Monkeybuttman

@rotrade93 @FTMO_com Conditions have been tough for everyone. 11 months is an impressive run. With that sort of skill, no doubt you'll be back stronger. GL Tim

I failed so hard at trading. This isn’t my favorite post to write, but it’s one I owe to myself. After a long battle with drawdown, I couldn’t make the comeback I wanted, and I breached my $200k @FTMO_com account that I had been holding for 11 months. Q1 was rough. There were too many moments where I couldn’t focus the way I should. I found myself taking the wrong trades… and then missing the right ones right after—either because I lost focus or simply wasn’t present. My mind was scattered, and the results reflect that. But I truly believe every setback comes with a lesson. So I’m taking a few days to reset. To clear my mind. To recalibrate. And starting Monday, I come back fresh. My focus and discipline will be at higher highs.

Wish I was kidding 😂 They were my #2 prior to this. I’m copying to every major prop firm and the ONLY firm that’s given me 0 issues is FTMO. This is why they are the gold standard and incomparable to the rest. Every single other firm has taken the piss some way or another. Delays, interviews, false IP allegations (tried to ban me for using tradezella), unfair restrictions etc

@monkeybuttman69 You're kidding? Okay so I had now 10+ reports like this. The did not attend interview is stalling 101... That's actually sad if it's widespread. As I said let's see.

I had some prop firm employees and owners tell me how great their prop is doing, how they are doing record sales or in fact having MoM growth not seen in ages... Yet they are either looking for jobs or have straight up lied to me. Lets be frank here, companies do not have multiple week payout delays, interviews for risk etc out of the goodness of their heart or that they are so busy processing those payouts... They have those as they are struggling from cash flow/liquidity POV, it's every. fucking. time. What a crazy world we live in sometimes.

@robinf_x Agree. Commented on a few of @DylanElchami ‘s post to get him to review it but he was having none of it. Probably because it’s a much more profitable model for them but definitely worse for traders

One thing I mentioned before is how important it is to understand the rules of the prop firm you choose. A good example for this is E8 Markets. I’ve always been a big fan of E8. Had multiple payouts there and was even on their leaderboards and currently still have around $900K in funding with them. Execution was good and everything worked smoothly. But recently things have changed. In my prop firm ranking and scaling plan, E8 is still ranked quite high as they are still one of the better firms. However, they have dropped significantly in my view. The main reason is the change in their drawdown model. Previously, they offered 1 and 2 step Evaluations with static drawdown accounts (around 8–10%), which allowed for more consistent long-term management. Now all of their accounts are based on balance-based / trailing drawdown. This means your drawdown adjusts with your balance and high watermark. Over time, this increases the probability of eventually losing the account even with a profitable strategy significantly. In my view, this type of structure feels less aligned with supporting traders long term and more tilted against them. That’s why understanding the rules behind each prop firm is just as important as your strategy itself. In the next post I’ll share a PDF explaining exactly what to look for when choosing a prop firm challenge.

@Market_Emotions @AlphaCapitalUK Ah the leverage is the catch. And yes, you’ll likely be stopped before getting to 0 so not the full 10k drawdown. Indeed it doesn’t make sense to downgrade your DD unless you’re forced to. I brought this up in @george_kohler ‘s post a few weeks ago but never got a response

You're right, it basically is the equivalent of a $100k futures account with 10% dd with no rules. I believe one of the main limitations was that it had extremely low leverage so you couldn't really make as much, think 1:10 or something. They said they will let you take it to zero but I think they also have safeguards to prevent that from happening - unsure entirely but they said they have a team which will help prevent that. And also to trade $400k funded for that was an extremely bad deal. But essentially it was $200k, since the other one got denied anyway.

My journey with @AlphaCapitalUK has officially come to an end. Not by choice though. Now, I will not speak ill of a firm that that has paid me $91,608. But as my followers know, I built my brand from the ground up with trust, transparency and full disclosure. And also as a partner and ambassador for @PropFirmMatch, it is my duty and responsibility to also share with you the true events which transpired towards the end of my journey with @AlphaCapitalUK. Those who followed my journey know I made a phenomenal performance of 14 payouts on one single $200k account to achieve the majority of my profits with this firm. @AlphaCapitalUK recognised my performance by inviting me to Alpha Prime. At this point, I was also awaiting a $200K Funded account which took me 2 months to pass. During my Alpha Prime interview, their Head of Client Support formally invited me to Alpha Prime and explained to me what it was. Long story short, it required me to give up $400K Funding ($200K Funded + pending $200K I passed) for a $10K live futures account which only had a 60% profit split. No salary offered. I don't even trade Futures and it didn't seem like a good deal, so I asked what would happen if I declined the offer? I was told that I would be allowed to trade out my $400K Funded account (and another eval I had parked) to finalisation, but I could not purchase any more accounts for a year. I found this fair, so I said I would have to decline the Alpha Prime offer. But after the interview, the conditions changed as the person I spoke with emailed me to say he was misinformed and that I would only be allowed to trade out the remaining $200K Funded account to finalisation. So in essence, they actually denied me the $200K Funding account. I protested that this was unfair and not what was agreed on the call, but to no avail. I then asked if the opportunity and potential to join Alpha Prime would be there upon finalisation of my remaining Funded account, and he said yes, there was that potential. Now, fast forward to a few payouts later, I have finally breached the $200K account. They informed me the offer of Alpha Prime is no longer available without any real assessment. Like I said, I won't speak ill of the firm, but if we are going to be transparent, these are the facts: - @AlphaCapitalUK paid me $91,608 in payouts total - They never denied me a payout unfairly - They gave me the conditions for rejecting Alpha Prime, but went back on the offer later and changed the conditions, under the reasoning that the Head of Client Support I spoke to was misinformed. - They denied me a $200K Funded account (refunded) under the guise of "being invited to Prime" - They did not consider me for Prime when I no longer had any Funded accounts left - To join Prime, I had to give up what I already had. Final Stats with @AlphaCapitalUK: Challenge Fees: $5,396 Payouts: $92,109 (Including Performance Bonus) The above are the facts with what happened. You will not find a single negative statement or opinion from me regarding this situation. You can make up your own mind about what's right and what's wrong. But you need to be informed with what actually happened, and I am here to be transparent and share with you the true side of things. At the end of the day, they paid me $91,608 in payouts and never denied me a payout, but that was also from my own skill as a trader.

@theOTEtrader Pretty much summed it up. The only profitable thing I’ve done this month is go on holiday for a week

Trade wars are much more favorable for the market than real wars. With current uncertainty, the market is literally waiting for Agent Orange to announce something and then move rapidly and then go back high resistance conditions.

Of course I’m not the average trader but I’m not the top 1% either. Everyone knows 95% fail. Most of them are out by year 2 but they’ve been buying & failing prop the whole way through. For everyone left after year 2 there’s a decent chance of making it if you keep going and are taking the right steps I.e journaling, tracking discipline, have an edge etc But saying things like “Do you really think getting Funded once is going to change your life?” is unnecessarily demotivating for the subset of people in between your average trader and the 1% because it can. Funded accounts aren’t designed to be burnt through as you wrote, if they’re managed correctly. Not some influencer BS.

@monkeybuttman69 But would you say the normal, average trader is like you that expectedly scales $100k to $3m? Have you looked at the actual data and confirmed what % of evaluations will actually achieve that outcome? Because I have. Across 4 firms. Less than 1% will achieve what you mentioned.

I'm about to drop some truth bombs on you about getting Funded. Do you really think getting Funded once is going to change your life? Most influencers here talk about getting Funded and then spout some ridiculous BS like: "Just get $200K Funded and make 2% per payout and you'll be getting $3.2k EVERY fortnight post-split, that's $83k a year and you're set for life!" 🤡 The math makes sense, but in practicality, it overlooks the fundamental mechanics of how Funded accounts operate. Funded accounts are designed to be burnt. No trader can actually keep winning non-stop, trading is always about ups and downs. In a personal account, you have the profits you made previously to pad up your future losses. This helps sustain the longevity of your account so you can keep pushing. But with Funded CFD accounts, traders almost always withdraw all the gains on payout day. This means you will lack the profits you've made to pad up your account and secure you against future losses. Essentially, it is the same as a 10% trailing DD on the Funded Account (which procs every time you make a withdrawal). Even if you make 50%, post-payout, one downturn of -10% will wipe you out. That is unless you leave your profits in the Funded account - which, let's be serious, nobody would do unless they had to 🤷‍♂️ Don't forget also when you get Funded, you've already made significant profit during the Evaluation stages, which again is not padding you up in the Funded stage. Yes, there are traders who have kept an account alive for a long time and kept getting payouts consistently from it. But please do not be mistaken, they are the literal top 1%. The cream of the crop. The anomaly, not the rule. That means statistically, it is completely & mathematically NORMAL (and even expected) for you to lose a Funded account quickly. Can you become the top 1%? Of course, but statistically probably not, that is why they are the top 1%. This is not to discourage or demotivate you, it is to illuminate the reality of the situation for you. But most of all, this post is to illustrate to you that you don't need to be in the top 1%. You can still make serious money. But not the way the influencers are trying to get you to believe. Because getting Funded once won't change your life. But a continuous supply of multiple Funded accounts over time will 🔥 So be realistic, Legends - know the battle you're fighting and don't let one blown Funded account beat you down. It's part of the game. Keep pushing. Get Funded again. Blow. Get Funded again. Rinse. Repeat. Don't buy into false dreams. As long as you keep pushing, the world is yours to claim 💪 And if you do actually make it to the top 1%? The world is already yours by then and you are already a Legend 🔥

I wouldn’t consider myself top 1%. On my way there but not there yet. Your thread is essentially about positive expectancy. You say no trader can keep winning nonstop.. but they can, that’s what positive expectancy is. The question is can survive the drawdown your edge puts you through. The claim “That means statistically, it is completely & mathematically NORMAL (and even expected) for you to lose a Funded account quickly.” Is incorrect. If you don’t know how to trade/manage risk it is correct. Your thread is more suited to people who have don’t have an edge with positive expectancy and shouldn’t be trading prop in the first place

@monkeybuttman69 You are the top 1% as I mentioned 🙂

@robinf_x Manually trading all of these is crazy work. Im assuming you're swing trading and using orders. Im copy trading $3.3 mill with some of the firms you mentioned but i just execute on one 100k funded account and it copies to the rest. Much simplier

As mentioned in my last post, here is my current prop firm allocation. At the moment I’m funded with around $3.5M across multiple firms. Additionally, $1.8M is currently in Phase 2 and $1.2M in Phase 1. Another 400K in Investor Capital Overall $6.9M Allocation across the Portfolio. At the moment I’m funded with - 500K FTMO - 400K AlphaCapital - 300K FundingPips - 900K E8 Markets

@srgtrades Large expansion today. No news tomorrow so would love to see an inside day. Then Daily FVG formed & Wednesday sweep of PDL/tap into D FVG then push up on news. That would be A+ for me. Reversal from PDH setting up the D FVG is an option too but higher risk

it seems that $DXY wants higher so let's try to long it i'll wait for confirmation tomorrow at those levels

@apparentlytrder @DarwinexZero Resetting sounds like the right plan I'm pretty new to it as well so don't really understand the nuances Are you copying it to a prop firm account with 1:1 risk? I'm copying my 100k fundingpips funded account to the 100k darwin 1:1. Not sure if that's the correct to do

@monkeybuttman69 @DarwinexZero yeah max drawdown pretty high, although not dramatic. but made some mistakes and my risk factor was low, limiting me thereby. Knowing how it works now, I preferred to reset

Quick update on my DarwinexZero journey. I reset the account. The signal account was up ~23%. Risk-adjusted Darwin ~8–9%. From the outside, no reason to. But I realized I didn’t fully understand how to trade optimally for the Darwin structure in the beginning. Made a few small execution mistakes aswell. Nothing catastrophic. Still - I prefer precision over ego. Since I wasn’t that deep into the track record yet, it felt like the right moment. I won’t reset it again though, as it obviously doesn’t make sense and at some point you just have to go with it, which also includes the rougher periods. New ticker will be shared once I’m out of calibration. (usually ~2 months with my trading style).

That's not how the world has to work Zamco. We're not living in North korea. Bow your head down, follow all the rules and hope master feeds you. Keep your mouth shut if they don't. We are the customers. We vote with our wallets. Bringing cases of bad enforcement / policy to light is a must. Look at what happened to @FunderPro & the @poojasi61410013 incident. I wonder how much that's hurt their sales. You can be sure every other prop firm was watching and you know they will be thinking twice about their payout denials policies. Like I said. I took the same trade across 5 firms. All 5 firms have exactly the same rule. Only QT funded breached me. That's clearly an issue that needs to be addressed because they are not only doing it to me but every other poor sod who is buying an account with them.

@monkeybuttman69 @QtFunded @fundingpips If you don’t like the rules, don’t trade with them and the or complain afterwards

Trade 1 short app.tradezella.com/shared/54f0228… Trade 2 accidental long (8 seconds long but 5 seconds overlap with trade 3 which is the trade they linked) app.tradezella.com/shared/54f0228… Trade 3 short app.tradezella.com/shared/54f0228… Trade 4 short app.tradezella.com/shared/54f0228… They are referencing trade 2 & 3 which had a 5 second overlap

Reverse trading is also explicitly listed as a prohibited strategy for: @FTMO_com @AlphaCapitalUK @fundingpips @the5erstrading Yet I took exactly the same trade across all my accounts with those firms as well as yours You were the only firm that breached me Why is that? Because your interpretation of the rule is purposefully designed to penalise traders unfairly. This needs urgent reforming

Dear Trader, Thank you for your post. We would like to clarify this matter transparently. Reverse trading is explicitly listed under our Prohibited Trading Strategies, which are publicly available and accessible to all traders prior to trading. As stated in our official rules, prohibited strategies include “Reverse Trading or Group Hedging”, and any occurrence may result in account action including forfeiture of simulated profits. The rule is enforced based on execution data and position overlap, not intent or duration. Even brief overlaps of opposite positions on the same instrument fall under reverse trading because enforcement must remain objective and consistent across all traders. All accounts are reviewed by the Risk Team using timestamps and trading logs before any breach decision is applied. The same rule framework applies equally across evaluation and funded phases, as clearly stated in the FAQs. Rules must be applied uniformly to maintain fairness and a level playing field for every trader on the platform. If you would like the Risk Team to formally re review the case with additional evidence, you may open a risk ticket through our official support channels for reassessment. Link to Prohibited Trading Strategy FAQ: qtfunded.zendesk.com/hc/en-gb/artic…

Every single trader has pressed buy instead of sell at some point in their trading. The question is proportionality: if an obvious misclick is corrected within seconds, should it be treated the same as deliberate hedging/reverse trading with an instant breach and no manual review? No other firm behaves like this. They’ve reset me to phase 1. The point is I don’t want to continue to trade at a firm that penalises such a common error with the maximum punishment. I know it will happen again because I watch 4 different assets and trade on the 1m/5 second timeframe. Then look for pyramids. Their rules should be reformed to be line with every other major prop firm. This is not only for my benefit but for common sense to prevail and to benefit every trader who uses their firm.

@monkeybuttman69 @QtFunded @fundingpips Don’t trade stupidly and you’ll be fine. You made the mistake, they have no reason to say “oh it was just an accident” Its not wrong of them at all to breach you

@fxNikhil @QtFunded @fundingpips I took the same trade across all my accounts. No other prop firm had an issue with it

@monkeybuttman69 @QtFunded @fundingpips Bro this rule of reverse trading is applicable with almost all firms. You can’t accidentally do anything. These prop firms won’t understand our pressure.

@TylerG_Capital Yes definitely agree with that. The LTF’s are constantly printing the same structure even when the HTF is out of alignment. The temptation is to take every set up but a probability/high RR trade only occurs when there’s multi time frame alignment.

Very valid point. I think I did a poor job of explaining my viewpoint. Although the physical structure of setups could remain fractal. My point is that although the physical resemblance is there on all timeframes the quality and weight of the setups doesn’t remain the same. So although you may get the same setup on the 1 minute the higher probability play would be the one that’s confirmed on the higher timeframe.

One thing that people always say that I will never agree with is…. TIMEFRAMES ARE FRACTAL. I absolutely disagree with this theory. You are telling me the price action on a 1 minute chart and the price action on a 1 HR, 2 HR or H4 is weighted the same. Go and test your model and see how many more losses you incur because you believe this theory. Back it with data I can almost guarantee this theory will be null and void. All you get on those lower timeframes is excessive noise of what’s going on inside of a higher timeframe candle. 🕯️ You think you get more opportunities by saying “timeframes are fractal” so my model will have the same results on a lower timeframe it absolutely will not!! Higher timeframes over everything 😤