tradeify

I love when their website doesn't work and you can't access your accounts. Super...

I love when their website doesn't work and you can't access your accounts. Super...

With 6 years of trading experience, this was hands down the worst platform I’ve ever used. I paid $111 and got nothing but pure frustration. It’s completely unclear what you’re actually paying for. There’s no proper practice mode, so if you’re not already familiar with the platform, you’re thrown in and left to suffer. The platform is terrible: constant lagging, unpredictable behavior, and no stop-loss button. Support is a complete joke — mostly useless AI, and even when you reach a real person, they do absolutely nothing to help. They promised to restart my account but never followed through. This felt like paying for 3 days of buggy, worthless paper-trading. Absolute scam. Do not waste your money on these scammers.

With 6 years of trading experience, this was hands down the worst platform I’ve ever used. I paid $111 and got nothing but pure frustration. It’s completely unclear what you’re actually paying for. There’s no proper practice mode, so if you’re not already familiar with the platform, you’re thrown in and left to suffer. The platform is terrible: constant lagging, unpredictable behavior, and no stop-loss button. Support is a complete joke — mostly useless AI, and even when you reach a real person, they do absolutely nothing to help. They promised to restart my account but never followed through. This felt like paying for 3 days of buggy, worthless paper-trading. Absolute scam. Do not waste your money on these scammers.

Stay away from this prop firm. I was trading a 150K Select account and was close to passing the challenge phase when my account was suddenly closed due to a position being executed at 4300 on MGC. The issue is that at the exact same time, market data shows price never traded anywhere near that level—the lowest visible price was around 4790. This is a 500+ point difference, far beyond what can be considered normal slippage. I contacted support with evidence and requested tick-level data to verify the trade, but they refused compensation and did not provide clear proof that such a price actually occurred. Losing an account under these conditions, especially when close to passing, raises serious concerns about execution reliability and fairness. Proceed with extreme caution.

Stay away from this prop firm. I was trading a 150K Select account and was close to passing the challenge phase when my account was suddenly closed due to a position being executed at 4300 on MGC. The issue is that at the exact same time, market data shows price never traded anywhere near that level—the lowest visible price was around 4790. This is a 500+ point difference, far beyond what can be considered normal slippage. I contacted support with evidence and requested tick-level data to verify the trade, but they refused compensation and did not provide clear proof that such a price actually occurred. Losing an account under these conditions, especially when close to passing, raises serious concerns about execution reliability and fairness. Proceed with extreme caution.

Imagine doing 5k in profits just to purposly make yourself loose so you meet the 20% consistencey rule. Absolute joke. The "instant funding" isn't really instant you have to make 9k in profits for the 150k account with the stupid 20% consistency rule. They are basically setting you to fail. Customer service.... doen't exist. I want my money back.you scammers

Imagine doing 5k in profits just to purposly make yourself loose so you meet the 20% consistencey rule. Absolute joke. The "instant funding" isn't really instant you have to make 9k in profits for the 150k account with the stupid 20% consistency rule. They are basically setting you to fail. Customer service.... doen't exist. I want my money back.you scammers

My experience with this company raised multiple serious concerns regarding execution reliability, fee transparency, and overall accountability. The most critical issue I encountered was a failure in execution. At one point, the platform did not allow me to exit a position when needed. In trading, the ability to manage risk and close positions is fundamental. Not being able to exit a trade exposes users to unnecessary losses and raises major concerns about the stability and reliability of the system. When I raised this issue, I was told that the company does not stand behind third party trading software. However, this is highly concerning because the platform they require users to trade on is entirely based on third party software. If traders are required to execute trades through software provided or mandated by the company, then disclaiming responsibility for that same software creates a clear contradiction. You cannot require users to use a platform while simultaneously refusing to stand behind its performance, especially when execution failures directly impact users financially. For comparison, firms like Topstep stand behind their trading infrastructure and provide a level of accountability when issues arise. That is the standard traders should expect. In addition to execution concerns, the company charges commission fees that are typically associated with live market execution. However, it does not appear that orders are actually being routed to a live exchange. If trading is being conducted in a simulated environment, then charging execution based commissions raises serious questions about how those fees are justified and whether this is being clearly disclosed. There is a clear and important difference between simulated trading and real market execution. When execution issues occur, such as not being able to exit a position, transparency becomes even more critical. Based on my experience, this was not sufficiently clear. I was also unable to find clear information regarding any regulatory registration or licensing tied to the services being offered. Depending on how a firm operates in this space, oversight may fall under the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Commodity Futures Trading Commission, or National Futures Association. The lack of transparency around this raises further concerns about how the business is structured and represented. Overall, the core issue is trust. A trading platform must provide reliable execution, clear disclosures, and accountability for the tools it requires users to rely on. Based on my experience, these standards were not met. I strongly encourage anyone considering this service to do thorough due diligence and fully understand how trades are executed, how fees are applied, and what level of support and accountability is actually provided

My experience with this company raised multiple serious concerns regarding execution reliability, fee transparency, and overall accountability. The most critical issue I encountered was a failure in execution. At one point, the platform did not allow me to exit a position when needed. In trading, the ability to manage risk and close positions is fundamental. Not being able to exit a trade exposes users to unnecessary losses and raises major concerns about the stability and reliability of the system. When I raised this issue, I was told that the company does not stand behind third party trading software. However, this is highly concerning because the platform they require users to trade on is entirely based on third party software. If traders are required to execute trades through software provided or mandated by the company, then disclaiming responsibility for that same software creates a clear contradiction. You cannot require users to use a platform while simultaneously refusing to stand behind its performance, especially when execution failures directly impact users financially. For comparison, firms like Topstep stand behind their trading infrastructure and provide a level of accountability when issues arise. That is the standard traders should expect. In addition to execution concerns, the company charges commission fees that are typically associated with live market execution. However, it does not appear that orders are actually being routed to a live exchange. If trading is being conducted in a simulated environment, then charging execution based commissions raises serious questions about how those fees are justified and whether this is being clearly disclosed. There is a clear and important difference between simulated trading and real market execution. When execution issues occur, such as not being able to exit a position, transparency becomes even more critical. Based on my experience, this was not sufficiently clear. I was also unable to find clear information regarding any regulatory registration or licensing tied to the services being offered. Depending on how a firm operates in this space, oversight may fall under the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Commodity Futures Trading Commission, or National Futures Association. The lack of transparency around this raises further concerns about how the business is structured and represented. Overall, the core issue is trust. A trading platform must provide reliable execution, clear disclosures, and accountability for the tools it requires users to rely on. Based on my experience, these standards were not met. I strongly encourage anyone considering this service to do thorough due diligence and fully understand how trades are executed, how fees are applied, and what level of support and accountability is actually provided