My payout was denied under a “copy…
My payout was denied under a “copy trading” allegation, and I want to explain exactly how this was handled.
After submitting my payout, I was informed that my account had been flagged for copy trading. I immediately disputed this, since all my trades were placed manually.
They provided a few trade comparisons as “evidence,” but these trades clearly had:
- Different entry times
- Different entry prices
- Different lot sizes
- Different closing times and results
I pointed this out and asked for clarification on how this could be considered copy trading.
My case was then escalated, and I was told to wait 24–48 hours for a full review. I waited beyond that timeframe, and when they finally responded, they stated that their decision was final.
They claimed their conclusion was based on a “pattern across multiple trades,” but:
- No detailed breakdown was provided
- No specific trades were identified beyond the initial examples
- No criteria or thresholds were explained
- No way to verify or challenge their conclusion was given
When I asked for more transparency, they refused, stating that their methods are confidential.
In the end:
- My payout was denied
- My account was terminated
- No refund or alternative resolution was offered
- No further escalation was allowed
This process felt one-sided, with no real opportunity to defend myself despite providing reasonable counterpoints.
Traders should be aware that decisions like this can be made based on internal criteria that are not shared, leaving you without a clear way to respond or appeal.
Ticket number - 256192
Account number - 8062804
----------------------
After my complaint and follow-up, the support team has informed me that my refund request has been forwarded and that I should receive an update on the refund status tomorrow.
I appreciate this step and will update this review again once the refund is confirmed.
I hope the process is completed smoothly.
Hi Hicham,
We appreciate the time you have taken to present your case and we understand this is a matter of significant importance to you.
Following a thorough internal review, we are writing to confirm that the decision to terminate your account remains final. Our investigation identified multiple instances of trading activity across your account that align with patterns indicative of copy trading involving an unrelated account. This constitutes a clear violation of our Terms and Conditions under the Copy Trading Between Unrelated Accounts policy.
We understand your disappointment. However, the determination made by our internal review is based on a comprehensive pattern analysis conducted across multiple trades, and the findings are conclusive.
As outlined in our Terms and Conditions, copying trades from accounts that do not belong to the same trader is strictly prohibited, regardless of the method of execution. This policy exists to ensure the integrity of our trading environment and the fairness of our evaluation process.
The termination of your account and its related contracts remains in effect, and this decision is final. Nevertheless, we deeply value the time and effort you have invested, which is why we have reached out and are currently awaiting your reply. Please respond at your earliest convenience so that we may begin the process of resolving this matter for you.
Instant Funding Team
Updated Review
I initially had a frustrating experience after my account was breached due to a drawdown rule, which I strongly questioned based on my own trade data and timing.
However, after raising the issue, the support team at Instant Funding took the time to conduct a detailed investigation with their Risk Department. While the original decision could not be overturned, I do appreciate that they handled the situation seriously and reviewed the case thoroughly.
As a gesture of goodwill, they provided me with a free IF-Micro 5K account to continue trading. This showed a level of professionalism and willingness to maintain the relationship, which I respect.
Overall, while I may not fully agree with the outcome, I can acknowledge the effort from the support team and the fair resolution they offered. Communication was clear, respectful, and professional throughout.
Looking forward to continuing my trading journey with them.
Hi Nova,
Thank you for your detailed 4‑star review! We’re thrilled to hear that your experience with Instant Funding has been so positive. We’re glad the matter was reviewed and resolved to your satisfaction. Our team is always here to look into any concerns and work toward a fair outcome so you can continue trading with confidence.
We appreciate your trust and wish you continued success ahead.
Instant Funding Team
dont purchase from this firm
I had a very disappointing experience with ProFirm.
My account (No: 8091976) was suddenly cancelled citing a “Trading Rules violation,” but no clear explanation or evidence was provided. Despite reaching out, the response lacked transparency and did not clarify what exactly went wrong.
For a company that deals with traders’ funds and trust, this level of vague communication is unacceptable. Users deserve clear reasons, proper documentation, and a fair review process before such serious actions are taken.
I would advise others to be cautious and fully understand their rules, as enforcement seems unclear and one-sided.
I hope the company improves its transparency and customer support.
Thank you for sharing your concerns, sinto v.j. We would like to have a conversation with you regarding the cancellation of account #8091976 to ensure you receive a clear explanation of the specific rule violation cited.
To provide some general context, account terminations for Trading Rules violations typically involve a breach of our core risk parameters, such as the Daily Drawdown limit, the 1% Risk Per Trade Idea rule, or the 15% Consistency Rule for reward eligibility. These rules are in place to maintain the sustainability of our funded accounts, and breaches are usually triggered automatically by our risk management systems based on real-time trade data.
We understand your frustration regarding the lack of specific documentation provided so far. Please provide us with your email address, so we can pull your specific trade logs and provide you with more clarity and a detailed review of the decision.
Inconsistent Review & Unfair Payout Rejection
I am currently facing a serious issue with Instant Funding regarding my payout and account breach.
Before this, my experience was actually good. I have successfully received 10+ payouts, and I even promoted this firm because of my positive experience. However, the issue started after I passed my $200,000 one-phase micro account.
After passing, the risk team applied restrictions: 1% risk per trade and mandatory stop loss on every position. I accepted these rules and traded accordingly.
When I requested my payout, it was rejected with the claim that multiple trades had no stop loss. I provided clear proof from my CTrader position history, and they accepted that I was right SL was placed.
Then a second allegation was made: that I exceeded the risk limit. However, the SL values they provided were incorrect. For example, they showed stop loss levels below entry on SELL trades, which is technically impossible because SL for SELL trades must always be above entry. I explained this with proof.
After this, my case was escalated to the senior team. After waiting 3+ days, the senior team claimed that 2 trades had no stop loss. This is again incorrect. I have complete CTrader history showing SL was placed, and in one case, the trade was even closed at stop loss, which clearly proves SL existed.
This shows inconsistent and incorrect analysis across all levels (support → second review → senior team). Every time I disprove one claim with proof, a new allegation is raised instead of resolving the issue.
My case is still under review, and I am waiting for a fair resolution.
I want to make one thing clear:
If I have violated any rule, then show it with correct data and take appropriate action—I will accept it. But if I have followed all rules, then I should receive my payout. Denying payout without a valid and consistent reason is not justified.
I hope Instant Funding reviews this case properly and resolves it fairly.
Ticket number - 255685
Account number - 3061190
-------------------------------------------
I am updating my review after Instant Funding’s response because new developments have made this situation even more concerning.
Email: hammadsarwar89(at the rate)gmail.com
Account: 3061190
On my $200,000 account, the risk team applied restrictions:
1% risk per trade and mandatory stop loss on every position. I accepted these rules and traded accordingly.
When I requested my payout, it was rejected with the claim that I did not place stop loss on multiple trades. I provided clear proof from my cTrader history showing SL was placed on every trade. After this, they accepted that I was right.
Then a new allegation was raised: that in one trade (Trade ID 3126263) my stop loss exceeded the risk limit. However, this was a SELL trade, and the SL level they provided was below the entry, which is technically impossible. I again proved with data that my actual SL was within 0.50%–0.75% risk, and their example was incorrect.
After that, my case was escalated to the senior team. A few days later, they claimed that 2 trades had no stop loss (Trade IDs 3130050 and 3120209). Once again, I checked my cTrader history and provided proof that both trades had SL placed.
Now, in their latest response, they have changed the reason again, saying that SL was placed but added later. I have already provided timestamp proof showing that SL was placed within 6 seconds (Trade 3130050) and 8 seconds (Trade 3120209) — both within risk limits.
This clearly shows a pattern:
Every time I disprove one claim with evidence, a new allegation is raised instead of resolving the case. This feels like an attempt to close the case with different excuses rather than conducting a proper and consistent review.
I have followed all rules and provided complete proof at every step.
My case is still ongoing, and I am requesting Instant Funding to properly resolve this matter instead of continuing with inconsistent explanations.
If I have violated any rule, clearly show it with correct and consistent data — I will accept it. Otherwise, if I followed all rules, then my payout should be processed and account restored.
Thank you for sharing the detailed timeline of your experience, Hammad. We would like to have a conversation with you regarding the review of ticket #255685 and account #3061190 to ensure full transparency in how our rules were applied.
To clarify our Mandatory Stop Loss and 1% Risk Per Trade Idea rules: for certain account types, every position must have a valid Stop Loss (SL) placed at the time of execution. Our systems calculate the risk based on the distance between the entry price and the SL; if this distance results in a potential loss exceeding 1% of the starting balance, it is flagged as a breach of our 'Gambling and Over-leveraging' policy. We acknowledge your concerns regarding the data provided during the review process and the consistency of the findings.
We take reports of data discrepancies and manual review errors very seriously. Please provide us with your email address, so we can conduct a final, comprehensive investigation into your cTrader history and the escalation with our senior team to provide you with more clarity and a fair resolution.
Risk team and support team Worse !!
No words ! The support team feels so robotic. The risk team is so inexperienced and inefficient.
Long story short - They banned me for VPN usage. Its clearly mentioned in rules VPN usage is not allowed, I respect that. The funny thing is I DID NOT USE VPN. The way they use to determine the VPN usage is the shitty, unreliable, free third party, third grade website of Whatsismyipadress. Thats pathetic, they could have atleast spent $50 on a premium and reliable subscription to check IP address.
I have given clear explanation, clear proofs and even risk interview 2 times. Still they are adamant cause that website shows its Data Center. If you guys don't have enough expertise to look into these things, please hire someone enough expert. In case you are expert but just finding excuse to reject payout, its pathetic.
Ticket number - 256122
Account number - 3010664
Nina Chorna
Edit - I have already raised the ticket with full details, ticket number 256122. I respect your VPN policy but the third party tool you use is not reliable data and going blindly with that is not fair. There is a difference between hosting and data center provider. And its about whether I used VPN or not, I did not, even by mistake or unknowingly I did not. Please make someone knowledgeable enough to review this ticket along with proofs I sent.
Thank you for sharing your feedback and providing your ticket details, Nina. We would like to have a conversation with you regarding the IP flags associated with account #3010664 and the findings from your recent risk interviews.
To clarify our VPN and Proxy Policy: Instant Funding prohibits the use of VPNs or data center IP addresses to ensure the security and integrity of each trader's location and identity. While we use third-party tools to verify network types, we understand your concern regarding the classification of your connection. Our Risk Team reviews these flags to distinguish between standard residential internet service providers and restricted hosting or proxy services.
We take your explanation and the fact that you have completed two interviews seriously. Please provide us with your email address, so we can conduct a final review of ticket #256122 and investigate the specific IP data to provide you with more clarity on the resolution.
