Prop Firm FundingTicks Faces Massive Backlash after "Retroactive Rule Change"

Tuesday, 23/12/2025 | 09:24 GMT by Arnab Shome
  • The rule change includes a minimum one-minute trade hold time and a reduction in the profit split.
  • FundingTicks’ Trustpilot rating dropped to 3.2, with 38 per cent one-star ratings.
FundingTicks' Trustpilot page as Trustscore dropped with 38% 1-star ratings
FundingTicks' Trustpilot page as Trustscore dropped with 38% 1-star ratings

Futures prop trading platform FundingTicks is facing a massive backlash on social media after reportedly changing its trading rules retroactively last week. The changes include a minimum one-minute trade hold time for scalpers.

Retroactive Rule Change Created Chaos

Although rule changes are common in prop trading, many traders claim FundingTicks applied them retroactively to all accounts.

Traders who bought challenges on the platform, agreed to the old trading rules, and passed them now have their challenges breached or profits reduced if they violated the current rules in the past. Earlier valid trades were also invalidated.

Read more: “Prop Trading Rules Aren’t to Trap but to Protect Capital”

The rule change includes a one-minute minimum trade hold period instead of no minimum period; a $200 minimum profit per day, up from $150; six profitable days, up from five; a new 80 per cent profit split compared with the previous rate of up to 90 per cent; and reduced and capped withdrawals.

However, FundingTicks highlighted an increased drawdown limit while promoting the new rules on social media.

FundingTicks was launched earlier this year by the same people behind the contracts for differences (CFDs) prop trading platform Funding Pips. Khaled claims to be the owner and CEO of both FundingPips and FundingTicks.

Angry Traders Moved to Social Media

“FundingTicks, you can’t change profit splits, trade holding times, and the number of profitable days required on existing accounts,” a social media user, Sahil, wrote on X. “You should have run polls and asked for public opinion. I believe you can make this right. The old rules were balanced.”

He also stated that the “one-minute scalping rule makes no sense.”

Another user, who goes by the name Babs on X, wrote: “This account was sitting at $3.2k in profit on Friday, and now it has been reduced to $751.62.”

Traders’ anger is now reflected on FundingTicks’ Trustpilot page. With over 1,000 reviews, the platform’s current TrustScore is 3.2, down from 4.1 in October, according to archived pages.

Currently, 38 per cent of the ratings on FundingTicks’ Trustpilot page are one star, the lowest rating a user can give.

Trustpilot temporarily suspended the profile page of FundingPips last year but later restored it.

Read more: Trustpilot’s Reputation Casino - Are Brokers and Props Playing or Getting Played?

FinanceMagnates.com contacted FundingTicks for comment on the backlash but did not receive a response by the time of publication.

Futures prop trading platform FundingTicks is facing a massive backlash on social media after reportedly changing its trading rules retroactively last week. The changes include a minimum one-minute trade hold time for scalpers.

Retroactive Rule Change Created Chaos

Although rule changes are common in prop trading, many traders claim FundingTicks applied them retroactively to all accounts.

Traders who bought challenges on the platform, agreed to the old trading rules, and passed them now have their challenges breached or profits reduced if they violated the current rules in the past. Earlier valid trades were also invalidated.

Read more: “Prop Trading Rules Aren’t to Trap but to Protect Capital”

The rule change includes a one-minute minimum trade hold period instead of no minimum period; a $200 minimum profit per day, up from $150; six profitable days, up from five; a new 80 per cent profit split compared with the previous rate of up to 90 per cent; and reduced and capped withdrawals.

However, FundingTicks highlighted an increased drawdown limit while promoting the new rules on social media.

FundingTicks was launched earlier this year by the same people behind the contracts for differences (CFDs) prop trading platform Funding Pips. Khaled claims to be the owner and CEO of both FundingPips and FundingTicks.

Angry Traders Moved to Social Media

“FundingTicks, you can’t change profit splits, trade holding times, and the number of profitable days required on existing accounts,” a social media user, Sahil, wrote on X. “You should have run polls and asked for public opinion. I believe you can make this right. The old rules were balanced.”

He also stated that the “one-minute scalping rule makes no sense.”

Another user, who goes by the name Babs on X, wrote: “This account was sitting at $3.2k in profit on Friday, and now it has been reduced to $751.62.”

Traders’ anger is now reflected on FundingTicks’ Trustpilot page. With over 1,000 reviews, the platform’s current TrustScore is 3.2, down from 4.1 in October, according to archived pages.

Currently, 38 per cent of the ratings on FundingTicks’ Trustpilot page are one star, the lowest rating a user can give.

Trustpilot temporarily suspended the profile page of FundingPips last year but later restored it.

Read more: Trustpilot’s Reputation Casino - Are Brokers and Props Playing or Getting Played?

FinanceMagnates.com contacted FundingTicks for comment on the backlash but did not receive a response by the time of publication.

About the Author: Arnab Shome
Arnab Shome
  • 7226 Articles
  • 131 Followers
About the Author: Arnab Shome
Arnab is an electronics engineer-turned-financial editor. He entered the industry covering the cryptocurrency market for Finance Magnates and later expanded his reach to forex as well. He is passionate about the changing regulatory landscape on financial markets and keenly follows the disruptions in the industry with new-age technologies.
  • 7226 Articles
  • 131 Followers

More from the Author

Retail FX

!"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|} !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}