Review on Excelexpresslogisti

The website in question, https://www.excelexpresslogistic.com/ (operating under the brand name “Excel Express Logistics”), presents itself as a global logistics and freight‑forwarding company offering air, maritime, land, rail, warehousing, intermodal and priority transportation services. On the homepage we see broad claims of “serving global”, “modern technology”, “expert employees”, “warehouse facility”, “global operation”.  The site includes pages for “Track Shipment”, “Contact Us”, “Careers”, etc. 

However, a closer look reveals numerous red flags and inconsistencies that cast serious doubt on the legitimacy of the entity. The core claim is: engage Excel Express Logistics to handle your freight globally, saving you time/cost, with a fully‑featured infrastructure of trucks, warehouses, “global operation” etc. But the website lacks credible identifiers: no meaningful company registration information, vague or generic team listings, suspicious content snippets (e.g., placeholder / “lorem”‑style text), no verifiable track record, and little transparency.

In short: The site appears to be professional in appearance at first glance, but on deeper analysis many elements indicate that it may be a scam or at least extremely high risk. If you are considering using the services of Excel Express Logistics, exercise extreme caution — for many users, better to assume the worst (scam) unless proven otherwise.

More Details

In this section I will detail why, based on the evidence, I lean strongly toward concluding that the website is not trustworthy and should be treated as a scam risk.

Firstly, one of the primary functions of a logistics company is transparency: you should be able to trace physical offices, track record, regulatory compliance (customs brokerage licences, freight forwarder licences, etc). This site fails to provide that. Without such verification, you cannot confirm that behind the website there is any real logistics infrastructure.

Secondly, the site’s content shows tell‑tale signs of template usage or copy‑paste logistics web design: phrases like “Mauris ut enim sit amet lacus ornare ullamcorper…” clearly appear as placeholder Latin/Latin‑look text in multiple sections.  Real operator websites rarely leave such filler text or duplicate it across sections. This suggests minimal genuine content creation and perhaps that the site was built quickly to appear legitimate.

Thirdly, the use of generic, non‑specific claims (e.g., “1 k Successful Transportation,” “1 Land Freight Transportation,” “1+ Countries of Operation”) are unrealistic and meaningless.  Real companies provide specific numbers and locations, not “1+ Countries”. These vague claims are often used by scam operations to give the appearance of scale without evidence.

Fourth, the domain and contact details are suspicious. While there is a U.S. phone number, there is no clear physical address. The site uses an apparently unrelated brand (“Loraic”) in some places. For instance, the “Track Shipment” page refers to “Loraic provides all the documents and freight tracking you need” whereas the company branding is “Excel Express Logistics”. This mismatch adds to the concern. 

Fifth, I found no credible verification of the company in industry directories, no reviews or forums complaining (or confirming) services. Usually, real logistics companies of any size will have some footprint or mention in shipping forums, client testimonial sites, or trade associations. The absence of this raises the probability that the site exists primarily online for deceptive purposes.

Finally, from a risk mitigation perspective: if a user engages with a company that lacks verifiable track record and pays in advance, the risk of loss is high. If the company fails to deliver freight, recourse is low. All these align with common scam logistics/forwarding models: they present a professional façade, collect payment or deposit, then fail to deliver.

For these reasons, while it is impossible to prove definitively that this is a scam without legal investigation or client testimonial, the preponderance of red flags strongly supports treating this as a scam‑risk entity rather than a legitimate operator.