Head Trader The story of Yusuf, who was nutured by Liquid since 2021 to successful trader who was paid over $20,000 by Liquid in few months in 2022 and was untarget for $200,000 payout
The Meteoric Rise of Yusuf Oluwu
Yusuf Oluwu was once a highly valued trader at Liquid Markets. Starting with the Sniper plan ($10,000), he quickly excelled and used his profits to upgrade to the Zero account ($20,000). On the Zero account, Yusuf’s performance skyrocketed – achieving a 5% target within two weeks and even accomplishing this feat three times in a row during a particularly successful month in 2022. As a result, he was considered one of the company’s top-performing traders.
Investing in Yusuf's Success
Liquid Markets has always been keen to invest in exceptional traders like Yusuf. Having been paid over five times on the Zero account, he was offered the exclusive Nitro account as a reward. The Nitro account, unlike the standard broker account, does not require monthly fees, has a minimum withdrawal request of just 1% target, and requires only 10% growth to double the account. Yusuf eagerly accepted the $20,000 Nitro account, which was granted to him with heavy discount from his earned profits on the Zero account.
The Turning Point: High Leverage and Losses
The Nitro account provided leverage of up to 1:200, and this is where Yusuf’s story took a turn for the worse. High leverage can multiply profits, but it can also amplify losses. Unfortunately, Yusuf experienced the latter, leading to a violation of the maximum drawdown allowed on the Nitro account. Consequently, his account was flagged by risk management and closed.
Yusuf's Plea for Fairness and Understanding
In a message to the support team, Yusuf argued that his partnership with Liquid Markets should be mutually beneficial and fair. He outlined his case, detailing his wins and questioning the handling of his Zero and Nitro plans. He requested the opportunity to run a Zero account alongside his Nitro account and sought clarification on when he would receive the 30% payment on $2,000.
“Hello,
Liquid market is one of the best Prop firm in the industry, no doubt. I believe our partnership should be a symbiosis one (where every one wins). Thus, there should be fairness when the rules are followed.
*My plight*
Zero plan start: 19 April, had 5 wins, paid 3 (less subscription fee) remaining 2 for Nitro plan.
Nitro plan: start 8 July
Rule 1: On Zero plan get full payout less subscription fee for first Payout. Second and third get 30% and Nitro.
Rule 2: Trader can trade Nitro and any other monthly plan simultaneously.
My case:
👉🏼I had 5 wins instead of 3
👉🏼3 was paid less subscription fee
👉🏼 Got Nitro on 8 July (meaning 1 Zero plan subscription was unused)
👉🏼 30% on $2000 unpaid
👉🏼 Zero plan discontinued
I want the management to see to my concise and provide a way forward.
What i want:
👉🏼 I want to run a monthly plan (Zero) concurrently with Nitro (which i still have a month subscription unused)
👉🏼 I want to know when my 30% of $2000 will be paid.
I believe reaching an agreement on these issues will be good for both parties.
I really appreciate it and I will patiently wait for your response. Thanks”
This was when he realized he couldn’t handle high leverage. He requested to go back to the Zero account. Risk allowed him on zero account without having to pay again. Unfortunately he failed to achieve target and subscription expired. He became highly emotional and abusive and went on a break from trading.
The Struggle with High Leverage Continues
Yusuf was allowed to return to the Zero account, but he failed to achieve his target before his subscription expired. After taking a break, he was initially restricted from opening any accounts due to his prior performance. However, he ultimately pleaded his way back in and was allowed to trade on a Lite account – a high-leverage monthly plan.
Trouble Brews on the Lite Account
Internal Risk Report
Based on the flagged dataset with individual account mapping information, lacma:ft-liquid:monitor-012 will analyze the six forex trades flagged on December 20, 2022 18:13 . The analysis will include the currency pair, trade direction, trade size, entry price, stop loss, take profit, exit price, and the profit or loss.
- AUDUSD Trade 1:
- Direction: Sell
- Trade size: 0.1 lot
- Entry price: 0.66343
- Stop loss: 0.99000
- Take profit: Not provided
- Exit price: 0.66734
- Profit/loss: -39.10
Trade 2:
- Direction: Sell
- Trade size: 0.2 lot
- Entry price: 0.66469
- Stop loss: 0.99000
- Take profit: Not provided
- Exit price: 0.66734
- Profit/loss: -53.00
- EURUSD Trade 1:
- Direction: Sell
- Trade size: 0.2 lot
- Entry price: 1.06078
- Stop loss: 1.40000
- Take profit: Not provided
- Exit price: 1.06503
- Profit/loss: -85.00
- GBPUSD Trade 1:
- Direction: Sell
- Trade size: 0.2 lot
- Entry price: 1.21260
- Stop loss: 1.60000
- Take profit: Not provided
- Exit price: 1.21638
- Profit/loss: -75.60
Trade 2:
- Direction: Sell
- Trade size: 0.5 lot
- Entry price: 1.21590
- Stop loss: 1.50000
- Take profit: Not provided
- Exit price: 1.21638
- Profit/loss: -24.00
- USDJPY Trade 1:
- Direction: Buy
- Trade size: 0.1 lot
- Entry price: 132.448
- Stop loss: 130.100
- Take profit: Not provided
- Exit price: 131.901
- Profit/loss: -41.47
In summary, all six trades resulted in losses. The traders behaviour is consistent in historical positions comprising 3 or more trades including minor pair and are all floating losses and the trader may need to review their trading strategy or risk management approach to improve performance related to the 1% rule mandatory for this plan. It was essential to analyze both the fundamentals and technical aspects of the currency pairs involved, as well as considering the timing and market conditions during trade execution. There is no significant standard deviation or events outside scheduled economic nodes. Sentiment is therefore not considered. Open position exposure and available liquidation prices were consistently confirmed to be in excess of $318.15 with confirmation flag event. However this risk exposure is flagged as breach with 100% confidence.
He says his own numbers do not fail the 1% rule and argues. He then starts to make threats – here is the conversation
Liquid Markets, [26/01/2023 15:26]hello
Tgold, [26/01/2023 15:41]Hi
Liquid Markets, [26/01/2023 16:22]yusef?
Tgold, [26/01/2023 16:32]Long time
Liquid Markets, [26/01/2023 16:34]ok so first things first
Liquid Markets, [26/01/2023 16:36]you have now blown your bridges for good by the threats, now risk are fighting with support because they let you resubscribe after the last time you blew up
Liquid Markets, [26/01/2023 16:36]you not arguing the rules, you arguing you did not break the rules?
Liquid Markets, [26/01/2023 16:37]so i requested full investigation report
Liquid Markets, [26/01/2023 16:37]this will detail the flags
Liquid Markets, [26/01/2023 16:38]remember i told you before the system produces flags then human goes to check the numbers
Tgold, [26/01/2023 16:43]
Liquid Markets, [26/01/2023 16:44]we will then produce blog article where we include the whole history, including previous payouts, previous rejected payouts and this specific one and the proofs, and your threats as well. keep these terms in mind;
Liquid Markets, [26/01/2023 16:44]Except to the extent any applicable law provides otherwise, the Agreement and any access to or use of our Backing will be governed by the laws of the UK, excluding its conflict of law provisions. The proper venue for any disputes arising out of or relating to the Agreement and any access to or use of our Support that are not otherwise subject to arbitration (as indicated below) will be the courts located in the UK.
Tgold, [26/01/2023 16:48]No problem then
Liquid Markets, [26/01/2023 16:49]Gross negligence or Malicious Intent on your part, including social media posts or reviews falsely implying a breach of agreement terms by our firm. Any action taken by us that conforms to the stipulations within the terms and conditions agreed by you during the onboarding process may not be offered publicly without the full context of the specific clause in the terms and conditions agreed to.
Liquid Markets, [26/01/2023 16:50]You will be liable for any loss of income due to damage to the reputation for our firm as a result of publishing falsehoods or engaging in slanderous or libelous conduct
Liquid Markets, [26/01/2023 16:50]so this is our position on your conduct
Tgold, [26/01/2023 16:51]Then provide me proofs of my violation or pay me, simple
Liquid Markets, [26/01/2023 16:52]Ofcourse, this is correct
Liquid Markets, [26/01/2023 16:53]I will receive full investigation report hopefully tomorrow
Tgold, [26/01/2023 16:53]If I don’t get clearly picture or payout by Feb 3 then I will take actions
Liquid Markets, [26/01/2023 16:54]if you are taking legal action then we will produce in court, no need to rush now
Liquid Markets, [26/01/2023 16:55]if you want me to look into whether they made mistake, i will look myself in the report
Liquid Markets, [26/01/2023 16:56]for now tell me in english, what mistake they made
Liquid Markets, [26/01/2023 16:56]I dont know these numbers
Liquid Markets, [26/01/2023 17:02]take action tomorrow, we simply do not care for your threats, you have history of misinterpreting our rules, we even politely asked you not to continue with us unless you accepted the rules.
Liquid Markets, [26/01/2023 17:05]do this, i will check the report, if they wrong i will help you as usual
Tgold, [26/01/2023 17:25]I was told I violated the rules, they gave me proof I compare with mine and I was total falsehood. I mailed and chat Allen like a gentle man and no positive response was given.
Tgold, [26/01/2023 17:25]I violated no rules
Tgold, [26/01/2023 17:25]All I want is my payout
Liquid Markets, [26/01/2023 17:42]look, this is ok to dispute, to be threatening is simply to not get anything beyond refund, even if you were correct. they fine people for breaching, your behaviour in the past is considered, risk did not want to finance you, didnt you get Nitro before then it went wrong, I dont know, I dont remember, I dont care, UNLESS they have done messed up.
Liquid Markets, [26/01/2023 17:45]if you not right though then I have no sympathy after the history you have with risk guys, it was like love hate, you call them crooks yet you get paid and come back, wtf
Liquid Markets, [26/01/2023 17:46]you was doing good with low leverage then you got greedy for high leverage, i think, i dont know, i dont care
Liquid Markets, [26/01/2023 17:48]the model is if you break rules, like football offside, you forfeit or get fined, its how the winners can be promoted
Liquid Markets, [26/01/2023 17:48]we discussed this before, why did you come back if you dont like it
Liquid Markets, [26/01/2023 17:49]yet if you didnt violate, then ofcourse we will make them pay, but its machine that flagged you first
Liquid Markets, [26/01/2023 17:49]so just explain to me in English why they are wrong
Liquid Markets, [26/01/2023 18:22]you know what, i dont have time for this if you dont either, you broke the rules, you dont get paid. Go sue them all you want, i tried to help, you giving me attitudes, we done here
Tgold, [26/01/2023 18:26]Get the report, review it then we can have a way forward.
Tgold, [30/01/2023 11:33]Hello
Tgold, [30/01/2023 11:33]Any update for me pls
Liquid Markets, [01/02/2023 17:32]they not giving me anything either, said too busy, understaffed one guy on holiday, they said they provided proof before
Liquid Markets, [01/02/2023 17:33]allen is your best bet for info
Tgold, [02/02/2023 20:10]Too bad, hard work n money gone to waste. 
Yusuf’s went away to another subscription firm who he says scammed him. He then returns 2 months later to begin his ‘terror’ campaign out his threats of ruining the name of the firm that showed him how to extract over $20,000 consistently from low leverage Liquid plans
Yusuf’s thinks its safe to sit at home and threaten a firm with over 1000 traders relying on it for income
9 Comments
Michelle
March 23, 2023Wow ,a very interesting story. Traders should be genuine without ruining a firm’s reputation because things didn’t work their way
Suile
March 23, 2023What a greedy horrible person. Begging when he needs something then crying like baby when he loses, then slapping you from the back like a coward.
[email protected]
March 23, 2023Just why would anyone want to do this, the highest level of deceit is self deceit. congratulate yourself when you do good, caution yourself when you do poorly
Godwin
March 31, 2023Everyone should trade based on what they are good at
Kevin Maina
March 31, 2023Wow, he should be ashamed for ruining Liquid reputation
Elias Gachanja
March 31, 2023Reading rules is very important, the fact that he was paid severally means a lot. Other firms out here you won’t even make it to the 2nd payout, they will do anything to work against you
Simon Mukeo
March 31, 2023Some traders are funny. Now the firm became bad when they didn’t pay because of Violating rules.
David
March 31, 2023I’ve known liquid markets to be a legit company, he should be blocked from trading with the company. He’s really terrible
Mary
March 31, 2023Yusuf should have done better by reading the rules and shouldn’t blame the company for his failures.