WikiFX

Reply

From my perspective as an independent trader, the primary risk I see with Topstep is that it operates without any recognized regulatory oversight. Despite its long presence in the market and U.S. registration, Topstep does not hold licenses from major authorities like the NFA, ASIC, or FCA. For me, this lack of regulation immediately raises questions about recourse if something goes wrong, ranging from disputes over payouts to platform malfunctions or changes in terms. In my career, I’ve found regulatory protections to be crucial for trader confidence, especially when actual funds are at stake. Another concern is Topstep’s proprietary model; rather than traditional live accounts, traders must pass a simulated evaluation. While this can be beneficial for some, it means that the pathway to accessing funded capital is tightly controlled and subject to the firm's shifting rules and evaluation criteria. There’s always a risk the company could adjust requirements or fees in ways that disadvantage traders. Transparency is also cited as lacking. I’m always cautious when I can’t independently verify how my data, results, or even the rules of engagement are managed—especially if I have no regulatory agency to appeal to for clarity. In short, the absence of regulation, limited transparency, and the proprietary nature of Topstep’s evaluation structure are the most significant downsides in my view. For traders considering Topstep, it’s vital to proceed conservatively, understand all program terms in detail, and never risk funds you can’t afford to lose.