Upcomers Omdömen 

Mi sono rivolto a questa Prop Firm più volte, sono arrivato ad essere PROFITTEVOLE E NON MI HANNO PAGATO…. Ho continuato pensando fossero in buona fede e dovessi in fine solo rispettare meglio le loro regole… Ma ormai NON CI CREDO PIU’… DOPO L’ULTIMA ESPERIENZA CAPISCO CHE C’E’ UN PIANO: APPIGLIARSI A QUALSIASI PRETESTO PER NON PAGARE!!!!
Riporto la mia ultima email a seguito delle loro contestazioni dove per negarmi il payout richiesto fanno riferimento perfino a conti e richieste precedenti, ove ciò non aveva alcun senso perche’ ogni conto ha storia e richiesta specifica che non può anche materialmente essere collegata ad altro. Venendo quindi a ciò che miseramente rimane: “ Riferimento conto: 576053. Periodo di tempo: 03/06/2026 15:22 UTC - 16/06/2026 14:43 UTC . Numero totale di operazioni eseguite: 64. Risultato netto: +$5.413,44 . Tick Scalping: OVVIAMENTE FALSO. Le operazioni sono tutte oltre i due minuti, come richiesto, e ove non fosse, era perchè spostato lo STOP LOSS ( E FRA L'ALTRO, IMMAGINATE LA BEFFA SE CONTEGGIATE COME SCALPING PERFINO SE VA A TAKE PROFIT!!! OVVIAMENTE LA REGOLA DEI DUE MINUTI DOVREBBE VALERE SOLO PER LE OPERAZIONI CHIUSE A "MARKET"!!!) che MI ERA STATO COMUNICATO DA XXX, VOSTRO DIPENDENTE, PERFETTAMENTE REGOLARE COME AZIONE.Voi dite che: “Riguardo all'indicazione ricevuta da XXX: le comunicazioni ricevute al di fuori del processo di revisione del payout non possono influenzare né sostituire la valutazione della conformità effettuata dal nostro team di rischio”. Peccato che il tale XXX mi scriveva dall’Azienda e si dichiarava “Brand Reputation”, e rispondendomi dall’Azienda Upcomers presumevo fosse la SOLA voce autorevole…. Evidentemente NON è così, voi, UPCOMERS SIETE UN’AZIENDA CHE DITE SU UNO STESSO ARGOMENTO COSE OPPOSTE. AZIENDE COSI’ HANNO REPUTAZIONE PESSIMA E VALORE ZERO. E COMUNQUE QUESTE SPECIFICAZIONI NON SONO SUL VOSTRO SITO DA NESSUNA PARTE. PERCIO’ FALSO. Martingala: E’ bizzarro che in un payout, che significa prelievo, si vadano a contestare le PERDITE|!… Ci sarebbe da ridere…. PERCIO’ FALSO IN QUANTO INSIGNIFICANTE. Dimensioni eccessive delle Posizioni: “La revisione ha identificato 4 operazioni in cui questa soglia è stata superata”. Mi specificate DOVE? SE QUESTO FOSSE STATO VERO SAREI ANDATO IN DROWDOWN E MI SI SAREBBE CHIUSO IL CONTO IN AUTOMATICO. PERCIO’ FALSO. La Sezione "Come Si È Formato Il Risultato": Mi dite che è tutto a posto e le vostra note ( in cui mi si contestava il fatto che tre trade fossero il 50% del profitto, contestandomi di fatto la regola della consistency pure sulle operazioni oltre che sul giorno: peccato che da nessuna parte esistesse come regola… Infatti poi se la sono dovuta rimangiare, dicendo che veniva detto solo per “trasparenza”….) mi dite valgono nulla, dette solo per, dite voi, “trasparenza”. Ovvero parole inutili: faccio come non fossero state neppure scritte. Pattern di Trading Reattivo: UN CASO, UN SOLO CASO SU PIU’ DI 60 TRADE…… E PURTROPPO, PER VOI, ANDATO PURE IN NETTO TP. LA DECISIONE: avete preso la decisione di rifiutare un payout di 5000 dollari circa ESCLUSIVAMENTE PER UN TRADE IN CUI SI E’ VERIFICATO UN PATTERN REATTIVO…… e dopo avervi io, DOVUTO SMONTARE ben tre “accuse” ed autoneutralizzata la quarta!!! SONO SICURO CHE I VOSTRI FUTURI CLIENTI ADOTTERANNO LA STESSA SEVERITA’ NEL VISIONARE LE RECENSIONI DELLA VOSTRA “AZIENDA”.

Sinceramente non è tanto male prezzi competitivi e unici al mercato mi trovo bene solo che sono un pò deluso per la mia esperienza personale ho due account funded e ne avevo un altro che mi hanno chiuso perché secondo loro il mio trading ha violate alcune regole tipo martingale che ho spiegato ripetutamente che il mio trading è scalping e sono molto veloci che durano più di due minuti che a volte viene chiusa prima per uno spread assurdo quindi di conseguenza la mia strategia mi dice di rientrare e per loro è come se io volessi recuperare la perdita però poi mi danno il 25% ed il 50% dei futuri payout ecco questo mi sa dell'assurdo perché invece di incentivare i trader voi li fate scappare ma va bene cosi secondo me le vostre regole andrebbero un pò riviste mi sa che mi sposterò su altra azienda e questo mi dispiace tanto perché vi avevo dato tanta fiducia

Cumplí todas las reglas numéricas que el propio panel de Upcomers muestra durante el proceso:

Drawdown diario: 0.23% (límite 4%)
Pérdida máxima global: 1.07% (límite 7%)
Días mínimos de trading: 9 de 6 requeridos
Consistencia (mejor día): 19.73% (límite 20%)

A pesar de tener todos los indicadores en verde, mi solicitud de pago fue denegada. El equipo de riesgos argumentó que había utilizado estrategias como 'tick scalping', 'position stacking' y 'martingala'.

Al revisar su documentación oficial para entender la decisión, encontré que:

'Tick Scalping' es la única regla clara, con un límite de 2 minutos por operación .

'Position Stacking' es un término que ni siquiera aparece definido en su centro de ayuda .

'Martingala' se describe como una estrategia general, pero sin especificar límites concretos para su aplicación en la práctica, lo que deja su interpretación a criterio del equipo de riesgos .

En sus propios Términos y Condiciones, Upcomers se reserva el derecho de decidir bajo su "único criterio" ("sole discretion") qué constituye una infracción en casos poco claros . Esto demuestra que el proceso de revisión se basa en criterios subjetivos y no en reglas objetivas y previamente comunicadas.

Por esta razón, no recomiendo Upcomers.

pure scam, they wont payout all because i used a specific strategy and had my bot spam it.

as a resident of the UAE im reporting them to Dubai Police, freezone authorities as well as the federal court .

y'all will be hearing from my lawyer so count your days

I purchased an Ash Turbo $100,000 challenge after seeing Upcomers advertise "No Hidden Rules", "Transparent Payouts", and a "99% Profit Split".

I successfully passed the challenge, became funded, completed KYC, signed the agreement, met the profit target requirements, and submitted my first payout request.

My account generated $3,152.20 in profit and I requested a payout of approximately $990. Instead of receiving the payout as expected, Upcomers conducted a review and reduced my payout by 75%, approving only $247.50.

The reasons given included "tick scalping", "position stacking", "hedging", "reactive trading patterns", and concerns about my "risk profile" and "risk management consistency".

I requested the specific trades, ticket numbers, timestamps, and evidence used to support these conclusions. Upcomers refused to provide them, stating that they do not disclose the trades or audit criteria used in their reviews.

What concerns me most is that the company markets itself using phrases such as "No Hidden Rules" and "Transparent Payouts", yet when I became profitable, my payout was reduced based on subjective assessments that I was not able to independently verify or challenge.

Upcomers also informed me that future payouts on this account will be subject to a 50% payout limitation.

I am not claiming that companies cannot have rules. My concern is that a trader can complete the program, become funded, generate profits, and still have a payout significantly reduced without being provided with the underlying evidence used to justify the decision.

I have retained screenshots of the marketing claims, account statistics, payout request, and email correspondence.

Potential customers should carefully read all terms, payout policies, prohibited strategy rules, and review procedures before purchasing a challenge and should keep records of all communications.

This review reflects my personal experience with account 580866 and the outcome of my first payout request.

Dear Trader Agreements & Payouts Department,

I am writing regarding account 580866 and the payout review decision.

I would like clarification on a point that remains unclear to me.

Your review concluded that my trading included prohibited strategies and trading patterns, including Tick Scalping, Position Stacking, Hedging, and Reactive Trading. These findings were serious enough to reduce my payout by 75% and impose a future 50% payout limitation on the account.

However, despite these findings:

- My account was never suspended during the trading period.
- I never received a warning while the trading activity was taking place.
- The account was allowed to continue operating normally.
- I was allowed to complete the funded account requirements.
- The account remains active today and I am still permitted to trade.

This raises an important question:

If the identified behavior constituted prohibited trading activity, why was the account permitted to continue trading without intervention, warning, or suspension at the time the behavior allegedly occurred?

From my perspective, the first indication that any issue existed was only after I became profitable and submitted a payout request.

I am trying to understand how this process aligns with the principles of transparency and fairness, particularly given the public statements on your website regarding transparent payouts and the absence of hidden rules.

If a trader is unknowingly engaging in behavior that may later lead to a substantial payout reduction, would it not be more appropriate to notify the trader when the behavior occurs rather than after profits have been generated and a payout has been requested?

I would appreciate a direct response to this specific question.

Thank you for your time and clarification.

WHAT HAVE I EXPERIENCED WITH UPCOMERS?

First Time. I reached a payout and my account was placed under review. Eventually, I received allegations regarding my trading style. What stood out to me was that most of the issues raised were not clearly defined in the publicly available rules that traders can easily review before trading. I spent a significant amount of time asking for clarification and explanations. In the end, my payout was denied and 50% of my profits were confiscated. I accepted the decision and moved on.

Second Time. I worked directly with the Brand Reputation team regarding these concerns. After many discussions, I was told that my trading style was acceptable and did not violate any rules. However, when I reached payout again, I was once again accused of violating trading methodology rules. When I asked which specific trades were considered violations and at what times they occurred, I was told that the review was internal and that the details would not be disclosed. The payout calculation looked like this: $2,000 payout → reduced by 50% → reduced again to 25% → withdrawal fees applied. Final amount received: approximately $153. I did in fact receive only $153, and my trading account was terminated.

After extensive discussions, we eventually reached an agreement. I was provided with a replacement Vanguard account free of charge, and the account conditions were adjusted to 4 valid trading days and 25% consistency. Throughout these discussions, I repeatedly requested several basic principles: if a payout is denied, a specific explanation should be provided; if a trader is considered in violation, the company should identify the trades involved and the rule that was allegedly violated; and reviews should be based on publicly available rules. After many rounds of discussion, these principles were finally put into writing. This led me to ask a simple question: why weren’t these transparency standards in place from the beginning?

Third Time. Just when I thought everything had finally been resolved, I adjusted my trading approach, continued trading, and eventually reached another payout stage. This time I received a new accusation: “Multi-accounting.” The explanation given was that two accounts had appeared on the same device and within the same network environment. One of those accounts belonged to my wife. That account was registered under her own name, belonged to a different individual, had never received a payout, had stopped trading months before my second payout cycle, had no matching trades whatsoever with my account, did not trade on the same days, and showed no evidence of hedging or coordinated activity.

I asked the company to clarify the evidence comparing the trading histories of both accounts and whether there was any direct evidence beyond shared devices or a shared household network.

My concern is not that a company conducts investigations. Investigations are their right. My concern is that traders can be heavily impacted by conclusions while not being provided with sufficient data or evidence to independently assess those conclusions. At times, it feels as though broad internal interpretations can outweigh the written rules available to traders. Or worse, that when a trader reaches payout, there is always another internal interpretation that can be used against them.

If I truly violated the rules, why was the issue not raised immediately? Why wait until payout, place the account under review for several days, and only then introduce a new reason to challenge or deny the payout?

I believe many traders could eventually find themselves in a similar situation. This is simply my personal experience. Do your own research, make your own judgment, and read the rules carefully before deciding to trade with any prop firm. If anyone would like to review the evidence themselves, feel free to contact me privately. I can share the conversations, emails, NDA, and supporting materials so everyone can draw their own conclusions.
Prop firm sc4m! Dont buy thit sh!t

Hay vamos podría ser mejor

terrible. i tested them and contacted them about it. they have a system which will give you an impression that everything is legite, but when you find yourself profitting big, you find your account failed and they tell you "water level" and this is a lame excuse to take people's money, water level goes up and there should be still 4 or 8 % loss limit and i tested this with multiple other firms, but those people they play in the mud with that water level and they mix it with equity level. save your money people. btw i have multiple accounts with them to test every scenario and their team sent me a "gift" account not to expose their little game...

I need to be honest about my extremely frustrating experience with Upcomers.

My first payout from a 500K funded account has been completely frozen since March 3rd 2026— that's already more than 3 months. The company claimed it was due to "A-book migration," and during this entire period, my funded account was frozen from trading while the payout remained stuck.

The team first promised everything would be completed within two months — missed.
They then gave bi-weekly updates promising progress — also not met.

Most recently, they said they would send a detailed update email by the end of last week — again, nothing. My follow-up messages have been heavily delayed or completely ignored. Staff even claimed to be "sick" as an excuse for not responding.

Logically speaking, they could have paid existing traders first before completing the full A-book migration, instead of freezing both accounts and payouts. This approach would have maintained trust during the technical transition.

The frequent 90% discount promotions running at the same time as these major delays make me seriously wonder if there is a cash flow problem behind the scenes.

After digging deeper, I discovered this same delaying tactic is being used on many other traders as well.
I’ve been patient and trusted the process, but trust has completely run out when promises keep shifting and communication goes silent. I really hope Upcomers is not turning into another prop firm that strings traders along with payout issues. I’ve seen this pattern too many times before.

If you're experiencing similar frozen payouts, account freezes, or delays, please reach out to me — I’m happy to share screenshots and full proof.

I rate them 1 star and strongly advise traders to be extremely cautious until they demonstrate reliable payouts and basic transparency.

Account number #319398
My experience with Upcomers has been extremely disappointing and has left me with serious concerns about the fairness and transparency of their payout process.

I purchased an account, followed the trading requirements, completed the verification process, and submitted a payout request in good faith. Initially, I was informed that my payout was being processed and that delays were due to internal workload. After waiting and repeatedly requesting updates, I was then informed that a compliance review had concluded that they could not verify that I was the sole trader on the account.

What concerns me most is the timing. These issues were only raised after I became eligible for a payout. Prior to that, there had been no indication that my account activity was under question.

The explanations provided to justify withholding the payout were, in my opinion, subjective and difficult to independently verify. For example, conclusions were drawn from my ability to explain trading concepts during a call, the terminology I used, and alleged inconsistencies regarding my trading schedule. I do not believe that a trader's performance during an interview-style call should automatically outweigh the actual trading record on the account.

I was also informed that another person was allegedly involved during the verification process. I dispute the conclusions that were drawn and have requested further clarification and supporting evidence.

My review reflects my personal experience only. Other traders may have had different experiences. However, based on my own experience, I would strongly encourage anyone considering purchasing an account to carefully review the payout rules, verification requirements, and dispute procedures before committing funds.

For me, the overall experience has resulted in a significant loss of confidence in the company's payout review process and the way successful traders are assessed once they become eligible for withdrawals.

I traded a funded account with Upcomers (24H SUPERNOVA) and achieved a net profit of $4,711.94 within the allowed rules and trading conditions.

When I submitted my payout request after achieving objectives, it was denied based on subjective reasoning such as: "position stacking," "one-sided bets," "impulsive trading,"

All traders were placed manually, within the permitted 24H session, objectives were met within 4 hours left of the session, and no rule violations (consistency, profit target, and trading) fell short.

What concerns me is not just the misaligned payout friction itself, but the lack of clear, objective criteria used to justify it. The same trading behavior that generates profit under their system is later reinterpreted negatively at the payout stage.

Additionally, after the denial, I was encouraged to purchase new accounts and offered discounted re-entry options. This creates a conflicting message regarding how payouts are evaluated versus how new business from Head of Risk is promoted.

After reviewing other trader experiences, I have noticed similar patterns where payouts are denied at the first withdrawal stage using comparable reasoning.

I am simply looking for: transparency, consistent rule enforcement in execution of payout distributions and objective evaluation standards beyond just the minimumm consistency and profit target/max loss objectives.

At this point, the payout process is questionable in this firm.

Avoid this company at all costs.
They're outrightly scamming their traders.
They have too many unrealistic rules designed to cheat traders out of their profits.
They use those rules to scam profitable traders out of their payouts.
They currently have rating of 66% which is one of the lowest among prop firms.
That about sums up who they are, scammers.
Three week update.
I made this review on June 11th, three weeks ago.
in three weeks their ratings have further slipped down to 60%.
can you believe this??
this is what happens when you scam people!
Thank you trust pilot for not hiding the negative reviews, however you need to go further to protect innocent unaware victims of this fake prop firm, issue a warning to potential traders.

I wrote a review because I experienced nothing but hell during my time on this platform. HIDDEN RULES ON EVERY SINGLE ACCOUNT PURCHASE. You have to write them to get the hidden rules. Once you pass those hidden rules, guess what? No payout. This company is a scam and a fraud. Just take your time and go throught these reviews. Notice how 40 plus reviews are within the last 32 hours. EVERYBODY IS NOT LYING on this company. They can respond back until they are blue in the face, at the end of the day if it walks like a duck and quack like a duck? ITS A DUCK. its A SCAM! STAY AWAY!!!!! check other websites too. EVERYONE IS NOT LYING ON THIS COMPANY. IT IS A SCAM! BEWARE!!!!!!

UPDATE - CASE RESOLVED AFTER FURTHER INVESTIGATION:

Following my review, Upcomers' Brand Reputation team conducted a further investigation into my case.

The company ultimately determined that the breach on my account was incorrect. According to the written findings provided to me, there were no open positions at the reported breach time and the account closure resulted from a synchronization issue between their internal platform and the trading platform.

Upcomers acknowledged the error in writing, provided a detailed explanation of the findings, and replaced the incorrectly closed account with a fresh account.

While I remain disappointed by the conflicting explanations I received during the original support process and the time it took to resolve the issue, I believe it is fair to acknowledge that the company ultimately reviewed the case thoroughly, admitted the mistake, and provided a satisfactory resolution.

[Original Review Below]

I had a $100,000 Astral challenge account with Upcomers and recently had my account terminated for an alleged breach of the Absolute Drawdown rule.

My concern is not simply that the account was breached. My concern is how the case was handled and the lack of account-specific evidence provided despite multiple requests.

The account was terminated with an official breach timestamp of June 2, 2026 at 11:48:28 UTC, with recorded equity of $89,582.21 against the $90,000 drawdown limit.

When I contacted support, I received multiple explanations for the same account termination.

Initially, I was told that the breach occurred because an open position was carrying approximately $3,026 in floating loss at 11:48:28 UTC. I asked several times for the details of that position, including the symbol, direction, lot size, open time, and ticket number. Those details were never provided.

After further escalation, I received a completely different explanation from another representative. I was then told that there was no separate open position responsible for the breach. Instead, I was informed that my XAUUSD trade had breached the account during rollover due to spread widening and that earlier explanations had been based on incomplete information.

The trade in question had a stop-loss in place, and the stop-loss was triggered almost immediately after the new daily candle opened. I was actively monitoring the position at the time.

Throughout the correspondence, I repeatedly requested the account-specific data supporting the breach determination, including:

- Exact bid and ask prices
- Recorded spread values
- Equity calculation
- Server-side logs
- Evidence showing how the account equity allegedly fell below the threshold

Despite several email exchanges and escalation to their technical team, none of this data was provided. Instead, I was simply told that the technical team's findings were final and that the breach had been recorded correctly.

To be fair, Upcomers eventually acknowledged that some of the earlier explanations provided by support were incorrect. However, I still did not receive the underlying account-specific evidence needed to independently verify the final conclusion.

My issue is not the existence of risk rules. Every trader accepts those when purchasing a challenge. My issue is that when a dispute arose, I was given multiple conflicting explanations and ultimately asked to accept the final decision without being provided the supporting data used to reach it.

I currently have two other active accounts with Upcomers, but after this experience I no longer feel comfortable trading with them. I have lost confidence in the transparency of their dispute resolution process and therefore do not intend to continue trading with Upcomers.

Based on my experience, I cannot recommend Upcomers to other traders.

FRAUD FRAUD FRAUD.
Horrible fraudsters. Hit you with unheard off rules. Such as stacking tick trades ever. If the trade length is more than 2 minutes. With no proof of deductions. Don't ever buy an acct with this firm!

Completely avoid this company. Numerous denied payouts, the entire industry is a joke but this firm is the cherry on top. If you seen 90% off deals all year round on the website then you know something fishy is going on. I would not wish the amount of stress I have endured in the past 2 weeks on anyone.

Scam ⛔
Just read the all reviews.

Do NOT trust Upcomers! They are a complete scam and highly unprofessional.
​I successfully passed their challenge and reached a net profit of over $4,454 on my account (Account 314926). Instead of paying me out, they target minor, normal trades to accuse me of "prohibited strategies" just to deny my withdrawal and confiscate ALL my profits.
​To make it worse, they didn't even ban the account because they know they are wrong. Instead, they told me they will keep it active but will cut all my future payouts by 50%! This is a classic scam tactic to trap traders, steal their hard-earned money, and force them to trade for half the price.
​I will never use this platform again. They are untrustworthy and dishonest. I have already contacted my bank to initiate a full chargeback for this fraud, and I am warning every single trader out there: STAY AWAY FROM UPCOMERS! They will find any excuse not to pay you. After 6 days trade win you can withdraw only 1000$ on your profit stupid prop firm

I bought several invoices during the promotion. I also have 2 payouts waiting for approval — one for over 10 days, the other for 4 days. Normally, they should be processed within 24-48 hours. Until they pay me, I won’t buy any more challenge from them and I won’t recommend them to others either.

01.06.2026 Update:
I wrote to customer service again at Ann's suggestion. Allegedly, the request was forwarded to a higher level and they promise to apply. In the past few days, I have received about ten similar responses, but no substantial progress has ever been made.
Also, I'll update this post after each rip.

04.06.2026 Update:
Meanwhile, one of my payments has been processed. They wrote that the other one is also fine and I'll receive that too — the system is just overloaded at the moment. Once they pay that one as well, I'll let you know here too.

19.06.2026 Update:
They promised that I would receive a contract two weeks ago because I was going to become an A-book trader. I still haven’t received it. Last time, they didn’t even give me a deadline anymore — they just told me to wait.
They manually locked my 3 live accounts and still haven’t processed my last withdrawal (it’s been exactly one month today since I requested it), even though they claimed everything was fine with my trading. For the past few days they haven’t been responding at all, even though I’ve written to two different people...
I’m increasingly starting to think that because the total amount of withdrawals I requested is three times the value of the account I bought from them, they’ve just put me on the back burner / sidelined me...

23.07.2026 Update:
They haven't responded to my messages for weeks, and my 3 live accounts have been suspended. I still haven't received the $2,000. All this with the explanation that I traded very well and will become an A-Book trader with them. About 2 months have passed since then. At the beginning, the communication was still good, but for a long time now they haven't replied at all — even though I didn't argue, I only asked if there was any update or development. You're only important to them as long as your deposits are higher than your withdrawals.

Just bought my vanguard account and so far its a very good experience and support is super