Does The TradeMakers 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.
We could not evidence a single payout leaving The TradeMakers, and its terms describe any payout as a discretionary reward it may withhold. Nothing here looks like a scam in progress, but nothing yet proves the product works either.
- Zero dated, attributable payout artefacts across Trustpilot, Reddit, the firm's own Discord and prop directories.
- Equally, zero payout-integrity complaints, zero disputes and no regulator action against this entity.
- The terms let the firm amend itself and change program parameters at any time, effective on publication.
- Genuinely good: the consistency rule is published as a hard number (20 percent, or 40 percent on challenge accounts), and the payout process has stated timeframes.
- No founder, director or staff member is named anywhere on the site, and two different Wyoming mail-drop addresses appear across the firm's own disclosures.
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 & transparency7/10
Operating entity named and US-domiciled with a working contact route, but no individual is disclosed anywhere, two different Sheridan mail-drop addresses appear across its own materials, and the registry entry could not be confirmed.
- Payout6/10
No evidenced payout, but also no disputes, no integrity complaints and a published process with committed timeframes. Capped at 6 because the empty record reflects an eighteen-month history rather than anything found against the firm.
- Terms & rug-pull risk7/10
Retroactive amendment, a right to change program parameters at any time, payouts defined as discretionary, and payout forfeiture on a chargeback. Held below the top band because the consistency threshold and payout gates are published as hard numbers.
- Trading conditions5/10
Simulated execution is disclosed honestly and the BlackArrow platform claim verifies against a real Nelogica product, but the legal disclaimers describe forex pairs the firm does not sell and exclude the stocks its flagship equities product is built on.
- Reputation5/10
Ten reviews, all five stars, no critical reports and no complaints on any platform. Too little independent data to read as either an endorsement or a warning.
- Operational & social7/10
The YouTube link in the firm's own footer leads to a page that does not exist, TikTok has one follower and no content, and the blog has never published. Support responsiveness is praised consistently and the Discord is active, which keeps this off the top band.
Payout reality
Whether the money actually arrives, and what we could evidence.
We found no dated, attributable artefact showing money leaving this firm, and we also found nobody saying it failed to arrive. The honest answer is unevidenced, not refused.
- Trustpilot: ten reviews, all five stars, none critical, spanning November 2025 to July 2026. Two refer to payouts in general terms, one saying they are quick. Neither names an amount, a date or a method, so both are claims rather than records.
- The firm's own Discord: a dedicated payouts channel exists, which is the right structure. Its contents are visible only to members, so no payout post could be read and dated from outside.
- Reddit and open search: no threads, no payout screenshots, no complaints, no blacklist entries under the domain or the brand.
- Prop directories: listings did not return during this review, so no third-party payout ledger corroborates or contradicts.
Two things temper this. The firm is roughly eighteen months old with a 284-member community, so a thin trail is arithmetic rather than misconduct. And the process itself is published in unusual detail: compliance review in one to two business days, payment in twenty-four to seventy-two hours, bank transfer to the trader's own verified name only.
Against that sits the language the firm would rely on if it declined. The Terms define a payout as 'a discretionary payout of simulated profits' and call it 'a discretionary performance reward, not trading profits'. Compliance is verified when the payout is requested, not when trades are placed. That the thresholds are published as numbers is what keeps this from being the classic denial trap, because a trader can check compliance in advance.
How the program works
The evaluation, the funded phase and what the firm keeps.
A buyer pays a single non-refundable fee for a simulated account, in one of two shapes, across two asset classes.
- Instant funding: the account is provisioned on purchase with no evaluation. A $50,000 futures instant account costs $520 one time, including data and platform licence.
- Evaluation: a challenge must be passed first. Equities challenges carry a five-day minimum trading requirement.
- Sizes: futures from $50,000 to $200,000, equities from $10,000 to $350,000. The advertised $1.75M is the combined total across multiple accounts, not one account.
- Risk rules on the $50,000 futures instant: $53,000 buffer to qualify for payouts, $1,250 daily loss limit as a soft breach, $2,000 maximum loss, end-of-day trailing drawdown, five minis or fifty micros maximum position.
- Profit split: up to 90 percent to the trader.
- Payout gate: six qualifying trading days since activation or the last payout, each with at least $200 in realized profit, a minimum account balance for the size, no single day exceeding 20 percent of total profits, and a minimum $300 withdrawal.
- Payout ceilings: capped per cycle and per size. A $10,000 equities account is limited to $300 for each of the first four payouts, a $350,000 account to $5,000, rising afterwards.
Trading is on BlackArrow, a third-party platform built by Nelogica and also used by several established firms. All accounts are simulated.
Who they are
The company behind the brand, and where it is registered.
- Brand: The TradeMakers
- Legal entity: TTM Digital 2 LLC, trading as The TradeMakers, named in its own Terms of Service
- Registered: Wyoming, United States. Governing law is Wyoming and disputes go to binding arbitration under the Federal Arbitration Act
- Address: 30 North Gould Street, Sheridan, Wyoming on the website footer. The firm's own Trustpilot profile instead lists 1309 Coffeen Avenue STE 1200, Sheridan. Both are high-volume company-formation service addresses rather than trading offices
- Website: thetrademakers.com, registered 17 March 2025
- Founded: Evidence points to 2025. The domain dates from March 2025, the Discord server from June 2025 and the Trustpilot profile was claimed in November 2025
- Team disclosed: None. No founder, chief executive or staff member is named on any page. Support staff appear only as first names in customer reviews
- Contact: support@thetrademakers.com and a US telephone number with a Tampa, Florida area code
- Where it accepts traders from: No published restricted-country list. Reviews come from the United States, Canada and Ghana
Company on record
The legal entity named in the terms, as found on a public registry.
- Legal name
- TTM Digital 2 LLC
- Jurisdiction
- United States, Wyoming
- Registered address
- 30 North Gould Street, Sheridan, WY 82801, United States
- Registry
- Wyoming Secretary of State, Business Division
Why this verdict
How the findings add up to this verdict.
This is a young, small firm whose documentation is better than average and whose payout record is empty. The risk is structural rather than demonstrated.
- No payout has been evidenced against terms that reserve the right to withhold one. That combination is the core of the finding. Either alone would be tolerable.
- The terms can change under a live account. The firm may 'update these Terms at any time', effective 'upon publication', and separately 'reserves the right to change program parameters at any time'. Every published threshold that protects a trader is revocable without notice.
- Recourse is narrowed on all sides. Chargebacks are contractually barred, filing one forfeits payouts and triggers a permanent ban, and class actions are waived.
- Nobody is accountable by name. No individual is disclosed, the registry entry could not be confirmed, and the firm publishes two different mail-drop addresses in its own materials.
- The marketing footprint is partly broken. The YouTube link in the firm's own footer leads to a page that does not exist, the TikTok account has one follower and no content, and the blog has never published.
- What this is not: there is no regulator action, no complaint pattern, no collapsed predecessor, no deposit-taking and no evidence of anyone being refused. This is not a failing firm. It is an unproven one.
Counterpoints
The strongest case in their favour, and what would change our mind.
The case in their favour
The fair case for The TradeMakers is stronger than its score suggests, and it rests on real evidence rather than goodwill.
- It is honest about the thing most firms obscure. The site says plainly that it empowers traders with simulated funding, the Terms state that accounts do not involve real capital, and the firm explicitly disclaims being a broker, dealer, futures commission merchant or introducing broker. Many competitors imply the opposite.
- The consistency rule is a published number. Twenty percent on instant accounts, forty percent on challenge accounts, alongside a stated minimum of six trading days, a $200 daily profit floor and per-size balance thresholds. A trader can verify compliance before requesting money, which removes the single most common denial mechanic in this industry.
- The payout process carries committed timeframes, step by step, with review in one to two business days and payment in twenty-four to seventy-two hours. Firms intending to stall rarely publish a clock.
- The platform claim checks out. BlackArrow is a genuine Nelogica product used by established names including Earn2Trade and The5ers, not an invented brand.
- There is documented evidence of the firm acting against its own interest. A Canadian reviewer in January 2026 described a glitched overnight position that stopped him out at maximum daily loss, and the firm repaired the account rather than enforcing the breach. That is the precise opposite of the behaviour this report exists to detect.
- Eighteen months in, not one person anywhere alleges non-payment.
What would change our mind
Specific and checkable, in both directions.
- Upward, decisively: two or more dated payout artefacts from independent traders naming amounts and dates, whether as Trustpilot reviews, Reddit posts answering follow-up questions, or a publicly readable payout channel. Opening the Discord payouts channel to non-members would do this on its own.
- Upward: naming the founder or operating team with checkable profiles, and reconciling the two Sheridan addresses to a single verifiable one.
- Upward: adding a notice period to the amendment clause so published thresholds cannot change mid-account, and defining what a good faith violation means.
- Upward: correcting the legal disclaimers so they describe the equities product the firm actually sells.
- Downward, decisively: any trader reporting a payout approved then reversed, an account breached retroactively at withdrawal time, or a demand for a further payment before funds are released.
- Downward: the Discord payouts channel falling silent, support response times lengthening, or the storefront continuing to sell while withdrawals queue.
- Downward: a warning-list entry or enforcement action naming TTM Digital 2 LLC or this domain.
Evidence ledger
Every finding behind the verdict, with its source.
- In favour
E1The Terms state that all accounts are simulated and that the firm is not a broker, dealer, futures commission merchant, financial advisor, money manager or introducing broker. The business model is disclosed rather than obscured.
- In favour
E2The purchase funnel offers only Equities, Futures and Giveaway products, each a one-time fee for a simulated account. No deposit page, cashier, wallet, live-account option or client-money language exists anywhere in the funnel or the terms.
- In favour
E3Payout eligibility is published as hard numbers: a 20 percent consistency rule on instant accounts and 40 percent on challenge accounts, six qualifying trading days, $200 minimum realized profit per day, per-size balance thresholds and per-tier payout caps. A trader can verify compliance before requesting money.
- In favour
E4The payout process is published step by step with committed timeframes: compliance review in one to two business days, approval the same day, payment in twenty-four to seventy-two hours, to the trader's own verified account only.
- Against
E5No founder, director or staff member is named on any page of the site. The footer address is a company-formation service address used by very large numbers of registered entities, and the firm's own Trustpilot profile lists a different Sheridan address. The domain was registered in March 2025.
- Against
E6The Terms reserve the right to 'update these Terms at any time', with updates effective 'upon publication', and separately state the firm 'reserves the right to change program parameters at any time'. Every published threshold protecting a trader is revocable without notice.
- Against
E7The Terms define a payout as 'a discretionary payout of simulated profits' and 'a discretionary performance reward, not trading profits', and list grounds on which the firm may deny one including suspicious activity and circumvention attempts. Compliance is verified when the payout is requested.
- Against
E8Traders contractually waive the right to file a chargeback for any reason. Doing so results in immediate termination, a permanent ban, forfeiture of payouts and reporting to fraud databases. Class actions are also waived, though a thirty-day arbitration opt-out is offered.
- Context
E9A sweep of Trustpilot, Reddit, open search and the firm's own Discord produced no dated payout artefact naming an amount and a date. The same sweep produced no payout-integrity complaint, no dispute and no scam or blacklist entry. Ten Trustpilot reviews are all five stars with none critical.
- Against
E10The YouTube link in the firm's own footer resolves to a page that does not exist. The linked TikTok account has one follower, no bio and no content. The Discord community has 284 members. The blog has published nothing since launch.
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 The TradeMakers
The questions traders actually ask about this firm.
What we would do
What we would do with our own money.
Treat this as an unproven firm and size your exposure to that, not to the marketing.
- Risk only the fee you can write off. Start at the smallest account, not the $350,000 tier. Fees are non-refundable the moment you open the dashboard.
- Ask for payout proof before you buy. Join the Discord and read the payouts channel yourself. If dated payout posts are there in volume, the central gap in this report closes. If the channel is thin or quiet, that is your answer.
- Take a screenshot of the rules on the day you buy. The firm can amend its terms and program parameters at any time with effect on publication, so your own dated copy is the only fixed record of what you agreed to.
- Plan around the payout ceilings. Your first four payouts are capped well below what the account size implies. Check the cap for your tier before assuming a profit can be withdrawn in one go.
- Consider opting out of arbitration. The Terms allow thirty days from first acceptance to do so. Most traders never notice this window, and it is the only leverage the agreement leaves you.
- Use your own verified payment details. Third-party payouts are refused, and a name mismatch at withdrawal is an avoidable way to lose a balance.