Upcomers faces two new customer complaints involving a disputed account liquidation and allegedly withheld trading payouts. In today’s prop trading roundup, a Nigerian trader challenges the termination of 15 positions following a reported $144 equity discrepancy, while a Malaysian customer claims $1,749.32 in outstanding payouts became a choice between $400 in cash and a $24,000 trading account. Both complaints were published on November 12, 2026, and Upcomers has responded publicly, although neither dispute has been independently resolved.
Upcomers trader disputes $144 equity gap after liquidation
A trader identified as Tunde has challenged the liquidation of 15 positions on a $5,000 Vanguard account, alleging that Upcomers incorrectly recorded an intraday drawdown breach.
In a November 12 Trustpilot review, the customer identified account #750212 and reported a starting balance of $5,394.80 at 00:00 UTC. Applying the stated 4% daily drawdown limit produces a minimum permitted equity level of $5,179.01.
According to the complaint, the trader finished with a closed balance of $5,240.25 after recording $154.55 in net losses. That balance was $61.24 above the calculated daily threshold.
But it was still a breach, the system said.
The customer alleges that Upcomers automatically liquidated 15 open positions at approximately 14:30 server time, with those positions generating a combined closed loss of just $17.93. The firm’s breach record reportedly showed account equity falling to $5,096.19, creating a $144.06 difference compared with the final closed balance.
The reported equity was also $82.82 below the trader’s calculated daily floor. The customer has requested a tick-by-tick MetaTrader 5 audit, including the exact liquidation timestamp, historical bid and ask prices, spreads and complete intraday equity records.
Upcomers acknowledged the complaint in a public response and invited the trader to continue coordinating with its support team. The company recognised the disputed figures and the request for a detailed review but did not publish the underlying calculation or confirm an execution error.
Why the $144 difference does not establish a wrongful breach
Upcomers’ official daily drawdown documentation states that the calculation uses whichever is higher between account balance and equity at 00:00 UTC. The resulting threshold is then monitored against live equity, including unrealised gains and losses on open positions.
The gap looks big on paper, and it is, but the measures are not the same.
A closed balance and a recorded intraday equity low represent seperate account measurements. Floating losses can reduce equity below the daily threshold before positions are closed, even if the final balance subsequently appears above that level.
Consequently, the customer’s $5,240.25 closing balance does not independently disprove the reported $5,096.19 equity reading. The exact daily threshold also depends on the opening equity snapshot, which the public complaint does not establish.
There is the timing question too, the exact second of it.
Reconstructing the alleged breach would require the server-side equity history immediately before liquidation, execution prices for the 15 positions, applicable commissions and spreads, and confirmation of the risk parameters assigned to that account.
Similar evidentiary problems emerged in recent FundingPips drawdown complaints, where customers questioned the allocation of trading losses to particular daily calculation periods.
Neither the Upcomers trader’s published account nor the firm’s response supplies enough transaction-level data to independently verify the liquidation decision.
Malaysian trader alleges $1,749 payout became $400 offer
A separate November 12 complaint concerns account #240602, which Malaysian trader Cyrrel Lee Wei Pheng says has remained suspended since February 2026.
The customer alleges that two payouts, worth $270 and $1,479.32, have remained unpaid throughout the suspension. Together, the disputed requests total $1,749.32.
According to the review, a member of Upcomers’ Brand Reputation team subsequently contacted the trader about an alternative arrangement involving its Vault A-Book program.
The customer claims he was offered either a $400 cash payment or a $24,000 Vault trading account after requesting release of the original payouts.
He says he declined the alternative trading arrangement and requested the money he believed was owed. The alleged correspondence he recieved from the representative has not been made publicly available for independent examination.
The reported $400 settlement represents approximately 22.9% of the disputed $1,749.32, leaving a difference of $1,349.32. The alternative $24,000 account represents nominal trading-account size, not an equivalent cash payment.
That offer, as the trader describes it, was not really a cash equivalent.
Upcomers’ published payout guidance distinguishes simulated trading balances from monetary rewards. Trading takes place in a simulated environment, while approved payouts are paid in real money through supported withdrawal methods.
The public documentation does not establish that the trader’s two payout requests had received final approval, or whether any account-rule violation justified their suspension. The contractual conditions attached to the alleged Vault offer are also not publicly availble.
The complaint follows an earlier Upcomers payout dispute involving automated trading, in which another customer challenged a withdrawal rejection following extensive Expert Advisor activity. That case concerned different trading rules and does not establish the validity of the Malaysian customer’s claim.
Upcomers responds as payout disputes remain unresolved
Upcomers publicly responded to the Malaysian trader’s review, acknowledging the prolonged account suspension and pending-payout concerns. The company said the case had been escalated to the relevant team for further examination, including the customer’s account history and earlier communications.
Its response did not confirm the reported $400 offer, explain why the original payouts remained outstanding or disclose whether the proposed Vault account would replace any existing payment entitlement.
The two complaints add to previous Upcomers payout and account-restriction allegations documented in an earlier prop trading roundup, including disputes involving withdrawal eligibility and account resets.
Regulators have separately raised concerns about the contractual discretion associated with simulated proprietary trading programs. In a March 2024 warning about prop trading firms, Belgium’s Financial Services and Markets Authority said customers may find it difficult to establish whether they qualify for compensation because firms determine the conditions governing simulated trading and rewards.
That general warning does not constitute a regulatory finding against Upcomers or establish that either November 12 complaint involves a legal violation.
And that leaves the two cases at different places, both still without the records.
The liquidation complaint requires a verifiable account-equity reconstruction, while the payout dispute depends on the original payment entitlements, suspension grounds and settlement correspondence. Upcomers has acknowledged both customers’ concerns, but its public responses have not supplied the additonal evidence necessary to determine whether either contested decision was justified.
Johan Shamshad is Editor-in-Chief at Dave Finances, covering financial markets, digital assets, trading platforms, brokers, fintech, payments and regulation. Since 2023, he has also worked as an editor at Gulf News, the UAE English-language newspaper published by Al Nisr Publishing LLC. His work focuses on market-moving developments, company disclosures, regulatory changes and trading infrastructure, with an emphasis on primary-source verification and practical context for traders and investors.