Funded Trader Markets 

Reply from Funded Trader Markets

17 hours ago

We want to clarify what actually happened here, as the review does not reflect the full picture.

We did respond to you and explained that confirmation of your funds was pending at the time. This is occasionally part of standard payment processing and is not something we control on our end. As soon as the payment was confirmed, your account was issued without further delay.

Given that this was a rare delay outside the norm, we also went ahead and issued you a complimentary account free of charge as a gesture of goodwill, on top of the account you originally purchased.

The claim that we did not respond and that no account was received does not reflect what took place. We responded, resolved the delay, and provided an additional account at no cost. We would encourage you to revisit this review in light of the full picture.

- The FTM Team

Reply from Funded Trader Markets

17 hours ago

The choppy chart issue you experienced was not specific to FTM. It was an issue affecting MT5 on Android devices across the board, impacting every broker and prop firm running on that platform regardless of server. When this was first raised in our community, we escalated it to our tech team immediately, who in turn contacted MetaQuotes directly for clarification. We were among the very first firms to even raise this issue with them before it became more widely reported and confirmed as a platform-wide Android problem.

We kept our community constantly updated throughout the issue and offered traders the option to switch platforms even on already-traded accounts, which is outside our standard policy of only allowing platform switches on untraded accounts. That is not the behavior of a firm trying to hide something.

You personally followed up multiple times in our Discord server during this period and were assured on each occasion that MetaQuotes was actively working on a resolution. You continued trading regardless, your account was breached, and you have now left this review calling us a scam.

We were one of the few firms to acknowledge this issue publicly and keep our community transparently updated throughout. The issue has since been resolved with an Android update from MetaQuotes. For reference, you can see this was raised and confirmed on their own official forum here: https://www.mql5.com/en/forum/511449

The Compliance Team
Funded Trader Markets

Reply from Funded Trader Markets

17 hours ago

The claim being made in this review is factually incorrect and contradicts what was already explained to you twice in our live chat conversation.

You purchased a 2-Step Plus account and selected the 90% profit split add-on at checkout. This add-on is entirely optional. By default, the 1% Maximum Floating Loss rule on 2-Step Plus only applies during the funded phase, as you correctly stated. However, the moment you select the 90% profit split add-on, this rule is extended to apply during the Evaluation Phase as well, both Phase 1 and Phase 2. This condition is displayed clearly on the purchase page at the point you selected the add-on, and is also documented in full on our FAQ.

This was explained to you directly in your support conversation, with the exact rule and the relevant FAQ links provided. The breach on your account was the result of two separate violations of this 1% floating loss limit during your evaluation, with the first treated as a soft breach and the second resulting in a hard breach, exactly as documented for this add-on.

Your closed loss being small is not relevant here. The floating loss rule tracks unrealized loss across open positions in real time, independent of your closed balance. This is a fundamentally different metric from your daily or overall drawdown and is explained as such in the FAQ.

Calling this firm a scam does not change the fact that you selected an add-on with clearly stated conditions, those conditions were violated twice, and the outcome is exactly what the rules say will happen.

The Compliance Team
Funded Trader Markets

Reply from Funded Trader Markets

5 days ago

This review directly misrepresents both what happened and how our team handled it.

You contacted our support team claiming a trade was opened on your account that you did not place and that it was a system error. We investigated and confirmed this was not a system error. The trade was opened by you or by someone with access to your account. Those are the only two possibilities. Trades do not open themselves.

Our investigation went further than a simple denial. We pulled the IP logs for every access to your trading account and every single one came back consistent with your previous access history. The same device. No anomalous logins. No indication of any external access whatsoever.

Beyond the IP logs, the trade history on your account tells its own story. You have a total of three trades on this account. The trade you claim not to have placed was opened exactly one second after the trade before it, in the opposite direction, and at the exact same lot size. A one second gap between two opposing trades on the same account accessed from the same device is not a system error and it is not a hack. It is a deliberate action. It is also difficult to reconcile the claim that you did not notice this position running given the circumstances under which it was opened.

When presented with these findings, your response was "Okay, my mistake. So, this is how you do it. You need money." followed immediately by "It's okay, one bad rating more or less makes no difference" and then you left this review. That sequence is on record.

You are solely responsible for the security and the activity of your account. The evidence in this case points unambiguously to the trade being placed from your own device in the same session as the trade before it. This was not a system error.


The Compliance Team
Funded Trader Markets

Reply from Funded Trader Markets

4 days ago

You purchased your account with the 90% profit split add-on.

This add-on is entirely optional and is not applied by default. When you hover over the add-on option on the checkout page, a message immediately appears making clear that the Maximum Floating Loss Rule applies. You do not need to click a single link or open a separate page. The information is displayed the moment your cursor reaches that option.

If we assume the checkout note was missed entirely, the rule is documented in full on our main website FAQ, our live chat FAQ, and our Discord server FAQ channel. It is in every single place we publish our rules. Not reading the conditions of an add-on you actively selected before purchasing is not something we can be held accountable for.

The daily and max drawdown limit you referenced is a separate rule. Having room remaining on your daily or max drawdown does not exempt you from the floating loss rule. These are two independent conditions and both must be respected at all times.

Our records confirm that your account exceeded the 1% floating loss threshold on two separate occasions. The first violation was treated as a soft breach and you received an email warning you of this. The second violation triggered a hard breach and resulted in the account being closed. This is the exact process outlined in the rules of the add-on you selected.

The account was not closed without reason. It was closed because the floating loss rule was violated twice. The outcome is fully consistent with the terms you agreed to at the time of purchase.

The Compliance Team
Funded Trader Markets

Reply from Funded Trader Markets

May 28, 2026

The claims made in this review are intentionally framed to be inaccurate.

You state that after reading every rule you started trading and your account breached without cause. However the breach was triggered by the Maximum Floating Loss rule, specifically the 1% floating loss limit which applies to your 2-Step Plus Evaluation account because you opted for the free 90% profit split add-on during purchase. This rule is not hidden, it is not buried, and it is not missing from any profile. It is displayed at the point of purchase on the checkout page and is documented across our main website FAQ, our live chat help centre, and our Discord server FAQ channel. If you read every rule as stated, this rule was there to be read at multiple points before you even placed your first trade.

Furthermore, the first time this rule was violated on your account, a warning email was sent to you immediately. That was a direct notification that the floating loss limit had been breached and an opportunity to pause, read the rule in full, and reach out to our support team for clarification. That opportunity was not taken. Trading continued and the rule was violated again, which triggered the hard breach and resulted in the account being closed. This is the exact process as documented.

On the stop loss being set at 0.98%, a stop loss controls where your position exits and protects against the final closed loss. It does not control the floating unrealised loss while the trade is running. The Maximum Floating Loss rule is triggered the moment the combined floating P&L across open positions reaches -1% of your account capital at any given point during the trade, regardless of where your stop loss is set. These are two separate mechanisms and one does not override the other. If the floating loss hits -1% before the stop loss is triggered, the rule triggers. That is how it works and that is how it is documented.

You did in fact reach out to our live chat team after the hard breach occurred. The agent who responded provided a detailed breakdown of exactly what happened and followed up shortly after to check if you had any further questions or anything to add. That message was read. No reply was sent. You then came here and left this review instead. That is not the behaviour of someone who has been ignored or dismissed. That is the behavior of someone who received a clear explanation, did not like the answer, and chose to escalate publicly rather than engage further.

Adding that you have a social media community of 100k traders is also irrelevant here. We respond the same way regardless of audience size. The facts of this case do not change based on how many people are watching.

The Compliance Team
Funded Trader Markets

Reply from Funded Trader Markets

May 27, 2026

Great question. It depends on which account model you are on, but the short answer is that all our performance rewards can be requested on demand. As soon as you meet the eligibility requirements for your specific account there is no fixed waiting period. You can submit your request immediately.

You can review the full eligibility requirements here: https://fundedtradermarkets.com/faq/when-am-i-eligible-to-request-my-withdrawal-of-simulated-profits/

Once submitted, all performance rewards are processed within a guaranteed 24 business hours: https://fundedtradermarkets.com/faq/how-does-the-24-hour-payout-guarantee-work/

If you have any further questions feel free to reach out to our support team at support@fundedtradermarkets.com, responses are much faster there.

- The FTM Team

Reply from Funded Trader Markets

May 27, 2026

Every claim in this review is either factually wrong or a deliberate misrepresentation.

Yes, the 2-Step Plus model advertises a 4% daily drawdown and 10% max drawdown. It also comes with the Shield Risk Protocol in its Simulated Funded Phase, which limits floating loss to 1% of initial account balance at any time. This rule is not hidden. It is published on our main website FAQ, our live chat help centre, and our Discord server FAQ channel. It is stated across every single information channel we operate. The idea that a rule documented in three separate public locations is somehow hidden is not an argument anyone should be making seriously.

The 'SAFE' indicator on your dashboard refers specifically to your distance from the daily and maximum drawdown limits. It tells you whether your balance and equity are within a safe range relative to those particular thresholds. It does not mean you are exempt from every other rule on the account. Interpreting a drawdown status indicator as a blanket clearance to violate the floating loss rule reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of the product, not a flaw in our disclosure.

The $55 loss that closed your positions did so because it pushed your floating loss over the 1% threshold on your account. The threshold exists in real time and is applied to floating unrealized P&L while positions are open. Your positions were closed automatically as documented in the rule. The profit split moved from 70% to 50% as documented. This is the Shield Risk Protocol working exactly as described.

Our support agent Kelvin explained all of this to you clearly during your conversation. Rather than engage with that explanation, you chose to characterize it as dismissive and threatened a public smear campaign. That says more about the intent behind this review than it does about our firm.

We make the challenge achievable because we want traders to succeed. We also enforce the funded phase rules because they exist to maintain a sustainable and fair program for every trader on the platform. Both things are true and neither is contradictory.

The Compliance Team
Funded Trader Markets

Reply from Funded Trader Markets

May 15, 2026

Congratulations on passing your 1-Step Evaluation, and thank you for sharing your experience with us.

We want to clarify what has happened here as it appears there may be some confusion about how the process works, which is completely understandable for first-time funded traders.

When you passed your evaluation, the challenge account you were trading on has now served its purpose. The login becoming inactive is not an error and nothing has gone wrong. It simply means the evaluation phase is complete and that account is closed as expected.

What you have now received is a brand new simulated funded account. This is a separate account with its own login credentials and this is where your actual trading journey with FTM begins. You will find the login details for your funded account on your FTM dashboard.

It is also worth clarifying that the profits made during the evaluation phase are not eligible for a performance reward. The evaluation phase exists purely to demonstrate that you can meet the challenge objectives and trade within the rules. It is the qualifying stage, not the earning stage. Your performance reward eligibility begins from your simulated funded account.

From here, you simply need to trade your funded account, meet the stated requirements, and once eligible you can submit your performance reward request. All the requirements and conditions for your funded account can be reviewed on your dashboard and in our FAQ.

If you need any further guidance on getting set up or understanding the requirements for your funded account, our support team is available 24/7 and will be happy to walk you through everything.

Welcome to the funded side and we look forward to seeing you succeed.

- The FTM Team

Reply from Funded Trader Markets

May 27, 2026

That is exactly what we like to hear. Hit the targets, follow the rules, get paid. That is the model and you experienced it exactly as it should be. Looking forward to supporting you as you scale up.

- The FTM Team

Reply from Funded Trader Markets

May 14, 2026

There is a fundamental contradiction in your review that needs to be called out.

Your review states that the Overall Drawdown Limit was not visible on the dashboard and that only the Daily Drawdown Limit, Maximum Drawdown Limit, and Consistency Rule were displayed. The Overall Drawdown Limit and the Maximum Drawdown Limit are the same thing. They are used interchangeably. If you are telling us that the Maximum Drawdown Limit was clearly visible on your dashboard, you are simultaneously confirming that the Overall Drawdown Limit was clearly visible on your dashboard. The concern raised and the information you acknowledge seeing are one and the same metric.

Your claim that this limit wasn't transparently tracked at any level is also false. It was not hidden in any form. How the trailing lock drawdown functions on the 1-Step Nitro model is documented in full across our main website FAQ, our live chat help centre, and our Discord server FAQ channel. The program overview and comparison section of our website also clearly states the drawdown type for every account model before purchase. There is no version of events where this information was unavailable to you.

Beyond the documentation, our dashboard includes a dedicated Simulators section specifically designed to allow traders to model and understand how each drawdown type we offer works in practice. This is particularly useful for anyone who prefers a visual and interactive way to understand the mechanics before trading. It was available to you. It was never used.

Our support team is also available 24/7. At any point before, during, or after purchasing, you could have asked for a breakdown of exactly how the trailing drawdown works on your model and received a detailed explanation immediately. That option was never taken up either.

The information was documented publicly. It was simulatable on the dashboard. It was one message away from our support team at any time. The trader area of the dashboard also provides fully automated real time tracking of your drawdown position so that monitoring your limit requires nothing more than checking the figures shown.

We understand losing an account is frustrating. But every avenue to understand this rule was available and none of them were used. That is not a transparency failure on our part.

The Compliance Team
Funded Trader Markets

Reply from Funded Trader Markets

May 12, 2026

Hi,

Thank you for being this open. We want to give you a direct and honest response to everything you have raised.

The negative reviews you have been reading are not a reflection of how we operate. The overwhelming majority of them stem from rule violations. If you trade within the rules, we pay. That is the model and it does not change.

Regarding margin, there is no floating loss rule on the 1-Step Nitro model so you are not in violation there. That said, we always advise practicing proper risk management regardless of the model. Trading at higher lot sizes on every entry puts you at a greater risk of hitting your drawdown limits in a single adverse move. Our full margin rules are outlined here:
https://fundedtradermarkets.com/faq/how-do-account-margin-rules-apply-to-my-challenge-and-funded-account/
https://fundedtradermarkets.com/faq/what-are-the-consequences-of-having-my-positions-stopped-out-due-to-a-margin-call/
You can also use our margin calculator to plan your sizing before entering a trade: https://fundedtradermarkets.com/tools/
As for the 10 minute no trade rule, we do not have that rule. You can enter a new position immediately after closing one with no waiting period required.

All of our rules and guidelines are fully and transparently documented in our FAQ: https://fundedtradermarkets.com/faq/ We would strongly encourage you to go through them before making any further decisions and remember, if you have any questions or need additional clarification with anything stated on our website, you are always welcome to reach out to our support team by emailing support@fundedtradermarkets.com

- The FTM Team

Reply from Funded Trader Markets

May 27, 2026

Same-day performance reward after years of being let down elsewhere is exactly what we are here for. Welcome home and thank you for the recommendation.

- The FTM Team

Reply from Funded Trader Markets

May 7, 2026

The logic being presented here falls apart on its own and stems from frustration rather than any genuine basis in fact.

You joined in November 2025, not January 2026, and did not pass your first account or your second. You passed your third, which was on a 100% profit split, and received your performance reward on that account. You then breached it and went on to purchase 12 more accounts, all of which you have breached fairly. You have contacted our support team on multiple occasions requesting an explanation for each breach and each one was broken down and explained in full every single time.

The conclusion you have nonetheless arrived at is that we must be manipulating your accounts to make you fail. Let us be clear about how little sense that makes. If we were interfering with accounts to manufacture breaches, we would have done so from the very first one. We did not. Your third challenge was passed, your funded account was issued, and your performance rewards were paid. Those outcomes were entirely the result of your trading. So were every single one of the subsequent breaches. The only variable between the accounts that succeeded and the accounts that did not is the trading that took place on them.

You have received more in performance rewards than you have spent with us. That is not the track record of a firm working against its traders. That is the track record of a firm that pays when the rules are followed and applies transparently laid out consequences when they are not.

We do not interfere with accounts. We do not manufacture breaches. What we do is enforce the same rules consistently across every account on the platform. Fifteen breached accounts is not evidence of manipulation. It is a trading performance issue and one that only you have the ability to address.

The Compliance Team
Funded Trader Markets

Reply from Funded Trader Markets

May 6, 2026

We are going to address every single claim in this review because every single one of them is wrong.

Your account was breached due to a violation of the overall drawdown limit. This is not the same as your daily drawdown limit, which you have repeatedly cited in your live chat ticket. These are two separate conditions and conflating them does not make your argument. The overall drawdown threshold was breached. The figures displayed on your dashboard are not numbers we generate or manipulate in any way. Every metric shown, including lowest equity, highest equity, and P&L, is based entirely on your recorded trading activity, which is driven by things completely outside of our control. The trades you place are executed based on tick data, which is public and identical across the market for every trader. That tick data determines your entry and exit price. Your lot size, combined with that, determines your profit, loss, and the maximum and minimum possible exposure at any point during the trade. All of that trading activity is independently logged and saved on your platform journal, which we can't manipulate in any way. What is displayed on your dashboard is simply a reflection of all of that combined recorded activity. We are not producing numbers from thin air. You are seeing the result of your own trades. Our support agent did not respond vaguely. He broke down the specific trade that caused the breach in full detail and attached screenshots to support it. You did not ask any follow-up questions. You then went on to purchase two more accounts.

On the FAQ not being part of the Terms and Conditions, this is factually incorrect and a direct demonstration that you did not read the Terms and Conditions. Section 5.E states explicitly that any rule, restriction, or condition stated within the FAQs section of the Company's website shall be deemed an integral part of the prohibited trading practices and shall be fully enforceable. The FAQ is not a substitute for the Terms and Conditions. It is a direct and accessible breakdown of all trading rules designed to be read alongside the Terms and Conditions. If anything, placing critical rules in a lengthy legal document and not in the FAQ would be the definition of hiding them. The FAQ is the first place any trader looks. The argument that the rule is buried because it is in the FAQ and not repeated verbatim in the Terms and Conditions falls apart the moment you read Section 5.E, which you clearly did not.

Our rules are not hidden. They are published across our main website FAQ, our live chat help centre, and our Discord server FAQ channel. If our model was designed to manufacture breaches and hide rules, one would have to explain why you have purchased 25 accounts with us, been paid before in 5 minutes, and continue to return. That is not the behaviour of someone who believes they are being scammed. That is the behaviour of someone who knows the rules, knows the rewards are real, and on this occasion fell short of the standard required. When the rules are followed, the rewards are processed. That is the entire model.

The warning on our page is the result of an ongoing dispute between us and the Trustpilot team which we have addressed and countered internally. Trustpilot is an external third party platform. A flag or dispute on their platform has no bearing on our services, our trading conditions, or the legitimacy of our operations. By that logic, an X account being suspended would mean something is wrong with the business itself. That is not how it works.

The Compliance Team
Funded Trader Markets

Reply from Funded Trader Markets

May 14, 2026

We want to address this review directly and on the record because the claims made are serious and deserve a factual response.

Before we do, we reached out to request the account details needed to investigate the specific situations described. No information was provided. We cannot verify, investigate, or respond to specific trade-level claims without an account number or any identifiable detail. That information was requested and not given, which makes it impossible for us to confirm whether the scenarios described even took place as stated.

On the stop loss claim. Stop losses do not guarantee execution at the exact price set. This is a fundamental and universally understood aspect of trading. When price moves rapidly through a level, whether due to a spread widening, a gap, or a fast market, the order is filled at the next available price. This is known as slippage and it is an industry-wide reality that applies across every broker, prop firm, and execution environment in existence. If a stop loss was set at minus $80 and the position closed at minus $150, the most likely explanation is that price moved through the stop level faster than the order could be filled at that exact price. This is not manipulation. This is how execution works in live market conditions. The fact that this occurred across two accounts is entirely consistent with trading during volatile conditions, not evidence of a deliberate pattern.

On the spread claim. A spread of 45 to 50 pips on XAUUSD would be abnormal under standard conditions and we do not recognize that as a figure representative of our platform. Spreads on Gold fluctuate based on market liquidity and can widen significantly during low liquidity periods such as weekends, session opens, and around major news events. Without the specific trade timestamps and account details, we are unable to verify what spread was present at the exact moment of execution. What we can say is that our spreads on XAUUSD are publicly available and competitive. The claim of a consistently predatory 45 to 50 pip spread as a standard figure is not something our data supports.

On the broader accusation that our model is designed to harvest evaluation fees by engineering failures. This is a serious claim that is entirely unsupported by evidence. We have processed millions of dollars in performance rewards to traders who trade within the rules. A firm operating the way described in this review could not sustain that track record. The accusation does not hold up.

We remain willing to investigate if the account details are provided. Until then, we are not in a position to accept the characterization made here as an accurate reflection of our platform or our practices.

The Compliance Team
Funded Trader Markets