Danny de Hek
Danny de Hek is a New Zealand-based YouTuber and OSINT researcher who has published detailed investigations into alleged Ponzi schemes and cryptocurrency frauds.
Early life
De Hek was raised as a Jehovah's Witness and was later disfellowshipped, a formal process of expulsion within the organisation that involves social shunning by members. After leaving the religious community, De Hek worked for several years in manual trades, including as a painter and decorator, before transitioning into business and online ventures. He later became involved in business networking, operating an in-person networking organisation for a number of years. During the COVID-19 pandemic, this business ceased operating, prompting him to focus more heavily on online work and digital platforms.Career
De Hek began investigating scams because of a hoax email he saw in the late 2010s. He later established a YouTube channel focused on investigating Ponzi schemes and high-risk online investment platforms. By 2023 he had produced more than 130 videos about scams.Pakistan investigations
In April 2025, the United States Department of Justice indicted the proprietors of an e-commerce website, eWorldTrade, for conspiring to distribute synthetic opioids in the United States. In June 2025, de Hek began publishing a series of investigations into the parent company of eWorldTrade as well as connected business operations based in Texas and Pakistan. de Hek's investigation claimed that eWorldTrade was owned by Intersys Limited, a Pakistan-based company formerly known as Abtach, with operations in the United States. The cybersecurity journalist Brian Krebs independently corroborated the connection, reporting that Intersys and its associated networks were implicated in fentanyl-analog trafficking and online scam operations targeting American consumers through a sprawling network of companies across the United States and Pakistan.In response, three lawsuits were filed in Pakistan against de Hek.
Goliath Ventures
Beginning in September 2025, de Hek began publishing coverage claiming the Orlando-based firm Goliath Ventures, Inc. was an unregistered hedge fund operating a Ponzi scheme. Subsequent reporting found that Goliath Ventures had raised more than US$500 million from investors in America, Canada and the United Arab Emirates without registering with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission to solicit or manage investor funds. In October 2025, the company filed a lawsuit against de Hek in Florida's Ninth Judicial Circuit, seeking damages and injunctive relief.HyperVerse
One of de Hek's most prominent investigations concerned HyperVerse, a crypto investment firm. de Hek began publishing coverage on HyperVerse in February 2022, claiming the corporation was a Ponzi scheme. The scheme subsequently collapsed, after which investors were no longer able to make withdrawals. In January 2024, the U.S. Department of Justice unsealed an indictment charging Lee with conspiracy to commit securities fraud and wire fraud for orchestrating a US$1.89 billion cryptocurrency fraud scheme. The SEC simultaneously filed civil charges against Lee, alleging that HyperFund was a pyramid scheme with no real source of revenue other than funds received from investors.Defamation suits
de Hek has been the subject of several defamation actions brought by individuals he has investigated. In March 2023, Texas-based cryptocurrency promoter Stephen Andrew McCullah filed suit against de Hek in New Zealand's High Court, claiming YouTube videos de Hek had published about McCullah's activities involving Apollo crypto project were defamatory. De Hek filed defences of truth, honest opinion, qualified privilege, and responsible public interest communication, and applied for security for costs. McCullah discontinued the proceedings in June 2023.Associate Judge Owen Paulsen subsequently awarded de Hek indemnity costs of NZ$27,500, finding that McCullah had never intended to take the proceeding to trial and that the claim was brought not to vindicate his reputation but to stifle further publications—what the court characterised as a "gagging writ".