Does PropShopTrader 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.
PropShopTrader did pay traders, and the record for that sits in late 2025 and January 2026. From February 2026 onward the independent record flips hard: the recent complaint tail is dominated by payouts refused after benchmarks were reached, including one trader claiming over $60,000 across three accounts on 1 September 2026 and another claiming a withheld $5,000 completion bonus on 3 September 2026.
- The legal entity is real and checks out: PropShopTrader OÜ, Estonian registry code 16949893, incorporated 22 March 2024, board member Ashley Lynn Kozak.
- Six independent traders described receiving money between November 2025 and January 2026, one naming $7,500 into a Wise account.
- No payout receipt was found in the independent record after 21 January 2026.
- The binding Terms state the firm will not issue any payout based on simulated results, while the entire advertised product is simulated payouts.
- The public storefront is currently in waitlist mode with no purchasable accounts, so the firm is not taking new money while these disputes are open.
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, registry code, incorporation date, address and named officer all verified and all consistent with the site and the domain age; gaps are minor, an unfiled 2025 annual report and some empty site sections.
- Payout8/10
Six evidenced payouts, all between November 2025 and January 2026, followed by a sustained tail of payout-integrity refusals including a claimed $60,000 denial and a withheld $5,000 bonus in September 2026; not 9 or 10 because money demonstrably did leave and the pattern rests on one platform.
- Terms & rug-pull risk9/10
The contract disclaims any obligation to pay on simulated results while selling simulated payouts, permits unilateral changes to programme requirements after purchase, voids payouts if the account fails during a review window of unstated length, and states violations are final and not subject to appeal; partly offset by published numeric thresholds and no consistency rule.
- Trading conditions6/10
Simulated status is stated honestly, which is a credit, but the Real Prop broker is never named and multiple traders report the dashboard and the trading platform disagreeing on the numbers that decide pass, fail and payout eligibility.
- Reputation7/10
539 reviews at a 3.8 score, but 24 percent are one-star and the negative tail is led by payout refusals rather than product gripes, while the positive tail praises support and almost never mentions money arriving; the firm does reply publicly and sometimes with specifics.
- Operational & social5/10
Discord is alive at 2,807 members with 248 online and videos were published within the last month, but the cadence has slowed, the storefront is in waitlist mode with no purchasable accounts, and the announcements page returns an error while the testimonials and promotions pages are empty.
Payout reality
Whether the money actually arrives, and what we could evidence.
Money has left this firm, and the evidence for that is real but it has a date on it. Between 30 November 2025 and 21 January 2026 six independent Trustpilot reviewers described receiving payouts. The strongest single artefact is Isaac Amoako on 30 November 2025, who wrote that he woke up on the Friday with '$7,500 deposited in my Wise account'. Chris Wilkin on 1 December 2025 wrote 'Just got paid'; DW.Trades the same week reported 'no issues with getting multiple payouts'; Tin Van on 26 December 2025 wrote 'today I receive my payout'; Dave Mroz on 16 January 2026 and Xiaochun on 21 January 2026 both described being paid.
After 21 January 2026 that stops. Nothing found in the independent record describes a payout arriving. What replaces it, month after month, is refusal:
- 1 September 2026: a trader states 'Propshop has decided not to pay me for 3 accounts which is over 60k usd after reaching the 8 benchmarks'.
- 3 September 2026: a trader passed the benchmarks, was denied the live transition, and says the firm 'also withheld the $5,000 completion bonus that I earned by successfully hitting those targets'.
- 21 July 2026: a payout 'rejected after more than a month with no proper explanation'.
- 20 June 2026: a $750 payout rejected.
- 29 June 2026 and 26 June 2026: two traders report the dashboard and the trading platform stopped agreeing on their numbers precisely at the point they became payout eligible.
A recurring mechanic sits underneath these. The firm's own reply to one denial explains that a payout is rejected if the account fails during the payout review window, and reviewers describe that review running ten days to over a month. That is post-hoc review at payout time, and it is the classic denial route in this industry.
Two honest qualifications. All of this negative material comes from a single platform, because the other obvious venues were not readable during this review, so the pattern is well documented but not independently corroborated. And the firm does answer publicly, sometimes with specifics such as a named MAE breach over the $1,000 threshold.
How the program works
The evaluation, the funded phase and what the firm keeps.
A trader buys a one-off Gladiator evaluation account, priced as a single fee with no subscription. Everything in the evaluation is simulated.
- Account families: Sprint, Forge and Light on futures, plus stocks accounts, at 12.5K, 25K and 50K, stackable to ten futures and ten stocks accounts.
- Progression: a Benchmark ladder rather than a single profit target, with no expiry window.
- Risk rules, published numerically: intraday or end-of-day drawdown at 2,500 on a 25K and 5,000 on a 50K, plus a per-trade Maximum Adverse Excursion cap set at half the account drawdown. Forge and Sprint fail instantly on a first MAE breach; Light and stocks give three warnings.
- Consistency rule: none. The firm advertises this and the rule pages back it up.
- Sim payouts on futures: automatic once compliance review clears, on a published ladder. A 25K Forge pays 1,000, 1,000, 1,250, 1,500 and 1,500 across Benchmarks 2 to 6, capped at 6,250. A 50K Forge caps at 12,000.
- Stocks: no payouts during evaluation. A 3,000 or 6,000 signing bonus on transition to Real Prop.
- Real Prop: 80/20 split in the trader's favour, no payout cap, no buy-in, governed by a separate Real Prop Trading Agreement.
Who they are
The company behind the brand, and where it is registered.
- Brand: PropShopTrader (PST)
- Legal entity: PropShopTrader OÜ, named in its own Terms and in the site footer
- Registered: Estonian Commercial Register, code 16949893, entered 22 March 2024, status active, share capital 2,862.79 euro
- Registered address: Võru tn 254, Tartu linn, 50115, Estonia, matching the address published on the website
- Website: propshoptrader.com, domain created 20 March 2024, two days before incorporation
- Founded: March 2024, and the domain, the registry and the firm's own marketing all agree on that
- Team disclosed: one board member on the registry, Ashley Lynn Kozak. Staff are visible in the Discord and in support replies but there is no team page on the site
- Where it accepts traders from: a published country list, with reviewers writing in from the United States, United Kingdom, Malaysia, Romania, Argentina, India, Australia and Hong Kong
One housekeeping gap: the 2025 annual report had not been filed with the Estonian register at the time of this review.
Company on record
The legal entity named in the terms, as found on a public registry.
- Legal name
- PropShopTrader OÜ
- Registration number
- 16949893
- Jurisdiction
- Estonia
- Incorporated
- 2024-03-22
- Registered address
- Võru tn 254, Tartu linn, Tartu maakond, 50115, Estonia
- Registry
- Estonian e-Business Register (Commercial Register)
Why this verdict
How the findings add up to this verdict.
HIGH_RISK, because a firm that used to pay and whose recent record is dominated by refusals is the exact shape a trader needs warning about, and because the contract itself supplies the escape hatch.
- The Terms disclaim the product. Clause 3.3 states the firm 'does not provide and will not issue any compensation, payout, withdrawal, profit share, or other monetary amount based on any simulated or hypothetical trading results generated through the Services', and a later clause repeats that the company 'is not engaged in simulated trading payout programs'. The advertised product is simulated payouts. Whatever the drafting intent, that is a term the firm can point at to refuse every sim payout it advertises.
- The rules can be changed under a live account. The firm 'reserves the right to unilaterally change the fees and content of the Services and evaluation programs at any time, including the requirements for their successful implementation', and says explicitly that the change 'may affect the Services that were ordered or booked before the notification of the change'. Several complainants describe exactly that happening.
- There is no appeal. The risk rules state violations are 'final and not subject to appeal'.
- The payout record has a break in it at roughly the end of January 2026, and it has not resumed.
It is not CONFIRMED_PAYOUT_FAILURE or COLLAPSED. The site is live, the Discord holds 2,807 members with 248 online, support answers publicly, videos were still going up within the last month, and the storefront is not selling.
Counterpoints
The strongest case in their favour, and what would change our mind.
The case in their favour
The fair case for this firm is stronger than the verdict suggests, and it is worth stating properly.
- It has actually paid. Six independent traders described money arriving between November 2025 and January 2026, one naming an amount and a method. That is more than many firms of this age can show.
- The identity is clean. Registry entry, incorporation date, address and named officer all match what the website says, and the domain age matches the founding claim to within two days. There is nothing hidden about who owes the money.
- The rules are published as numbers. Exact drawdown figures, exact per-trade MAE caps per account size, and a payout ladder that names the dollar amount at every benchmark. A trader can check compliance in advance, which is precisely what the industry's worst actors make impossible.
- There is no consistency rule. The single most common denial mechanic in this industry has been removed voluntarily.
- It answers complaints with specifics. One denial was met with a named rule and a named threshold rather than a template.
- It is not taking money right now. The storefront is in waitlist mode. A firm intent on harvesting fees while refusing payouts would be selling hardest, not standing still.
A plausible benign reading of 2026 is a firm that outgrew its platform, migrated onto Tickblaze badly, and is now failing accounts and payouts on data its own systems cannot reconcile.
What would change our mind
Specific, checkable things, in both directions.
- Upward: dated payout receipts from independent traders after January 2026, naming amounts and methods, on any public platform.
- Upward: the removal or rewriting of the Terms clause stating the firm will not pay on simulated results, so the contract matches the product being sold.
- Upward: a published, bounded payout review window with a stated maximum, and a stated rule that a payout already qualified for survives a later account failure.
- Upward: a public, resolved outcome on the September 2026 disputes, particularly the claim of over $60,000 across three accounts.
- Downward: the storefront reopening and selling evaluations while those payout disputes remain unresolved.
- Downward: the Discord going quiet, the support replies on public review platforms stopping, or the site removing the payout ladder pages.
- Downward: any regulator naming PropShopTrader OÜ or propshoptrader.com on a warning or enforcement list.
Evidence ledger
Every finding behind the verdict, with its source.
- In favour
E1PropShopTrader OÜ is on the Estonian Commercial Register under code 16949893, entered 22 March 2024, status active, board member Ashley Lynn Kozak, registered at Võru tn 254, Tartu, matching the address and entity named in the firm's own Terms.
- Against
E2The binding Terms state the firm 'does not provide and will not issue any compensation, payout, withdrawal, profit share, or other monetary amount based on any simulated or hypothetical trading results generated through the Services', while the advertised product is automatic simulated payouts.
- Against
E3The Terms permit unilateral change to programme requirements after purchase: the firm may change 'the requirements for their successful implementation' and 'the change may affect the Services that were ordered or booked before the notification of the change'.
- In favour
E4Six independent reviewers described payouts arriving between 30 November 2025 and 21 January 2026, the strongest naming $7,500 deposited into a Wise account.
- Against
E5A sustained payout-refusal tail from February to September 2026, including a claim of over $60,000 across three accounts declined after eight benchmarks (1 September 2026) and a $5,000 completion bonus withheld after benchmarks were hit (3 September 2026).
- In favour
E6Risk rules are published as concrete numbers: drawdown of 2,500 on a 25K and 5,000 on a 50K, per-trade MAE capped at half the account drawdown with the exact figure listed per account, and no consistency rule anywhere in the programme.
- Against
E7The published rules state that a rule violation outcome is 'final and not subject to appeal', removing any route for a trader to contest an account failure that costs them a payout.
- Against
E8Payout review runs at payout time rather than trade time, and the firm's own public reply confirms a payout is rejected if the account fails during that review; reviewers describe the window running from ten days to over a month.
- Context
E9The public pricing page carries no purchasable accounts and the primary call to action across the whole site is a waitlist, so the firm is not taking new evaluation fees while the payout disputes are open.
ModeratePropShopTrader pricing page - Context
E10No warning list entry, enforcement action or injunction naming PropShopTrader OÜ or the propshoptrader.com domain was found across the regulators that publish on this industry.
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 PropShopTrader
The questions traders actually ask about this firm.
What we would do
What we would do with our own money.
Treat this as a firm with a proven ability to pay and an unproven current willingness to.
- Do not commit money you cannot afford to lose outright. The evaluation fee is explicitly non-refundable once access is provisioned.
- Before buying anything, look for a payout receipt dated after January 2026 from a trader who is not an affiliate. If you cannot find one, that is your answer for now.
- Read clause 3.3 of the General Terms and the Legal Disclosures page yourself before paying. Decide whether you are comfortable buying a simulated-payout product from a contract that says simulated results will not be paid.
- If you already hold an account, screenshot your dashboard, your platform statement and your benchmark progress every trading day. The single most common complaint is that the two systems disagreed at exactly the moment a payout became due.
- Take payouts at the earliest benchmark you qualify for rather than accumulating toward a larger one. The disputes cluster around large accumulated amounts.
- Keep the card or crypto trail. One reviewer recovered a fee by chargeback, and the Terms permit the firm to cut off service in response.