Discretionary FX. 9 years - most of them wrong. Darwinex #XTXJ To me, crazy taxi is just a regular taxi.
Joined October 2022
- Tweets3.9K
- Following253
- Followers1.5K
- Likes18.6K
V retweeted
🚨Scam alert @FundingPips @Khldfx — Serious Concerns Regarding FundingPips
I never expected to make a public statement like this, but traders deserve to know what has happened.
Recently, after passing my $100K Phase 2 challenge, FundingPips introduced additional conditions for on-demand payouts:
35% consistency rule.
Minimum 7 profitable days, with at least 0.5% profit each day.
1% per-trade restriction under their risk-tracking system.
I raised my concerns publicly because I disagreed with these conditions. However, I want to make one thing absolutely clear: I eventually accepted ALL their conditions.
After accepting the new rules, I was moved to the onboarding process. I completed the required steps and was waiting for my funded account.
Then something unexpected happened.
My Twitter post discussing these new conditions gained significant attention, reaching approximately 65,000 views.
Shortly afterward, FundingPips closed my funded account without providing any clear or reasonable explanation.
And that wasn’t all:
My funded account was terminated.
I was blocked from their Discord community.
I was banned from purchasing any new challenges.
I received no satisfactory explanation for these actions.
Let me be clear: I accepted their conditions. I completed onboarding. So why was my account closed afterward?
Is publicly raising concerns about a prop firm’s policies now a reason to terminate a trader’s funded account?
I have invested approximately $16,000, received over $27,000 in payouts, and supported this company for a considerable period.
My request is straightforward:
Reinstate my funded account.
If you are unwilling to do so, refund my challenge expenses.
I am asking @Khldfx to address this matter publicly and provide a proper explanation.
Please watch the full video and review all attached evidence before reaching a conclusion.
Repost this as much as possible and tag @Khldfx. Traders deserve transparency, fairness, and accountability.
@FundingPips @Khldfx
@LORDFX_786 @SF__Trades @avikkfp @propfirmeye @PropFirmMedia
🚨 ALERT | @FundingPips @Khldfx
After successfully passing Phase 2, I received an email asking me to accept the On-Demand Payout model, which comes with the following additional restrictions:
• 35% consistency rule
• Minimum 7 profitable days, with at least 0.5% profit per day
• A striking system limiting risk to 1% per trade
My question is simple: How is a trader supposed to generate consistent profits under these restrictions?
I purchased a $100K account for $650 when prices were increased. I successfully passed both evaluation phases without violating a single rule.
Throughout this process, the announcement was clear that there would be no restrictions on risk per trade.
Introducing these conditions after a trader has completed both phases is extremely disappointing and raises serious concerns about transparency and fairness.
I urge @FundingPips and the management team to reconsider these conditions and honour the rules under which traders purchased and completed their challenges.
Traders deserve clarity and consistency, not unexpected restrictions after passing an evaluation.
@propfirmeye @PropFirmMedia @propfundsquad @avikkfp @LORDFX_786
V retweeted
I drank so much milk directly from the Gold cash cows utters that the bitch is anorexic and I got colitis so the dairy is hitting hard but the profits offset the pain.
V retweeted
KNOWING WHEN YOUR EDGE IS DETERIORATING
Your strategy can stop working long before your equity curve makes it obvious…
- An edge rarely disappears with one catastrophic loss
Sometimes it erodes gradually:
- smaller winners
- worse execution
- fewer quality setups
- or a market regime your strategy wasnt built for
The research I found:
“A study of 60 published investment strategies found that their Sharpe ratios fell by roughly 50% after publication. The authors linked much of the decay to overfitting and inflated backtest results—not simply competition. (McLean & Pontiff, 2016; related follow-up research.)”
What should you monitor?
• Rolling expectancy:
Are you still earning positive R per trade?
• Profit factor:
Is gross profit shrinking relative to gross loss?
• Execution costs:
Are spread and slippage eating more of your edge?
• Market regime:
Are your results deteriorating specifically in the conditions your strategy should handle?
• Statistical significance:
Is the change meaningful or just normal variance?
One bad week proves very little.
A persistent decline across multiple metrics deserves investigation.
The framework we need to work on:
- Define performance thresholds before emotions take over
- Compare live results with realistic backtest expectations
- Separate regime mismatch from genuine strategy deterioration
- Reduce risk, retest, or stop if predefined conditions are breached
So a serious takeaway:
Dont abandon a valid edge because of random losses.
But dont defend a failing strategy because ur emotionally attached to its backtest
- Monitor the evidence!
Adapt before the drawdown
forces you to.
V retweeted
"My lesson from Soros is to start every meeting at my boutique by convincing everyone that we are a bunch of idiots who know nothing and are mistake-prone, but happen to be endowed with the rare privilege of knowing it." - Nassim Nicholas Taleb in Fooled by Randomness
V retweeted
[Writing this in a personal capacity, not on behalf of my employer (Anthropic).]
Jacob’s thread is very worth reading. Here’s my birds-eye view of the situation with risks from AI:
1. AI developers believe their technology could cause human extinction (or similarly bad outcomes). This could happen in the next few years. In general, the more senior the employee, the more concerned they are.
2. Why do AI developers continue despite the risk? Due to a mixture of commercial incentives and a belief that they are in a race with other, less responsible AI developers that will abuse the technology or develop it less safely.
3. Unlike traditional software, we can’t “program” AIs to behave how we’d like. AIs frequently severely misbehave. For instance, AIs from multiple developers recently hacked their way out of secure evaluation environments and into real-world companies, even though no one asked them to do this.
4. We have methods that can nudge AIs towards better behavior, but nothing that can robustly align them. Insofar as there is a plan, it’s to make sure that AIs are good enough at alignment training that they can align their successors better than we can align current AIs.
5. Many AI developer staff desperately want to slow down to figure out how to build AI more safely. That was the intent of this open letter (which I signed): pacingthefrontier.com/
I work on safety research at Anthropic because I hope my work will reduce the chance of these extinction-level bad outcomes.
V retweeted
Topic:
Market Microstructure & Price Discovery
- Most day traders study the chart
Institutions also study what happens underneath the chart
This is market microstructure:
- who is trading
- where liquidity sits
- how orders interact
- how those interactions turn into price
The first uncomfortable truth:
There is no single global EURUSD order book
- Spot FX is largely OTC and fragmented across dealers, electronic venues and liquidity providers (mentioned this before)
BIS research says dealers match more than 80% of customer trades internally through their own liquidity pools
So when someone on Twitter says:
“Institutions are hunting the stops sitting at 1.100”
Be skeptical haha
There isnt one giant institutional order book everyone can see…
The scale is insane
Global FX turnover reached approximately:
$9.6 TRILLION PER DAY in April 2025.
Thats up 28% from $7.5T in 2022
- approximately 89.2% of all FX trades involved USD on one side heh
Youre trading inside one of the largest and most complex financial markets on Earth…
And here where it gets REALLY interesting:
- Order flow can contain information.
“A famous study by Evans & Lyons examined Deutsche mark/USD trading and found that their order-flow model produced an R² above 60% for daily exchange-rate changes in their sample.
They also estimated that $1 billion of net dollar purchases was associated with about a 0.5% move in the dollar/deutsche-mark price in that market/sample.”
Thats a historical research result-not a rule saying “$1B always moves EURUSD 0.5%.”
The important insight is:
Actual trading pressure can contain information about future prices.
V retweeted
The European Parliament voted AGAINST Chat Control. 314 to 276.
And it passed anyway.
Let me tell you how: they needed 361 votes to say no. On the last day before vacation. Every empty seat counted as a yes.
They lost the vote. They won the law.
That’s not democracy. That’s a trick. #ChatControl
