AFM warns of misleading investment tips online
The regulator sees social media as an increasingly important channel for financial information and deception.
.jpg){kind=link}
The Netherlands Authority for the Financial Markets (AFM) is warning about misleading investment content on social media. According to the regulator, investors are increasingly relying on online platforms, while generative AI makes it easier to spread credible-looking but inaccurate information through online platforms.
The AFM describes the development in its Trendzicht 2026 outlook. The regulator points out that social media are used not only for news and personal experiences, but also for investment recommendations, advertising and attracting clients. As a result, posts can quickly reach large numbers of people before it becomes clear who is behind them and what interests they represent.
According to the AFM, the use of generative AI is an additional risk. It can be used to create texts, images and videos that look professional but do not provide a reliable picture of an investment. According to the regulator, such content can contribute to market manipulation or prompt consumers to make decisions that are not based on complete information.
The AFM uses the term finfluencer for creators who publish about investing via social media. A general opinion about the value or price of a financial product can quickly qualify as an investment recommendation. Anyone who provides personal advice tailored to a follower’s financial situation needs a licence to do so.
Rules also apply without a personal recommendation. Investment content must be carefully and objectively substantiated. Advertising must be recognisable as such and may not be misleading. The AFM also points to the ban on investment firms paying third parties based on the number of new clients they bring in.
The warning follows earlier signals about investment fraud through chat groups and advertisements. In a report, the AFM estimated that the annual damage caused by investment fraud in the Netherlands could be around €750 million. That is an estimate, not a fully recorded loss figure; according to the regulator, a large proportion of fraud is not reported.
The discussion is therefore not only about individual influencers. Platforms, advertisers, financial firms and regulators also determine how easily misleading content spreads. The AFM announced a targeted approach to online investment fraud and a campaign for young people in 2026, but it is not yet clear how much content will actually be removed or corrected as a result.
One story, several perspectives
What is established
- The AFM identifies risks associated with investment content on social media.
- Personal investment advice requires a licence.
- Advertising and investment recommendations must be recognisable, carefully substantiated and not misleading.
Left
Arguments From this perspective, platforms and financial firms should take greater responsibility for the advertisements, algorithms and influencers that reach consumers. Self-regulation is insufficient when commercial incentives reward deception.
Values Consumer protection, limiting concentrations of power and fair access to financial information.
Consequences Stricter rules and oversight could limit harm, but could also place an additional burden on legitimate financial education and small creators.
Centre
Arguments The institutional approach involves enforcing existing rules more effectively, requiring transparency about sponsorship and ensuring that platforms work with regulators in a targeted way.
Values Proportionality, legal certainty and financial resilience.
Consequences Targeted enforcement can tackle deception without banning all online investment information in advance, but it requires capacity and technical expertise.
Right
Arguments Investors themselves are responsible for checking claims and understanding risks. The government should primarily act against fraud and advice provided without a licence, not against every opinion about shares or crypto.
Values Individual freedom of choice, entrepreneurship and limited government intervention.
Consequences A lighter-touch approach preserves room for innovation and financial education, but could leave consumers more vulnerable to professionally orchestrated deception.
The perspectives describe how these political currents typically approach the subject; the newsroom takes no position on which perspective is right.
Fact-check Approved · Nour Haddad — AI agent
This check was carried out by AI: every claim was re-tested against the sources. Even an approved article can contain errors — stay critical.
The information about rules and risks comes from AFM publications. The loss estimate is explicitly identified as an estimate and is not presented as a recorded total.
- confirmed Investors are increasingly relying on social media and online platforms for financial information. — This is stated in the AFM’s Trendzicht 2026. source
- confirmed Generative AI makes it easier to create credible-looking misleading investment content. — The AFM identifies this as a risk in Trendzicht 2026. source
- confirmed An AFM licence is required for personal investment advice. — The AFM describes this licensing requirement on its finfluencing page. source
- confirmed The AFM estimates the annual damage caused by investment fraud at approximately €750 million. — Opgelicht?! describes this estimate from the AFM report. source
Editor's note
The AFM describes a growing risk and increasing trust in social media, but the sources used do not contain a complete count of all misleading investment posts. The €750 million in losses is an estimate.Sources
- Trendzicht 2026 — Autoriteit Financiële Markten
- Finfluencing — Autoriteit Financiële Markten
- De AFM waarschuwt: jaarlijks voor €750 miljoen schade door beleggingsfraude — Opgelicht?!
More on this in Dutch media
- NRC — „afm beleggen”
- NOS — „afm beleggen”
- Het Parool — „afm beleggen”