NexusFi: Find Your Edge


Home Menu

 





Topstep's Nick Dolby (Social Media and Community Coordinator) - Ask me Anything (AMA)


Discussion in Trading Reviews and Vendors

Updated
      Top Posters
    1. looks_one Topstep with 258 posts (612 thanks)
    2. looks_two bobwest with 121 posts (306 thanks)
    3. looks_3 Big Mike with 49 posts (167 thanks)
    4. looks_4 emini2000 with 36 posts (16 thanks)
      Best Posters
    1. looks_one Big Mike with 3.4 thanks per post
    2. looks_two DarkPoolTrading with 2.8 thanks per post
    3. looks_3 bobwest with 2.5 thanks per post
    4. looks_4 Topstep with 2.4 thanks per post
    1. trending_up 491,349 views
    2. thumb_up 2,123 thanks given
    3. group 387 followers
    1. forum 1,296 posts
    2. attach_file 44 attachments




Closed Thread
 
Search this Thread

Topstep's Nick Dolby (Social Media and Community Coordinator) - Ask me Anything (AMA)

  #1271 (permalink)
 HiLatencyTRDR HLT 
Midway florida
 
Posts: 462 since Dec 2018

I bought the 50k demo acct for 99 dollars. ..

Why am I allowed a 5 lot in the mini nasdaq but then only a 5 lot in the micros?
Obviously I should be allowed up to 50 micros!

Why not allow 50 on the micros


Can you help answer these questions
from other members on NexusFi?
NexusFi Journal Challenge - April 2024
Feedback and Announcements
NT7 Indicator Script Troubleshooting - Camarilla Pivots
NinjaTrader
Online prop firm The Funded Trader (TFT) going under?
Traders Hideout
Deepmoney LLM
Elite Quantitative GenAI/LLM
My NT8 Volume Profile Split by Asian/Euro/Open
NinjaTrader
 
Best Threads (Most Thanked)
in the last 7 days on NexusFi
Get funded firms 2023/2024 - Any recommendations or word …
59 thanks
Funded Trader platforms
37 thanks
GFIs1 1 DAX trade per day journal
22 thanks
NexusFi site changelog and issues/problem reporting
22 thanks
The Program
20 thanks
  #1272 (permalink)
Bubba1
Wichita Kansas USA
 
Posts: 34 since Feb 2016
Thanks Given: 1
Thanks Received: 74

For one reason, you would incur a very higher than normal ticket charge if you traded 50 micros.

And, the micros are usually traded in the swing $10,000 account which is not included in that $99 special offer (that has expired BTW).

And, that are the rules that they have set up for their trading.

  #1273 (permalink)
VirtualMark
Birmingham, United Kingdom
 
Posts: 75 since Jul 2022
Thanks Given: 20
Thanks Received: 65



Bubba1 View Post
For one reason, you would incur a very higher than normal ticket charge if you traded 50 micros.

And, the micros are usually traded in the swing $10,000 account which is not included in that $99 special offer (that has expired BTW).

And, that are the rules that they have set up for their trading.

He knows that's the rules, he's asking why. That's what this thread is for isn't it?

It'd be smart to allow 10 micros to a mini as we can scale in and out of trades easier, minimising risk.

Thanked by:
  #1274 (permalink)
 
Tymbeline's Avatar
 Tymbeline 
Leeds UK
Market Wizard
 
Experience: Intermediate
Platform: Tradovate
Broker: Tradovate
Trading: MES, MNQ
Frequency: Several times daily
Duration: Minutes
Posts: 644 since Apr 2015
Thanks Given: 2,343
Thanks Received: 1,054


HiLatencyTRDR HLT View Post
Why am I allowed a 5 lot in the mini nasdaq but then only a 5 lot in the micros?
Obviously I should be allowed up to 50 micros!


Your question is discussed in some detail and (kind of) answered in posts 1164 - 1174 of this thread (see pages 117 and 118).

  #1275 (permalink)
VirtualMark
Birmingham, United Kingdom
 
Posts: 75 since Jul 2022
Thanks Given: 20
Thanks Received: 65

Still no reply from Topstep on not paying out to someone due to a retrospective rule change, yet they have posted on this site today advertising new rules. So this demonstrates to me they are avoiding this issue, which doesn't look good.

Thanked by:
  #1276 (permalink)
Topstep
Chicago, IL
 
Posts: 293 since Feb 2013
Thanks Given: 77
Thanks Received: 746


VirtualMark View Post
Still no reply from Topstep on not paying out to someone due to a retrospective rule change, yet they have posted on this site today advertising new rules. So this demonstrates to me they are avoiding this issue, which doesn't look good.

Unfortunately, this incident happened over a year ago so I cannot speak accurately to it. We have made a lot of changes to our program since this issue occurred. Since then, we have not had any issues paying traders out and we have a real-time live stream of our payouts in our Discord for complete transparency. We have also added an article on "prohibited conduct" which you can view here:
https://help.futures.topstep.com/hc/en-us/articles/8808125387923-Prohibited-Conduct

  #1277 (permalink)
Topstep
Chicago, IL
 
Posts: 293 since Feb 2013
Thanks Given: 77
Thanks Received: 746


MrTrader View Post
Hi,
I would like to know what happens in a scenario like this..
Lets say someone did a Combine and goes thru step 1 and 2...

Well, after a while his/her account is up to 20k and one day some rule has been broken and his/her account is gone.. not able to trade anymore. For the sake of simplicity lets say the account after this has 15k..

Is that scenario possible? and What happens to that balance/profit?

I am really sorry if I could not make myself clear.. english is not my native language.. if you need further clarifications just point out and I will try to explain in other words..
Thank you in advance

Upon a rule violation any profits accumulated in the account greater than the initial balance you would retain. There are some exceptions like the Express Funded Account where we want you to show that you can be profitable for at least 5 days before being able to take a payout.

  #1278 (permalink)
VirtualMark
Birmingham, United Kingdom
 
Posts: 75 since Jul 2022
Thanks Given: 20
Thanks Received: 65


Topstep View Post
Unfortunately, this incident happened over a year ago so I cannot speak accurately to it. We have made a lot of changes to our program since this issue occurred. Since then, we have not had any issues paying traders out and we have a real-time live stream of our payouts in our Discord for complete transparency. We have also added an article on "prohibited conduct" which you can view here:
https://help.futures.topstep.com/hc/en-us/articles/8808125387923-Prohibited-Conduct

Wow, what a lousy reply.

So lets get this straight - someone asks about an incident and you ignore them for a year. Dozens of other members also ask about it, then you reply after a year stating that the incident was too long ago for you to remember. Handled like a politician, and that's not a compliment.

Sorry, but that's unacceptable for me. The accusation was extremely serious - the trader passed the evaluation, was in profit, and requested a payout. You didn't give them the payout, then changed the rules a good few months after they requested the payout, then decided not to pay them at all. That's a terrible way to do business, and to be honest your reply is almost as bad.

Thanked by:
  #1279 (permalink)
Topstep
Chicago, IL
 
Posts: 293 since Feb 2013
Thanks Given: 77
Thanks Received: 746


VirtualMark View Post
Wow, what a lousy reply.

So lets get this straight - someone asks about an incident and you ignore them for a year. Dozens of other members also ask about it, then you reply after a year stating that the incident was too long ago for you to remember. Handled like a politician, and that's not a compliment.

Sorry, but that's unacceptable for me. The accusation was extremely serious - the trader passed the evaluation, was in profit, and requested a payout. You didn't give them the payout, then changed the rules a good few months after they requested the payout, then decided not to pay them at all. That's a terrible way to do business, and to be honest your reply is almost as bad.

I am getting additional information from Mick and Tim about what happened and will share what I can while respecting the individuals privacy.

Thanked by:
  #1280 (permalink)
 
bobwest's Avatar
 bobwest 
Western Florida
Site Moderator
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: Sierra Chart
Trading: ES, YM
Frequency: Several times daily
Duration: Minutes
Posts: 8,162 since Jan 2013
Thanks Given: 57,343
Thanks Received: 26,267



Topstep View Post
I am getting additional information from Mick and Tim about what happened and will share what I can while respecting the individuals privacy.

Hi @Topstep,

This would be very, very, very good.

I have held my peace about this incident when it came up again, because it was old, as you had said, and it was before your time here, and the trader in question had decided to drop it and had moved on.

But, during the several weeks before that happened, the thread was often one of the most-read of the day. The situation that the user laid out was deeply troubling to many who read about it, and @Topstep kept absolutely silent about it, even though many members, myself included, invited them to address the situation and tagged the Topstep username with the "@" symbol, which sends an email to the account with a notification that Topstep had been mentioned, with a copy of the post. People were essentially pounding on the @Topstep door asking the company to come in and give their side of it... and there was nothing. The absence of a response was troubling.

I went back and counted three posts I made tagging Topstep about it, and many others did the same. Either no one was monitoring the company account at that time, or no one at the company cared enough about this issue to simply respond and give their side of it.

For example, here is a post I made early on responding to another member, whose post I am first quoting. There was no response to either post, nor to any other post in that thread:


SBtrader82 View Post
I really hope topStep will join the thread and clarify this. It is quite scary to think that we might be spending energy in a program that might not pay at the end.
I am a strong believer in the honesty of Topstep, so I would really like to receive some clarification.


bobwest View Post
I absolutely agree, and if it hasn't been made clear so far, I think this is a matter @Topstep should take very seriously. A company only has their good name, ultimately, and if it is tarnished they have nothing.

So far, it looks as though a rule change was made and applied retroactively to a situation that existed before the change, and that was not in violation of any rule at the time. @Topstep may have their reasons for the rule, and for applying it as they did, but it is troubling that they did it so far after the fact, at least according to the emails that have been furnished. Pretty much all the comments so far have reflected a concern about how it was applied after the rule change to a situation from before the change was made.

If @Topstep disputes the facts, or their interpretation, they can do so.

Let me repeat the invitation to @Topstep to come in and make clear to members what their stance is on this, and to answer these concerns.

If @Topstep does not consider this as at least a major PR flub, they may want to rethink it. Potential and actual customers want to know what they can count on, and to know that the terms will not be changed in mid-stream and applied retroactively to them. @SBtrader82, quoted above, has been a strong supporter of TopStep on this forum and has been funded by them, and his concerns should not be taken lightly, as representative of how this is perceived.

Aside from this question, there is a simple fairness question as it was applied here.

If the company concludes, on reflection, that this was a mistake, it would not be a terrible thing to say so. Everyone makes mistakes, and what you do about them is what matters. If they want to stand by it, they should explain why, in these particular circumstances, so that traders can understand and perhaps make informed decisions based on this.

This is actually a big deal, @Topstep.

Bob.

This is still a big deal, because the incident still gets mentioned from time to time, and there's still nothing from the company explaining their side of it.

I hope that when you come back with whatever others at the company have told you about the situation, it's not just with some corporate fog, but with something of substance. I am sure that people on this forum are -- or should be -- perfectly willing to make allowances for the fact that people, and companies, make mistakes. It is also possible that there was no mistake, and that the company was correct. If the company feels they were justified, it would be only right to at least explain why. Or perhaps the only mistake was that they didn't tell their side of it. Or perhaps they felt they had to respect "individual privacy," as you mentioned.

But there needs to be an explanation of some sort. Ignoring it has not helped the company at all.

My view is that @Topstep has contributed positively in giving traders who are interested an avenue to learning their craft, and I have said so many times. I feel the company has simply made a mistake in letting this situation be ignored, and I do not think it should be taken out of proportion.

But this is a reputational issue, and someone at the company has screwed up in letting it grow unanswered. I hope you will provide enough information to permit readers to understand what happened and, most importantly, to understand what they may face if they decide to use Topstep in the future. Any doubts people may have need to be settled, going forward.

Bob.

When one door closes, another opens.
-- Cervantes, Don Quixote

Closed Thread



Last Updated on January 31, 2023


© 2024 NexusFi™, s.a., All Rights Reserved.
Av Ricardo J. Alfaro, Century Tower, Panama City, Panama, Ph: +507 833-9432 (Panama and Intl), +1 888-312-3001 (USA and Canada)
All information is for educational use only and is not investment advice. There is a substantial risk of loss in trading commodity futures, stocks, options and foreign exchange products. Past performance is not indicative of future results.
About Us - Contact Us - Site Rules, Acceptable Use, and Terms and Conditions - Privacy Policy - Downloads - Top
no new posts