The Truth Behind Prop Firms. News • Investigations • Payout Reports • Transparency

Dubai, United Arab Emirates
🚨 $76,656 PAYOUT DISPUTE — RESOLVED A major payout dispute involving a trader and The5ers has reportedly reached a positive outcome. The trader @Trillionarie369 had publicly raised concerns over a $76,656.09 payout. After the case gained significant attention from the trading community, the trader has now confirmed that the full payout was received, along with proof of payment. 💰 $76,656.09 — PAID This is a good reminder that public transparency can matter when a serious payout dispute arises. The important part here: the trader got paid, and the case is now closed. ✅ Credit to both sides for bringing the situation to a resolution. 🔎 The Prop Truth 
We follow the case. We report the outcome. #The5ers #PropFirm #Payout #PropTrading #ThePropTruth
RECEIVED PAYOUT from the @the5erstrading THANK YOU 🙏 TRADERS 🥹🫂
16
12
223
16,704
If this had happened to just one trader, we could have ignored it or assumed it was the trader’s mistake. But under just one of my post, there are already five people reporting the exact same issue — same reason, same case, same pattern, nothing seems to change. What kind of automated system is this if traders are repeatedly facing the same situation in @fundingpips So, traders, before buying any account or trusting any firm, think twice — or even a hundred times. Even a firm like FundingPips, which has been around for years, is still facing these kinds of complaints from traders. And these are only a few of the people who are actually speaking up in the comments. There could be many more who simply aren’t saying anything. At this point, what is really going on with this CFD firms ? @fundingpips @Khldfx @avikkfp
🚨 FUNDINGPIPS BANNED TRADER AFTER GIVING 25000$ PAYOUT 🚨 According to trader @hammadtrades after receiving 25k payout and being profitable since long time @fundingpips closed his 2× $100K Master accounts, 1 Phase account and others, citing reverse trading. But the trader claims: • ~160 trades across 23 accounts using the same strategy • Evidence provided allegedly focuses on just one trade • Entry timing differed by ~12 minutes • Exit timing differed by ~5 minutes • Entry/exit prices also differed • The cited trade was on 28 Aug, while the account breached on 2 Sept • Allegation email was received only on 22 Sept • After multiple requests, the trader says the firm maintained that the decision was final The trader also claims to have received around $25K in previous payouts and is asking for the complete evidence and methodology behind the decision. If the evidence is conclusive, show it clearly. If there are material differences in timing and price, those deserve a proper explanation. Transparency matters — especially when large accounts and traders’ payouts are involved. @Khldfx @fundingpips @avikkfp
11
5
11
710
The Prop Truth retweeted
If this had happened to just one trader, we could have ignored it or assumed it was the trader’s mistake. But under just one of my post, there are already five people reporting the exact same issue — same reason, same case, same pattern, nothing seems to change. What kind of automated system is this if traders are repeatedly facing the same situation in @fundingpips So, traders, before buying any account or trusting any firm, think twice — or even a hundred times. Even a firm like FundingPips, which has been around for years, is still facing these kinds of complaints from traders. And these are only a few of the people who are actually speaking up in the comments. There could be many more who simply aren’t saying anything. At this point, what is really going on with this CFD firms ? @fundingpips @Khldfx @avikkfp
🚨 FUNDINGPIPS BANNED TRADER AFTER GIVING 25000$ PAYOUT 🚨 According to trader @hammadtrades after receiving 25k payout and being profitable since long time @fundingpips closed his 2× $100K Master accounts, 1 Phase account and others, citing reverse trading. But the trader claims: • ~160 trades across 23 accounts using the same strategy • Evidence provided allegedly focuses on just one trade • Entry timing differed by ~12 minutes • Exit timing differed by ~5 minutes • Entry/exit prices also differed • The cited trade was on 28 Aug, while the account breached on 2 Sept • Allegation email was received only on 22 Sept • After multiple requests, the trader says the firm maintained that the decision was final The trader also claims to have received around $25K in previous payouts and is asking for the complete evidence and methodology behind the decision. If the evidence is conclusive, show it clearly. If there are material differences in timing and price, those deserve a proper explanation. Transparency matters — especially when large accounts and traders’ payouts are involved. @Khldfx @fundingpips @avikkfp
11
5
11
710
🚨 ANOTHER DAY ANOTHER TRADER , SAME FIRM SAME REASON FOR PAYOUT DENIAL 🚨 A trader @ambitiousmind06 says Guardian Futures rejected a $7K payout and prohibited access to accounts with a total balance of $26K. Guardian Futures’ email cites “coordinated opposing positions” on MNQU6 and says the accounts showed matching trades opened and closed at the same or closely corresponding times. The trader disputes the allegation and says no coordinated or hedging activity was involved, while also claiming the firm did not provide sufficient proof. $7K payout rejected. $26K balance locked. The evidence behind the decision matters. @GuardianFutures @seanbaint @Aliatcx #PropFirms #FuturesTrading #TradingCommunity
7k$ rejected and total balance of 26k$ prohibited from @GuardianFutures I never hedge or do coordinated trading with anyone , they did without proof @seanbaint @EricGairns @TrustedPropNews @PropFirmMatch @theproptruth @PropFirmsGuru @PFRT_X @risers343
7
5
11
760
The Prop Truth retweeted
🚨 ANOTHER DAY ANOTHER TRADER , SAME FIRM SAME REASON FOR PAYOUT DENIAL 🚨 A trader @ambitiousmind06 says Guardian Futures rejected a $7K payout and prohibited access to accounts with a total balance of $26K. Guardian Futures’ email cites “coordinated opposing positions” on MNQU6 and says the accounts showed matching trades opened and closed at the same or closely corresponding times. The trader disputes the allegation and says no coordinated or hedging activity was involved, while also claiming the firm did not provide sufficient proof. $7K payout rejected. $26K balance locked. The evidence behind the decision matters. @GuardianFutures @seanbaint @Aliatcx #PropFirms #FuturesTrading #TradingCommunity
7k$ rejected and total balance of 26k$ prohibited from @GuardianFutures I never hedge or do coordinated trading with anyone , they did without proof @seanbaint @EricGairns @TrustedPropNews @PropFirmMatch @theproptruth @PropFirmsGuru @PFRT_X @risers343
7
5
11
760
🚨 $10K PAYOUT DISPUTE WITH @GuardianFutures Blue Guardian rejected trader @story_mythy payout and the reason of denial was "Coordinated Trading." According to the trader : He never do coordinate trading with any of other trader. He has never hedged or coordinated trades across his accounts, and has provided his trade logs as proof. Trader want manual review and ready for interview and showing whole the evidence Traders deserve transparency by the firm Transparency = trust @GuardianFutures @seanbaint @Aliatcx
$10k payout rejected by @GuardianFutures I have never hedged or co-ordinated traded my accounts with anyone. Trade log attached. Please review your decision @seanbaint @EricGairns @PropFirmMatch @Propfirm
7
4
20
1,963
The Prop Truth retweeted
🚨 $10K PAYOUT DISPUTE WITH @GuardianFutures Blue Guardian rejected trader @story_mythy payout and the reason of denial was "Coordinated Trading." According to the trader : He never do coordinate trading with any of other trader. He has never hedged or coordinated trades across his accounts, and has provided his trade logs as proof. Trader want manual review and ready for interview and showing whole the evidence Traders deserve transparency by the firm Transparency = trust @GuardianFutures @seanbaint @Aliatcx
$10k payout rejected by @GuardianFutures I have never hedged or co-ordinated traded my accounts with anyone. Trade log attached. Please review your decision @seanbaint @EricGairns @PropFirmMatch @Propfirm
7
4
20
1,963
🚨 $4,160 Payout Denied with @AlphaCapitalUK due. So called payout denial rule ‘ CID DEVICE MATCH RULE ’ 🚨 A trader, @dsakjh3432s21_ claims Alpha Capital Group denied his $4,160 payout and permanently banned his account over an alleged CID/device match with another trader he says he does not know. According to the trader: • Trader says he used only his own phone, Wi-Fi and account • Alpha Capital says its CID system detected 2 devices linked to another user account • The firm cited its policy prohibiting account management by anyone other than the account holder • The trader disputes knowing or sharing access with the other account The key question is simple: Does a device match alone establish that two traders are connected — and what evidence is being used to make that determination? Alpha Capital should provide clear, verifiable evidence explaining the alleged connection. $4,160 is not a small amount. Transparency matters when denying a trader’s payout.
5
4
7
963
The Prop Truth retweeted
🚨 $4,160 Payout Denied with @AlphaCapitalUK due. So called payout denial rule ‘ CID DEVICE MATCH RULE ’ 🚨 A trader, @dsakjh3432s21_ claims Alpha Capital Group denied his $4,160 payout and permanently banned his account over an alleged CID/device match with another trader he says he does not know. According to the trader: • Trader says he used only his own phone, Wi-Fi and account • Alpha Capital says its CID system detected 2 devices linked to another user account • The firm cited its policy prohibiting account management by anyone other than the account holder • The trader disputes knowing or sharing access with the other account The key question is simple: Does a device match alone establish that two traders are connected — and what evidence is being used to make that determination? Alpha Capital should provide clear, verifiable evidence explaining the alleged connection. $4,160 is not a small amount. Transparency matters when denying a trader’s payout.
5
4
7
963
🚨 $5,888 APPROVED — BUT ONLY $1,766.40 TRANSFERRED? Since last few days there are many traders suffering from payot approved≠ payout transferred with the @Pipstonecapital A trader @Ksatyaganeshh has raised serious questions regarding a payout issue with Pipstone Capital. According to the trader : • Dashboard reportedly showed a $5,888 payout as APPROVED. • Only $1,766.40 was allegedly being transferred. • Pipstone reportedly cited multiple linked accounts and alleged trading across them. • The trader says they operated only one Pipstone account and has asked for the account IDs, trading records and evidence supporting the alleged link. The key question is simple: If the remaining payout was withheld due to a compliance decision, what exactly is the evidence and calculation behind it? Traders deserve clear explanations when thousands of dollars are involved. Pipstone Capital — can you clarify this case?@Pipstonecapital @AirRaja
🚨 Pipstone captial scam paying only for influencers, Pipstone Capital payout issue I’m extremely disappointed with how my payout review has been handled. Pipstone has denied/flagged my payout based on claims that I traded across multiple linked accounts, including accounts that allegedly failed and used different risk profiles. The problem: I traded only ONE Pipstone account. I have not operated the other accounts they are referring to. I’ve asked them to provide the account IDs, trading records, and evidence showing these accounts are linked to me. If there has been a mistake in their compliance review, I expect it to be corrected and my payout to be reconsidered. I’m sharing this publicly for transparency. I’ll update this thread when I receive their response. 🚨 PIPSTONE CAPITAL — I NEED ANSWERS This payout situation is completely unacceptable. My dashboard shows a $5,888 payout as APPROVED, yet the amount being transferred is only $1,766.40. That is a massive unexplained difference. Even more concerning, your compliance email claims I traded across multiple linked accounts and that other accounts associated with me failed. I traded ONLY ONE Pipstone account. If you claim otherwise, SHOW THE EVIDENCE. I want the following publicly clarified: • Which accounts are supposedly linked to me? • What evidence connects those accounts to me? • Why is only $1,766.40 being transferred? • Where is the remaining payout amount? @Pipstonecapital @AirRaja @TrustedPropHub @propwatchmedia @PropFirmsGuru @PropFirmMedia @MSTARROHIT @raunitfx @cryptoparida @SahibNoor08 @HirenFX @anandfx_og @Sai_Prasan When traders don’t have unity propfirms like these scam our traders Let’s show our unity brothers
4
5
8
887
The Prop Truth retweeted
🚨 $5,888 APPROVED — BUT ONLY $1,766.40 TRANSFERRED? Since last few days there are many traders suffering from payot approved≠ payout transferred with the @Pipstonecapital A trader @Ksatyaganeshh has raised serious questions regarding a payout issue with Pipstone Capital. According to the trader : • Dashboard reportedly showed a $5,888 payout as APPROVED. • Only $1,766.40 was allegedly being transferred. • Pipstone reportedly cited multiple linked accounts and alleged trading across them. • The trader says they operated only one Pipstone account and has asked for the account IDs, trading records and evidence supporting the alleged link. The key question is simple: If the remaining payout was withheld due to a compliance decision, what exactly is the evidence and calculation behind it? Traders deserve clear explanations when thousands of dollars are involved. Pipstone Capital — can you clarify this case?@Pipstonecapital @AirRaja
🚨 Pipstone captial scam paying only for influencers, Pipstone Capital payout issue I’m extremely disappointed with how my payout review has been handled. Pipstone has denied/flagged my payout based on claims that I traded across multiple linked accounts, including accounts that allegedly failed and used different risk profiles. The problem: I traded only ONE Pipstone account. I have not operated the other accounts they are referring to. I’ve asked them to provide the account IDs, trading records, and evidence showing these accounts are linked to me. If there has been a mistake in their compliance review, I expect it to be corrected and my payout to be reconsidered. I’m sharing this publicly for transparency. I’ll update this thread when I receive their response. 🚨 PIPSTONE CAPITAL — I NEED ANSWERS This payout situation is completely unacceptable. My dashboard shows a $5,888 payout as APPROVED, yet the amount being transferred is only $1,766.40. That is a massive unexplained difference. Even more concerning, your compliance email claims I traded across multiple linked accounts and that other accounts associated with me failed. I traded ONLY ONE Pipstone account. If you claim otherwise, SHOW THE EVIDENCE. I want the following publicly clarified: • Which accounts are supposedly linked to me? • What evidence connects those accounts to me? • Why is only $1,766.40 being transferred? • Where is the remaining payout amount? @Pipstonecapital @AirRaja @TrustedPropHub @propwatchmedia @PropFirmsGuru @PropFirmMedia @MSTARROHIT @raunitfx @cryptoparida @SahibNoor08 @HirenFX @anandfx_og @Sai_Prasan When traders don’t have unity propfirms like these scam our traders Let’s show our unity brothers
4
5
8
887
🚨 FUNDINGPIPS BANNED TRADER AFTER GIVING 25000$ PAYOUT 🚨 According to trader @hammadtrades after receiving 25k payout and being profitable since long time @fundingpips closed his 2× $100K Master accounts, 1 Phase account and others, citing reverse trading. But the trader claims: • ~160 trades across 23 accounts using the same strategy • Evidence provided allegedly focuses on just one trade • Entry timing differed by ~12 minutes • Exit timing differed by ~5 minutes • Entry/exit prices also differed • The cited trade was on 28 Aug, while the account breached on 2 Sept • Allegation email was received only on 22 Sept • After multiple requests, the trader says the firm maintained that the decision was final The trader also claims to have received around $25K in previous payouts and is asking for the complete evidence and methodology behind the decision. If the evidence is conclusive, show it clearly. If there are material differences in timing and price, those deserve a proper explanation. Transparency matters — especially when large accounts and traders’ payouts are involved. @Khldfx @fundingpips @avikkfp
I didn’t want to post this publicly, but I feel I need to share my experience and ask for clarification from @fundingpips. @fundingpips has raised a reverse-trading concern regarding my accounts, which resulted in the closure of my 2 × $100K Master accounts, 1 Phase account, and multiple other accounts. I traded around 160 trades across 23 accounts using the same strategy. The evidence shared with me refers to one trade, but I noticed several differences: • Entry timing differs by ~12 minutes • Exit timing differs by ~5 minutes • Entry and exit prices are also different • The trade was on 28 August, while that account breached on 2 September • I received the email of this allegation on 22 September I have asked for the complete evidence and methodology behind the decision. However, after four replies, I received essentially the same response: that the decision is final and that the provided trade is sufficient proof. I have already attached the details showing the differences in the evidence. @Khldfx is a trader, and was built by traders, for traders. I chose @fundingpips because I believed it was a firm that understood and supported traders. I hope this situation can be reviewed with the same transparency and fairness that traders expect. I have received around $25,000 in payouts from FundingPips. I genuinely want to understand one thing: if a trader becomes profitable but isn’t an influencer or public figure, does that become a concern for the firm? Because the trades provided as evidence do not match in timing or price in a way that, from my side, explains the decision that was made. I’m also willing to participate in an interview and explain how I trade, my strategy, and every detail of my trading activity. I’m sharing this publicly because I believe traders deserve clarity when serious decisions are made about their accounts.
16
8
56
9,408
The Prop Truth retweeted
🚨 FUNDINGPIPS BANNED TRADER AFTER GIVING 25000$ PAYOUT 🚨 According to trader @hammadtrades after receiving 25k payout and being profitable since long time @fundingpips closed his 2× $100K Master accounts, 1 Phase account and others, citing reverse trading. But the trader claims: • ~160 trades across 23 accounts using the same strategy • Evidence provided allegedly focuses on just one trade • Entry timing differed by ~12 minutes • Exit timing differed by ~5 minutes • Entry/exit prices also differed • The cited trade was on 28 Aug, while the account breached on 2 Sept • Allegation email was received only on 22 Sept • After multiple requests, the trader says the firm maintained that the decision was final The trader also claims to have received around $25K in previous payouts and is asking for the complete evidence and methodology behind the decision. If the evidence is conclusive, show it clearly. If there are material differences in timing and price, those deserve a proper explanation. Transparency matters — especially when large accounts and traders’ payouts are involved. @Khldfx @fundingpips @avikkfp
I didn’t want to post this publicly, but I feel I need to share my experience and ask for clarification from @fundingpips. @fundingpips has raised a reverse-trading concern regarding my accounts, which resulted in the closure of my 2 × $100K Master accounts, 1 Phase account, and multiple other accounts. I traded around 160 trades across 23 accounts using the same strategy. The evidence shared with me refers to one trade, but I noticed several differences: • Entry timing differs by ~12 minutes • Exit timing differs by ~5 minutes • Entry and exit prices are also different • The trade was on 28 August, while that account breached on 2 September • I received the email of this allegation on 22 September I have asked for the complete evidence and methodology behind the decision. However, after four replies, I received essentially the same response: that the decision is final and that the provided trade is sufficient proof. I have already attached the details showing the differences in the evidence. @Khldfx is a trader, and was built by traders, for traders. I chose @fundingpips because I believed it was a firm that understood and supported traders. I hope this situation can be reviewed with the same transparency and fairness that traders expect. I have received around $25,000 in payouts from FundingPips. I genuinely want to understand one thing: if a trader becomes profitable but isn’t an influencer or public figure, does that become a concern for the firm? Because the trades provided as evidence do not match in timing or price in a way that, from my side, explains the decision that was made. I’m also willing to participate in an interview and explain how I trade, my strategy, and every detail of my trading activity. I’m sharing this publicly because I believe traders deserve clarity when serious decisions are made about their accounts.
16
8
56
9,408
🚨 FundedNext: Allegation Changed After the Case Went Viral And blocked by @galibsyed_ then @FundedNext offered him 50% split 🚨 A trader @fahad07865 says he requested $16,000 in payouts, but instead of receiving the payout, his account was moved to DTP with just one explanation: What about the ordinary trader whose payout gets denied and who has no social media reach or public influence? Where is the accountability, transparency, and fair treatment for them from FundedNext? “Your trading behaviour is not good.” No specific trade or rule violation was reportedly provided. Then the case went public and gained attention. According to the trader’s screenshots, FundedNext offered a 50/50 performance-reward split instead of the original payout structure. Now the questions are: • If there was a clear rule violation, why wasn’t the specific rule/trade explained? • Why offer a 50/50 split after the issue became public? • Why were interview dates repeatedly changed/cancelled? • And why does a $16,000 payout remain unresolved? The trader says he is ready to explain his strategy, risk and every trade. So what exactly is the issue here — trading behaviour, a rule violation, or something else? @FundedNext — traders deserve a clear explanation. @FundedNext @galibsyed_ @Jayed_FN
Replying to @FundedNext
@Fundednext STOP DELAYING WHAT YOU PROMISED! ⚠️ 🚨 TRADING COMMUNITY HOLD THEM ACCOUNTABLE!!! After my post went viral, Fundednext initiated me to an interview. The latest date was 2 weeks ahead. I booked it. Now they cancelled after a week an asking me to book again.
9
7
17
1,951