No, he was trading their account 5 days a week, and after about 6 months of regular withdrawals from TopStep he had enough to open his own account at AMP safely. That also grew gently in the same way. Another 6 months after that I backed him myself so he could increase his position size a lot. He'd been steadily successful for over a year, by then. He's done well, and was obviously well above average for TopStep standards to start with. TopStep was really a great way for him to get started, though. He was ideal for them - he had risk management skills and trading skills, learned from sim accounts, but no money to invest. I know a lot of people fail combines too, but what can you expect when there's no entry qualification or assessment at all? A real garbage review by someone who's totally missed the point. All these people on the web who argue that you'd be better off opening your own futures account than getting TopStep backing really have TOTALLY missed the point. That's just like saying that people with broken legs should cure them by running in the next marathon. Or like telling someone who goes to work on the bus every day that they'd be better off going in a taxi. If they had enough funds to trade their own futures account, they wouldn't need TopStep in the first place, would they?
Exactly so. This is the very point that many posting in this forum about TST also miss. A lot of the criticism one finds online about TST revolves around criticizing them for not being something they've never pretended to be in the first place, and/or for being unsuitable for people who are clearly not part of their target market anyway. "It's quite a nice apple: it's firm and crisp and sweet and juicy, but I think it's a scam anyway, because it can't play the Beethoven violin concerto: it has no music-reading skills at all and it can't even pick up and hold the violin, so you'd be better off ignoring TST and going to the Yehudi Menuhin Music School instead." How people assess things often tells us as much about the people doing the assessing as it does about the things they're assessing.
Thanks for the answer Lukas. Just a note on the debate: From TST's point of view, a profitable trader who leaves them after taking the first unshared 5K is NOT a good deal. TST used to advertise themselves as a backing company so the best deal would be if money makers stick around as long as they can (or at least for the full year*), and TST makes money from and with them by the profit sharing agreement. But if they just withdraw the first unshared 5K then they leave, how is that good for TST? It is not... But as we know, they aren't really a backing company anyway. *If you are a backer, why do you want the deal to last only a year? (hypothetical question)
I also found this link inside your link interesting: https://www.tradingschools.org/reviews/top-step-trader-survey-part/
i have a fantastic regard for the way you handle yourself. i get the impression-correct me if i am wrong-that you think TST is genuine.that is good enough for me i see that they also fund smaller amounts such as 30 thousand. i was wondering if they could go down to 5000 thousand and reduce the cost of the combine?
I agree. Good hypothetical question. Hypothetical answer: you'd know there's no chance of anyone staying longer than a year anyway: why would anyone continue to give up 20% of their profits unnecessarily once they're up and running? No reason that I can see. I bet hardly anyone stays for a year anyway: the successful ones don't need it and the unsuccessful ones must blow out? These obvious comments aren't a valid criticism of TopStep, though. As a couple of us have just pointed out, it's obvious that anyone who could afford their own futures account safely (which surely includes people who have been successful there for several months, just like my step-son?) wouldn't need TopStep's service at all and those obviously aren't the people in their market. None of this detracts from the fact that TopStep can be a great way for people to get started if they have trading skills but not enough money to trade their own futures account. And that's what they're there for. Good job, and well done, I say.
Ask them. But I'll be amazed if they will. Don't forget that the combine fee includes not only their administrative costs (in other words, that's how they pay their rent and staff salaries) but also the exchange data fee, which isn't TopStep's money. That $150 fee for the $30k combine includes $85 that isn't their money. The risk parameters for the $30k combine are very tight anyway. For the sake of $15 extra, you must be better off doing the $50k combine and having more leeway on the drawdown allowances.
Yes they are. The original idea was, they back you, you guys make money together as long as everybody is happy, it is a symbiotic relationship and could last forever. They never said, we let you go after a year... Let's look at a non-US guy who lives in a low cost of living country. If he is profitable, but he can not save up enough money to go out on his own (not to mention maybe uncomfortable to trade his own money ever) that doesn't mean he can not live nicely on the small profits he is making with TST's backing even if that is not much by American standards. So he could be happy giving an extra 20% to TST and trading away for 5-10 years. Yet at the current set up he is let go after a year (my understanding). And he was making a living and all happy, and TST should have been happy too because he was making money for them. There are actually cheaper ways to get a start with less hooplas (like opening a CFD account) than going the TST route. Just because their silly policies can still be advantageous for a small % of users that doesn't mean they don't suck for the big majority... If A company is a real backer, once the trader has proven himself with real money, they can sweeten the deal, less cut or bigger account to keep the trader around. A smaller cut of a bigger account for the company can be the same profit as a bigger cut of a smaller account. I know because I finished 3rd grade.
That's my firm impression, and I also know personally a couple of people who started off successfully, that way - one now trading their own account and the other now trading OPM for a living. Like Lukas's stepson, both had proven risk management skills before starting, and I strongly advised each of them to "do their own Combine" on a demo account first, with the same or stricter risk management parameters, and not pay for it until they knew they could pass it. I strongly agree: the $50k Combine is the one I always suggest people should try. As I was explaining to Paula, above, I can't see any additional benefit, given the scaling plan, to paying more for the $100k or $150k Combines, and it would be a real shame to try the $30k one and be unlucky and creep over that tight $500 daily loss limit and blow out, then have to pay another $100 to reset the Combine. The way I look at it is that your best overall chance is to practice first on demo until you know you can pass it, and then take the $50k Combine trading only one lot/contract to minimize your chances of hitting a loss limit: if you have a real edge, you'll eventually pass the thing and get a funded account, and if you don't have a real edge, you shouldn't be paying TST to find that out - you should already have found it out yourself on demo. This is wrong. That was exactly what they said. Their agreement offered specifically an account for 12 months. For the same reasons that Lukas has explained, above, my own guess (but this is only opinion, not fact) is that very few people will still be there after a year. The people who are successful don't need to keep giving up the 20%. Of course TST would be delighted if anyone wanted to stay for more than a year (but I wouldn't expect that to happen very often, if at all!!). That was exactly what they offered to one of the people I mentioned above: they actually suggested reducing their cut to 10% to keep her for longer, but of course she didn't need them any more.
My step-son too, when he withdrew all he was entitled to and said he was leaving. That was not after a year - he stayed only 5 or 6 months, maybe 5 months after becoming funded. They paid his share, of course, and offered something similar to sweeten the deal, to try to keep him. I can't remember the details and anyway he wasn't interested at that stage, he had enough to open his own account at AMP and didn't need TopStep any more. They did well enough out of him, for a few months, and he did well out of them, too. But they were honest and reliable and he still recommends them to others.