The main reason why doing business with these get-funded programs is a bad idea...

[traider]

There's never any trading 'against these funded programs'. If / when trading on the simulator the fills are subject to the simulator on Ninjatrader which I'd say is fairly (very?) realistic. There's no cheating in that regards.

Most who try this ain't good enough to pass those programs anyhow, so they don't really need to cheat with false fills in order to make people fail.

I don't know if my funded account was in simulator or not, but it's been said that the initial live account will be a simulated account and that you will be moved to a live account later on if you stay profitable. I couldn't find it in fine print for OneUp now, but this is what LeeLoo says:

View attachment 263939

Initially, I figured this was no big deal as I wouldn't mind my profits being paid out from the subscription fees of others and knowing the fills are good, but that was before I started considering the incentives from the firms point of view by doing that.

If my 'live profits' are generated in a simulator only - they don't have any profits to pay me from. This means the money have to come from something else other than profits from the market. And basic accounting tells us that this would be an expense for the company. And potentially a large one.

So, they really have zero incentive for you to succeed and all incentives to make you fail before you get that far.

In my case, they either collected 6K of profits themselves OR they didn't have to pay me what I was due. Either way it's a win for them.

If they don't let you trade live accounts even after passing evaluation, then it's really shady and their interests are opposite yours. You can usually tell if it's sim by the fills or by checking the actual time and sales.

 

[traderjo]

If they don't let you trade live accounts even after passing evaluation, then it's really shady and their interests are opposite yours. You can usually tell if it's sim by the fills or by checking the actual time and sales.

Absolutely true .. after passing the test if the company "is going to pay any profits out from the subscription fees of others " A) it is unethical and B) proves that the "Company" survives on test fees and not on real profits and C) that mean you are not really funded at all and your trades don;t go to the market
What if by luck or skill all those who pass make huge profits and the accumulated "Failed test fees" are not enough to pay out!
so THIS ENTIRE BUSINESS PRACTICE IS DODGY ( still legal somehow )
I stand corrected if none of these companies do not indulge in such practices

 

[traderjo]

On the subject of MES Capital they actually got quite rude when I was talking to them after the account was eliminated.

They went on to accuse me of FIVE prior rule breaks and having held overnight one more time earlier (and on a date where I was not yet funded).

I told them this was not correct and asked if they mixed me up with someone else?

Incredibly, they replied that the was indeed mixing me up with someone else who had actually got their account eliminated the same day.

Not very assuring, IMO. It also raises the question why someone else could have had five prior rule breaks and held overnight without being liquidated.

The bottom line for me seems to be that while these companies ain't necessarily scams and that they probably DO pay out money to those who makes it - they certainly have no interest in doing so and prefer to keep traders grinding on their evaluation accounts generating risk-free income. And for those who do make it as funded traders they sure as hell don't have any interest in them being or staying profitable.

It is not an apples to apples comparison IMHO
C2 is copy trade service you just auto trade follow other peoples trading and TST and others are so called Pay test funding

 

[traderjo]

Which is the only rule that should matter. I NEVER exceeded my daily drawdown rule. I made $$$ 19/20 days.

My original post stands on its own. I merely added my own experience showing how they liquidated a winning account - something which doesn't make sense if they were truly interested in funding a trader. Not to mention their rude customer support and admitting to mixing up my account with some other trader who had broken the rules five times prior without getting booted.

Who the hell knows? Maybe they liquidated the wrong account even?



Explain to me why they have one set of rules for their evaluation accounts, but increasingly more difficulties and restrictions on their live accounts?

Does it sound to you like they really have any interesting in staking a trader?

I heard that TopStep now added a new rule which states a trade can't be less than 10 seconds. Just another excuse to get rid of you, IMO, as the only thing that should matter is if you're making money and staying within maximum position size limits and daily drawdowns/trailing drawdowns.

To my knowledge there is one company which have one very simple rule only and where you can hold overnight too: "Do not exceed the trailing drawdown."

The problem is that this trailing drawdown never stops trailing and it trails from unrealized profits. So, if you're up 5K one day, but for some reason take profits at 1K, you effectively have a 1K drawdown before you're toast. This may never be a problem if you're trading only 1 lot, but that kind of defeats the purpose of trading through a so called 'prop firm' to begin with.

Based on "following rules" you can;t complaint you signed up for it!
rest of your criticism is understandable
What is happening is becasue you admit breaking rules all of your other points are ignored by those who support this business model
Keep these two things separate

 

[JSOP]

As I found myself in a life situation where I didn't want to risk my own capital, but at the same time wanted to stay in the game and practice, I decided to actually try my luck with OneUp / MES Capital a few weeks ago.

Long story short, I passed the evaluation within the 15 days required generating 10K worth of simulator $$$. I got funded and earned $7K of 'live' profits and my account was liquidated on the grounds that I held a position overnight.

This is true, but it's also true that this company practices a 2 strikes and you're out policy with regards to breaking rules. As such, I took a calculated risk on holding an unrealized loss (but still well within daily loss limits) through the electronic close and overnight. Prior to that I sent them an email asking for permission, but admittedly received the answer too late. I figured I would survive with a warning.

16 hours after I broke this rule as my account and position was profitable and my account had hit $7K of profits my account was liquidated. They did this on their own discretion; not an auto-liquidate upon rule break.

It seems like OneUp/MES have their funded traders initially on a simulator even after funded, so maybe it was not in their best interest to have someone making 'money' after all as it would mean they had to pay out of their own pockets if someone wanted to withdraw.

I made money 14/15 days on the try-out and 5/5 as a funded trader. If they really wanted to back someone it does not make sense to liquidate an account at equity highs where someone is actually making money.

If you were able to make that much money in such a short time, you could very well be making this much for yourself. Why trade for others to let them take a cut of your profit? As what I always tell others here, get a day job or do whatever to accumulate some trading capital and just trade on your own. You don't need those prop firms. And for that prop firm, it's their loss to let you go. For you, it's a good thing that they did. Now you can enjoy 100% of your profit.

 

[SimpleMeLike]

You got that right. I'm not sure why you're defending these companies?



Respectfully, you seem to continue missing the point. It's not about not accepting that there are rules to follow.

It's about how these companies don't truly have any interest in having you as a funded trader to begin with. And if you're funded they're making it increasingly difficult for you to stay funded and will not in any way help you to scale up.

Get it?

If I truly felt that there was an opportunity with these companies and that they really wanted to fund and support me and other traders who made the cut I'd do it again, but my experience and common sense tells me otherwise.

For what it's worth - TopStep was never even an option as there are companies that are more attractive than TopStep. I see that TST also added a policy with regards to their withdrawals, i.e., you can't withdraw more than 50 % of generated profits at once and ONLY after 5 winning days. If you want to withdraw again - you need 5 new winning days. What the hell?

Laissez Faire,

I am not sure with the problem is buddy. Everything is fair about TST and laid out for the trader.

I like the funding companies, because the give trader's with no capital to get funded if they can trade profitable and follow the rules.

If you follow there rules, and you think you can make money within their trading rules limits, they join it and go for it.

If you do not like the rules, do not join the funding program and trade however you want. However, I myself and maybe others like their rules.

I think their rules are fair. Because the rules are written out before I play the game.

 

[SimpleMeLike]

It's about how these companies don't truly have any interest in having you as a funded trader to begin with. And if you're funded they're making it increasingly difficult for you to stay funded and will not in any way help you to scale up.

Hello Laissez,

You see what you wrote, "don't truly have any interest".

You still think these trading companies, and trading gurus or trading teachers or whatever, give a F**K about you. That is your problem buddy.

I told you, in this trading business noone gives a F**K about you or me. In this trading business you have to do your homework before paying for stuff, cause there is alot of salesman taking money from people selling traders stuff that does not work.

Man, when it comes to making money, alllll that caring and best interest for the trader is for the birds.

Next time follow the rules of the funding program or trade your own money and follow your own rules.

Nice and simple

 

[SimpleMeLike]

Which is the only rule that should matter. I NEVER exceeded my daily drawdown rule. I made $$$ 19/20 days.

My original post stands on its own. I merely added my own experience showing how they liquidated a winning account - something which doesn't make sense if they were truly interested in funding a trader. Not to mention their rude customer support and admitting to mixing up my account with some other trader who had broken the rules five times prior without getting booted.

Who the hell knows? Maybe they liquidated the wrong account even?



Explain to me why they have one set of rules for their evaluation accounts, but increasingly more difficulties and restrictions on their live accounts?

Does it sound to you like they really have any interesting in staking a trader?

I heard that TopStep now added a new rule which states a trade can't be less than 10 seconds. Just another excuse to get rid of you, IMO, as the only thing that should matter is if you're making money and staying within maximum position size limits and daily drawdowns/trailing drawdowns.

To my knowledge there is one company which have one very simple rule only and where you can hold overnight too: "Do not exceed the trailing drawdown."

The problem is that this trailing drawdown never stops trailing and it trails from unrealized profits. So, if you're up 5K one day, but for some reason take profits at 1K, you effectively have a 1K drawdown before you're toast. This may never be a problem if you're trading only 1 lot, but that kind of defeats the purpose of trading through a so called 'prop firm' to begin with.

Laissez Faire,

TST is in business to make money sir. They not in business to lose money.

If traders make money and follow the rules and get funded, they make no money.

If traders lose money and break the rules, they make money.

Very fair playing field to me.

 

[traider]

Laissez Faire,

TST is in business to make money sir. They not in business to lose money.

If traders make money and follow the rules and get funded, they make no money.

If traders lose money and break the rules, they make money.

Very fair playing field to me.

If you never get to trade live it means that you win and they lose. There are a lot of things that the company can do to make a short term trader lose such as spiking data to trigger stop loss etc. It's like the bucket shops of the past

 

[Laissez Faire]

It is not an apples to apples comparison IMHO
C2 is copy trade service you just auto trade follow other peoples trading and TST and others are so called Pay test funding

I'm not sure why you bring up C2 in this thread or as a reply to the post you quoted. I never compared TST and C2.

Based on "following rules" you can;t complaint you signed up for it!
rest of your criticism is understandable
What is happening is becasue you admit breaking rules all of your other points are ignored by those who support this business model
Keep these two things separate

Actually, I'm not really complaining it. I just added it as further proof that they're not really interested in funding a successful trader as they eliminated my account on their own discretion 16 hours after breaking a rule and while the account was at equity highs.