Instant Funding 33% Off Challenge Pricing and 90% Profit Split Add-On

Instant funding rejecte my withdrawal reason fraud KYC. First u proov it my kyc in fraud. Send My kyc to INDIAN GOVERNMENT and proov my kyc it's fraud. R u mad? Again and again u cheeting me .You are a fraud. Cloused another account 141389. You have no money, so rejected everyone account withdrawal. First you are a scammer. Both account my son account. ( nivan mathew)

This was my first experience with a prop trading firm.
I was aware of negative reviews, but the company’s responses seemed reasonable, so I decided to try. I initially opened an account using a secondary email to test the platform. After that, I created a main account under my real details and successfully completed KYC verification.
I purchased multiple challenges ($50k and $25k). I also had some penalties along the way, which I fully accept, as I was adapting to their rules and conditions.
Eventually, I generated over $3,400 in profit, with my share being $3,125.
All trading was done лично by me:
– from one location
– using one device
– without simultaneous trading across accounts
– without copy trading or duplicated trades
There was no harm to the company and no clear violation of trading rules.
However, when I requested a payout, my account was terminated. The justification changed multiple times (location issue, then “Shared Computer ID”, then multiple identities), and no clear evidence was provided.
After their final refusal, I submitted complaints on several platforms. Only then was I offered a refund for the last challenge.
In my opinion, this is not a fair outcome. The company accepted multiple payments over time, approved KYC, allowed trading, and only raised issues after profits were generated.
This experience resulted in a loss of time, effort, and expected earnings.
Traders should carefully consider this risk before choosing this firm.
One-Phase Micro 25000 #8087332

Instant funding have breached the funded account without any rule break

By far one of the worst prop firms out there. Crazy spread. Don’t ever try them out. Waste of money and time and it makes the job harder than it actually is.
Update: they reached out to me, completely dismissed their spread issue and how low the quality of the service is. They started explaining their drawdown rules. Ridiculous kids. Instant Funding is a shame for the trading industry and for the prop firms

IF1 Accounts = Failure No Matter What
A company having 25% 1-star reviews while simultaneously maintaining large amounts of short generic 5-star reviews should concern consumers.
The issue is not just the star rating itself it’s the quality and consistency of the reviews.
Many positive reviews are extremely short and vague, often mentioning only customer service interactions, while negative reviews tend to contain detailed descriptions involving payouts, slippage, execution quality, and consistency rule disputes.
Trustpilot may not create these reviews, but it provides the stage for companies to present themselves as overwhelmingly trusted businesses while serious complaints are buried underneath generic praise.
As you can see 5 stars front page when it’s been nothing but 1 stars posted all week!!!
The pattern is concerning.
Update 3:
Even the company’s response below fails to address the actual issue. Throughout the first week of May, multiple traders reported similar complaints regarding slippage, execution quality, and payout disqualifications.
Update 2:
Instant Funding IO refuses to correct my trading IDs despite repeated requests.
Update 1:
This was the company’s response to me:
“What happened to you is really a sad and heartbreaking thing, but it is as per the normal market behavior and no anomaly happened. If your total profit is just $10-$20 more the consistency would have been under 15% making you eligible for the payout.”
That response alone explains the problem.
ORIGINAL ISSUE:
Instant Funding IO markets IF1 accounts as being ideal for:
“day traders focused on news events and sharp intraday moves.”
Yet traders are penalized when volatility creates larger winning trades.
That is contradictory.
If a trader executes well during volatility and captures a legitimate move, they can still fail payout eligibility because the consistency formula punishes concentrated profits — even when the account is profitable overall and risk is controlled.
My results:
* 50k IF1 account
* 2.20% net profit
* 27 separate trade ideas
* 77% win rate on buys
* 75% win rate on sells
* 3.1 profit factor
* Result: zero payout
This is not about slander. It is about transparency and framework design.
You cannot:
1. Encourage volatility trading
2. Refuse to disclose liquidity/execution structure
3. Penalize volatility-driven profits
…and still present the environment as trader-aligned.
I also raised concerns regarding take-profit execution discrepancies that were never adjusted or properly addressed.
If volatility-based outcomes are structurally incompatible with payout eligibility despite being part of the marketed strategy environment, then the consistency framework may be penalizing legitimate edge realization rather than identifying reckless trading behavior.
I will never use this firm again.
Account 141556