Does Combat Capital Markets pay out?
The verdict, the risk score and the figures behind them.
We found something serious: a payout pattern, a severe clause, or regulator action.
Yes, this firm demonstrably pays. We independently confirmed ten separate USDT payouts on the Tron and BNB chains, matching the firm's own published certificates to the dollar, the most recent dated 12 September 2026. The high-risk rating is driven by structure, not by any failure to pay.
- Ten on-chain payouts verified by us; the firm claims 492 payments totalling about $717,000 across 48 trader certificates, each carrying a blockchain link.
- Legal entity Combat Capital Markets LTD. (IBC) confirmed on the official Saint Lucia IBC registry; CEO Reza Golshahian is named and appears on camera.
- A customer wallet takes top-ups, pays balances back out to personal addresses and allows member-to-member transfers, and is explicitly built to serve a declared brokerage arm as well as the prop programme.
- Trustpilot has suppressed the predecessor profile's rating for a breach of its guidelines, and the referral scheme pays commission across four downline levels.
- The consistency rule is published numerically and shown daily, but in the funded stage its benchmark never resets.
Risk breakdown
Six axes, each scored 1-10. Higher means more risk.
Six axes, scored 1 to 10, where a higher number means more risk. Being unregulated is normal for a prop firm and is not scored against them.
- Identity & transparency3/10
Legal entity confirmed on the official Saint Lucia IBC registry, offices and contacts published, named CEO who appears on camera, and a verifiable domain lineage to 2022 that makes the since-2023 claim conservative; held off the floor only because just one person is named and the pre-2026 operating entity is never disclosed.
- Payout3/10
Ten separate on-chain USDT payouts verified by us against the firm's own certificates, the latest dated 12 September 2026, plus a complainant paid 2,865 USDT whose transaction we confirmed; not lower because of four public disputes and a funded-stage withdrawal lock that can bite.
- Terms & rug-pull risk5/10
Genuinely better than the norm on the headline mechanic, with a numeric 30% consistency threshold shown daily, no balance forfeiture on breach and purchased evaluation parameters protected from amendment; offset by a subjective sound-trading test decided by the risk team, a funded-stage benchmark that never resets, and retroactive amendment of operational rules including payment methods.
- Trading conditions6/10
The firm is its own broker with no independent venue or liquidity provider named for funded accounts, the funded stage's live or simulated status is never stated plainly, and two traders allege the evaluation feed widened spreads when real accounts did not; credited for a prominent and honest simulated-account disclaimer and no contradictory live-capital marketing.
- Reputation6/10
Trustpilot has suppressed the predecessor profile's rating for a guidelines breach, a four-level referral scheme creates a standing incentive to manufacture praise, and the main negative source carries two near-duplicate reviews, so the signal is contaminated in both directions rather than clearly bad; credited for substantive positive reports and a firm that answers complaints publicly with records and transaction links.
- Operational & social3/10
A 21,000-subscriber channel posting daily including on-chain payout proofs and operational incident notices, a CEO interview published three weeks ago, and expo attendance; the dormant X account and the broken X link in the site footer are an abandoned channel and a maintenance defect rather than signs of decline.
Payout reality
Whether the money actually arrives, and what we could evidence.
This is the strongest part of the picture, and it rests on evidence we checked ourselves rather than on the firm's claims. The firm publishes a payout ledger of 48 trader certificates, and critically each one links to a public blockchain transaction rather than to a screenshot. We opened ten of those transactions directly against Tron and BNB Chain nodes and every one settled successfully, for the amount claimed, on the date claimed.
- 10,635 USDT on Tron, 9 November 2025, matching the certificate for the trader with the largest cumulative total ($93,638 across 31 payments).
- 15,097 USDT and 1,552 USDT on BNB Chain, November 2025 and January 2026, matching their certificates.
- Six further transfers from a single payout wallet dated 3 August to 12 September 2026, reconciling line by line with a channel post that itemised nine named traders and 29 transaction links. One trader's stated $6,410 resolved exactly into transfers of 1,614 and 4,795.44 USDT; another's $4,609 into 2,038 and 2,571.
- That payout wallet has made 760 transactions and still held about $10,300 in USDT when we looked, so it is funded and working rather than drained.
- Most tellingly, when a trader published an Absolute SCAM review in March 2025, the firm replied with a transaction link showing it had paid that same person 2,865 USDT. We verified it: confirmed on Tron, 22 June 2024.
What we could not establish. We cannot measure the gap between a request and its settlement, so the stated 2 to 3 business days remains the firm's own figure. The single most recent certificate, dated 20 August 2026, carries no transaction hash, and one certificate has an internal accounting note where the hash should be. Payouts are crypto-only, which means no card or bank recourse if something goes wrong. And four traders have publicly disputed their treatment, discussed below.
How the program works
The evaluation, the funded phase and what the firm keeps.
A buyer purchases a non-refundable evaluation plan priced between $15 and $399, on account sizes from $1,000 to $50,000. Three families are sold: Express (classic two-stage), Marathon and Marathon Pro (two-stage with automated risk management), plus a direct-funded Combat Fund plan from $109 that skips the evaluation.
- Targets: two-stage plans require 7% then 5%. There is no time limit to reach them, but the account must place at least one trade every 30 calendar days or it is automatically failed with no refund.
- Drawdown: total loss limits are selectable at purchase between 4% and 10%; daily limits are 5% classic, or a 2% automated daily stop that locks the account until end of day instead of failing it. Marathon Pro adds a 2% daily profit lock that closes trades once reached.
- Consistency: largest daily profit divided by total profit must stay under 30%, recalculated every day and displayed in the dashboard.
- Profit split: 60% if you withdraw on days 7 to 14, 80% on days 15 to 30, 90% from day 31. The clock resets after every payout, so 90% always costs a 31-day wait.
- Payout cadence: minimum 1% profit, 7 trading days for the first request, then at least every 7 days. The plan fee is refunded in full with the first payout.
- Caps: $100,000 total exposure per user, of which at most $20,000 may sit in direct-funded plans, and only one funded account per plan family may be active at a time.
- Platform: MetaTrader 5 on the firm's own broker, offering 101 forex pairs, 20 metals, commodities and indices, and 34 crypto symbols. Payment in and out is USDT on TRC-20 and BEP-20, plus a TCPay gateway.
Who they are
The company behind the brand, and where it is registered.
- Brand: Combat Capital Markets, previously TradersCombat; the rebrand is openly disclosed and traderscombat.com redirects to the current site.
- Legal entity: Combat Capital Markets Ltd., an International Business Company incorporated in Saint Lucia under the International Business Companies Act, Cap. 12.14, stated registration number 2026-00419.
- Registered: Ground Floor, The Sotheby Building, Rodney Village, Rodney Bay, Gros-Islet, Saint Lucia. Physical office given as 100m East from Bar Axis (Black Gates), Heredia, San Juan, Costa Rica, with telephone +506 6256-6047.
- Website: combatcapitalmarkets.com, registered November 2023; the predecessor domain traderscombat.com was registered March 2022 and both are paid through to 2028.
- Founded: The programme traces to July 2022 under the TradersCombat name, which began with a free trading competition of more than 500 participants. The site's own claim of operating since 2023 is therefore conservative rather than inflated.
- Team disclosed: Founder and CEO Reza Golshahian, a long-established Persian-language trading educator, is named on the About page and appears in a one-hour interview published three weeks before this review. No other staff are named.
- Where it accepts traders from: Marketing, support and all substantive rule documentation are in Persian, and the audience is overwhelmingly Iranian. The firm excludes residents and citizens of Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia, Bangladesh, Nepal and North Korea, U.S. Persons, and anyone under 18.
Company on record
The legal entity named in the terms, as found on a public registry.
- Legal name
- Combat Capital Markets LTD.
- Registration number
- 2026-00419
- Jurisdiction
- Saint Lucia
- Registered address
- Ground Floor, The Sotheby Building, Rodney Village, Rodney Bay, Gros-Islet, Saint Lucia
- Registry
- Saint Lucia Registry of International Business Companies (Pinnacle St. Lucia)
Why this verdict
How the findings add up to this verdict.
Two findings sit in genuine tension, and we have not resolved one by hiding the other. The payment record is better evidenced than almost anything we see in this sector. The structure around it carries risks a buyer should price in.
- A live customer-funded wallet. Traders top it up with USDT or through the TCPay gateway, can withdraw the balance back out to a personal address within about 24 hours, and can transfer funds to other members. The firm describes it as a central balance for all products including prop, broker and services to be added in future. A facility that takes money in, pays it back out and moves it between customers is materially more than an evaluation checkout, and it is the single largest driver of this rating.
- A declared brokerage arm. The footer states the company provides brokerage services in forex and CFDs. A retail account-types page is live on the domain with zero, classic, demo, swap-free and fusionpro tiers, though it still shows unpopulated template text, and no live MetaTrader 5 server for the brand is publicly listed. The brokerage looks built but not launched.
- Contaminated reputation signals. Trustpilot has withheld the predecessor profile's rating for a breach of its guidelines. The referral programme pays 10% to 20% commission plus four levels of downline on challenge-fee sales, and we found a favourable review carrying the firm's own sign-up link and discount coupon.
- It is its own counterparty. Trading runs on the firm's in-house broker with no independent venue named, and two traders have alleged the evaluation feed widened spreads when real accounts did not.
- Nothing from a regulator. The consolidated IOSCO alert network returns no match for the brand or the domain, and we found no warning or enforcement anywhere.
Counterpoints
The strongest case in their favour, and what would change our mind.
The case in their favour
The honest case for this firm is stronger than its risk score suggests, and it is built on verifiable facts rather than goodwill.
- It proves payment the hard way. Publishing a blockchain hash for each payout invites exactly the audit we performed, and it survived. Ten transactions, three chains' worth of explorers, amounts and dates matching. Very few firms in this industry expose themselves to that.
- It answers critics with records, not templates. Confronted with a scam accusation, it produced a transaction proving it had paid that accuser. Confronted with a complaint about midnight spread spikes, it checked its records and stated the person had never held an account. Confronted with a spreads complaint, it explained its liquidity arrangements.
- The consistency rule is disarmed. The threshold is 30%, the formula is published with worked examples, and the score is recalculated nightly and shown in the dashboard. Breaching it does not fail the account or forfeit the balance; it only pauses withdrawals until further trading brings the ratio down. That removes the industry's most common denial mechanic.
- The amendment right is bounded. The rules state in terms that the evaluation parameters of a plan already purchased, meaning target, drawdown and stop loss, do not change.
- The fee comes back. The plan cost is refunded in full with the first payout.
- Verifiable longevity and a real face. A continuous archive trail since January 2024, a predecessor domain from March 2022, a registry-confirmed entity, and a CEO who sits for hour-long interviews alongside named traders whose payouts appear in the ledger and on-chain.
- It is visibly alive. A 21,000-subscriber channel posting daily, including operational notices when a liquidity feed faltered.
What would change our mind
This verdict is driven by structure rather than conduct, so specific, checkable changes would move it in either direction.
- Would lower the risk: the firm separating the evaluation storefront from the customer wallet, or stating plainly in its terms that wallet balances are not client funds, are not used for trading and are segregated.
- Would lower the risk: the retail account-types page either being removed or launched with full disclosure of who holds deposits, under what terms, and in which entity.
- Would lower the risk: the funded-stage consistency benchmark resetting after each payout, instead of the best day anchoring the ratio for the account's whole life.
- Would lower the risk: Trustpilot restoring the predecessor profile's rating, and the referral scheme dropping from four downline levels to direct commission only.
- Would lower the risk: naming the executing venue and liquidity provider for funded accounts, and stating explicitly whether funded trading is live or simulated.
- Would raise the risk: payouts stopping while the storefront keeps selling, which the on-chain wallets make unusually easy to check; the payout channel going quiet; or the certificate ledger ceasing to publish transaction hashes.
- Would raise the risk sharply: a cluster of traders reporting the volume-sizing or sound-trading discretion used to void accounts after a passed evaluation, with account identifiers and dates; or any regulator naming this entity or domain.
Evidence ledger
Every finding behind the verdict, with its source.
- In favour
E1Ten separate USDT payouts independently confirmed on Tron and BNB Chain, each matching an amount and date the firm published in its own certificate ledger or payout posts, including six dated 3 August to 12 September 2026; the BNB Chain payout wallet shows 760 transactions and still held about $10,300 USDT.
- In favour
E2A free name search on the official Saint Lucia Registry of International Business Companies returns Combat Capital Markets LTD. (IBC), matching the operating entity named in the site's own footer and legal disclaimer.
- In favour
E3Answering a trader who titled his review Absolute SCAM, the firm posted a transaction link showing it had paid him 2,865 USDT; we confirmed that transfer settled on Tron on 22 June 2024, so the most aggressive public allegation came from someone who had in fact been paid.
- In favour
E4The consistency rule is published with its exact formula and a 30% threshold, illustrated with worked examples, recalculated nightly and displayed in the trader's own dashboard; breaching it does not fail the account or forfeit the balance, it only pauses withdrawals until further trading brings the ratio down.
- Against
E5A live customer wallet accepts USDT and TCPay top-ups, pays the balance back out to a personal address in about 24 hours, and permits member-to-member transfers; the firm describes it as a central balance for all products including prop, broker and future services, and a retail account-types page with zero, classic, demo, swap-free and fusionpro tiers is live on the domain.
- Against
E6Trustpilot displays a warning that the predecessor profile's rating is unavailable due to a breach of its guidelines, withholding the score across a review base of roughly 117 entries with 43 in the last twelve months, which goes directly to the integrity of the firm's favourable review signal.
- Against
E7The Combat Club referral programme pays 10% to 20% commission by monthly volume and states that commission continues across four levels of downline, describing the result as explosive recurring income; a favourable third-party review was found carrying the firm's own sign-up link and a discount coupon.
- Against
E8In the funded stage the consistency benchmark is never reset after a payout and the entire account history is taken into account, so a single outsized winning day permanently raises the total profit a trader must accumulate before any further withdrawal is permitted.
- Against
E9Two traders, in March and July 2025, allege the evaluation feed widened spreads at moments when real accounts were unaffected, one calling it manipulation; the firm replied that simulation accounts carry identical specifications to real accounts, and that the second complainant had never registered an account with it.
- Context
E10The consolidated IOSCO international alert network, carrying more than 47,000 entries submitted by member regulators, returns no warnings matching either the brand name or the domain, and no warning-list entry or enforcement action was found at any authority.
Official channels
Official accounts and the captures we archived.
Official channels
Audience size and the latest post we could see, captured on the review date. A prop firm usually goes quiet before it stops paying, so an inactive channel is worth noticing.
What we captured
Screenshots taken by WIKILIX on the review date. Pages change; these do not.
Questions about Combat Capital Markets
The questions traders actually ask about this firm.
Yes, and unusually this can be checked rather than taken on trust. The firm publishes a blockchain transaction hash for each payout certificate. We opened ten of them against Tron and BNB Chain and all ten settled successfully for the stated amount, including six dated between 3 August and 12 September 2026. Its payout wallet has made 760 transactions and was still funded when we looked.
Because of what sits alongside the prop programme. The firm operates a customer wallet that accepts top-ups, pays balances back out to personal addresses and moves funds between members, and it describes that wallet as serving a brokerage arm as well as the prop business. A deposit-shaped facility at a prop-branded firm is a structural risk regardless of whether payouts are currently flowing.
Your largest single day's profit divided by your total profit must stay below 30%. It is published with the formula and worked examples, recalculated nightly and shown in your dashboard, and breaching it does not fail your account or take your balance, it only pauses withdrawals. The sharp edge is that in the funded stage the best day is never reset, so it is measured against your whole account history indefinitely.
Treat them carefully in both directions. Trustpilot has withheld the predecessor profile's rating for a breach of its guidelines, which goes to review integrity. The referral programme pays up to 20% plus four levels of downline on fee sales, and we found a glowing review carrying the firm's own sign-up link and coupon. On the negative side, the two one-star reviews on one Persian scam-reporting site are near word-for-word identical and posted four days apart.
The evaluation phase is explicitly simulated, which the footer states clearly and which is the industry norm. The funded stage, which the rules call the real stage, is never plainly described either way. All trading runs on the firm's own MetaTrader 5 broker with no independent venue named, so the firm is your counterparty in both phases.
Yes. A free name search on the official Saint Lucia Registry of International Business Companies returns Combat Capital Markets LTD. (IBC), matching the entity named in the site's own footer. The detailed record carrying the registration number and incorporation date sits behind a paid search, so the stated number 2026-00419 remains the firm's own figure.
Yes. TradersCombat rebranded to Combat Capital Markets, the old domain redirects to the current site, the X profile is still titled previously TradersCombat, and the same founder runs it. There was no collapse and no attempt to hide the lineage. The predecessor domain dates to March 2022, which makes the operation older than the current brand.
It depends entirely on how long you wait. Withdraw on days 7 to 14 and you get 60%. Days 15 to 30 gives 80%. From day 31 you get 90%. The counter resets after every payout, so the headline 90% always requires a fresh 31-day wait, and the realistic recurring rate for a trader withdrawing weekly is 60%.
No. The consolidated IOSCO alert network, which carries more than 47,000 entries from member regulators, returns no match for either the brand name or the domain, and we found no warning-list entry or enforcement action anywhere. Note that being unregulated is the normal baseline for a prop firm and is not itself a concern; the firm states plainly that it is not regulated by the Saint Lucia FSRA.
Payouts are USDT only, on TRC-20 or BEP-20. After you submit a request the account is deactivated while the team reviews it, and the firm states profit is sent within 2 to 3 business days, with the account reopening the next business day. Withdrawing from the wallet to your own address takes about 24 hours, with a network fee of $2 on BEP-20 or $5 on TRC-20 deducted. There is no card or bank option, so no chargeback recourse.
What we would do
What we would do with our own money.
A trader who understands the structure can deal with this firm, but should deal with it narrowly.
- Do not leave money in the wallet. Top it up for the plan you are buying and withdraw payouts promptly to your own address. The wallet is the part of this operation we would not treat as a safe place to hold funds.
- Buy the smallest plan that tests your strategy first. Prices start at $15, the fee is refunded with your first payout, and a cheap plan is the only honest way to test whether the rules suit how you actually trade.
- Read the consistency rule before you trade, not after. In the funded stage your best single day is measured against your entire account history and never resets, so an outsized winning day can gate withdrawals for a long time. Distribute profit deliberately.
- Check your consistency score in the dashboard daily. The firm publishes it; use it, because it is the one number that decides whether you can withdraw.
- Take the 60% early rather than waiting for 90%. Withdrawing on day 7 at 60% realises money; holding 24 more days for 90% leaves it exposed to a firm that is its own counterparty.
- Respect the operational rules literally. Only nine named expert advisors are permitted, all automated trading is banned, VPS use is banned in every plan including funded, and 30 days without a trade fails the account with no refund.
- Keep your own evidence. Save the signed agreement, statements and request timestamps. Payment is crypto-only, so there is no card or bank chargeback to fall back on.
- If you are in Canada, the UK, Australia or the United States, do not buy. You are excluded by the firm's own terms, and we saw at least one Canada-based buyer who was sold an account and then had trouble.