquartered in London. The group was established in 2004, has multiple offices across the UK, as well as an international presence, and works with both institutional and private clients.
Key services
Investment & Wealth Management, Financial Advice & Investment Platform, Advisory Services
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Elementor, jQuery, PHP 8.2, MediaElement.js
Frameworks
Elementor
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of latest WordPress and Elementor versions

Analytics and tracking

Services
Jetpack Stats
Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Jetpack Stats (stats.wp.com), WordPress.com Stats pixel
Marketing tools
Jetpack, Elementor Pro
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenges.
  2. Professional financial services website with clear service offerings.
  3. No exposed sensitive data or obvious security vulnerabilities in HTML.
  4. WHOIS data is missing or domain appears unregistered, which is unusual for an active business website.
  5. Privacy and cookie policies are present but cookie consent mechanism is missing.
  6. Contact information is only via contact form; no explicit emails or phone numbers found.
  7. Social media presence on Facebook and LinkedIn.
  8. Uses modern WordPress and Elementor technology stack.
  9. No explicit security or incident response policies found.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern WordPress CMS platform with Elementor page builder, leveraging jQuery and MediaElement.js for UI and media handling. Hosting appears to be with GoDaddy, inferred from included styles and scripts. The site is mobile optimized with responsive design and good SEO meta tags. Performance is moderate, with some lazy loading and prefetching techniques used. Accessibility is basic but could be improved with more ARIA roles and semantic markup. No critical technical debt or outdated libraries were detected, but security enhancements are recommended. Overall, the technical infrastructure supports a professional business presence but can be further modernized and secured.
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 fusionam.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 fusionam.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.