The Trading Pit
The Liechtenstein registration is real and verifiable — three named entities with published numbers. It falls on a rule added in June 2025: CFDs Prime accounts now require three "minimum profitable days" of 0.5% each, a payout gate that appears only in a help-centre article, never in marketing.
Pinorena Capital backing is financial, not regulatory — it is a private-equity investor. Its founder co-founded the regulated broker Tickmill, but that is a personal track record, not a licensing relationship. The Trading Pit itself holds no financial licence.
Crossed one of the seven hard bars. Open the row and it names which one, with the mechanism spelled out. This is not a low grade — no quantity of virtue elsewhere buys it off, which is why it carries no rank at all.
Disqualified for
Trustpilot: fabricated-reviews warning
Trustpilot withholds the rating and serves a fabricated-reviews warning — a third party concluding the firm faked its own reviews. A low score is not this; every prop firm has angry traders. This is separate from having no legal entity: a firm can publish its registration number and still be caught doing it.
Scorecard
8Trails on live equity, then freezes at your starting balance
A named company, but no financial regulator anywhere — or a light-touch one only
A lifetime ceiling, or a rule that can block payment
Overstates size or speed, but costs you nothing
Reviews suppressed for manipulation, or the firm is gone
Each axis is scored 0–5 against a published scale. The line under each bar is the rung this firm landed on — not our summary of it, the scale entry itself.
The score is published anyway, because it is the honest picture: a firm can be strong on four axes and still be disqualified on one mechanism. A disqualifier is not a low grade — it is a rule we will not trade under at any price.
Trustpilot
score withheld by Trustpilot — this is the figure it computes but will not show
Trustpilot removed reviews it found to be fake and withheld the rating. This is not a low score — it is a third party concluding the firm wrote its own praise.
What this firm published
Everything below is quoted from a page we opened, on the date shown. The quotes are in the firm’s own language, exactly as published — never edited, never shortened, never swapped for a translation. On the Spanish edition our own rendering appears underneath each one, unquoted and marked as ours: the quotation marks on this site mean the words are the firm’s, and nothing we wrote ever wears them. Where we have not read enough to put a number on an axis, we say so instead of guessing.
—
Can you even pass?
Almost nobody who pays for an evaluation ever reaches a funded account, so this is the part of the product most customers actually buy. Every firm advertises its profit target; none of them advertises that target next to how much you are allowed to lose while chasing it.
—
Can you keep the money?
The drawdown takes the account away; the payout rules take the money. Answered by whichever of the two we can measure and is worse — they are two ways of losing the same thing, so a good half cannot pay for a bad one.
—
Is anyone behind it?
A named company, a market, and rules you could read before paying. These three do not substitute for one another — a company you can sue does not stop existing because the account is a simulation — so this is the average of the ones we could measure, not the worst.
We have not read a single plan of this firm, so neither of the two axes that belong to a plan — the floor and the payout path — has anything under it yet.
The rules in writing
we did not read enough to sayCould you read the rule before paying, and can they change it afterwards?
Where the rule that binds you is publishedin the document its own contract points at4/4
“The Product Objectives published on our Website at the time of your order form part of the Product Contract”If the rule that binds you lives in a help article your contract never mentions, you did not sign it.
Can it change the rules without noticeyes, and it says so0.60/3
“Amendments to the Schedules of these GTC , Product Parameters, Product Objectives, Product-specific features and Prohibited Trading Practices that exclusively affect new orders of Products may take effect without prior notice”The clause that makes every dated verdict perishable, including ours. Near-universal, so not fatal.
Below 60% read we publish no number at all, because a grade computed from two facts out of six is not a lenient grade — it is a different measurement wearing the same label.
We have not compared their pages against each other.
Is the binding document dated
The company behind it
we did not read enough to sayIf it goes wrong, which company do you claim against, and under whose laws?
Below 60% read we publish no number at all, because a grade computed from two facts out of six is not a lenient grade — it is a different measurement wearing the same label.
Almost no firm here has a financial regulator, because selling simulated evaluations is not a regulated activity anywhere. Of the 114 firms we scored by hand, 96 sat in the bottom two rungs of backing for this reason. So we do not count it against anyone — it only adds when a firm genuinely has one.
The company you contract with · Where it is registered · Its registration number · That company owns the brand · The people behind it are named
The market
we did not read enough to sayDo your orders reach a market, or is all of it a simulation?
Below 60% read we publish no number at all, because a grade computed from two facts out of six is not a lenient grade — it is a different measurement wearing the same label.
Almost none names a broker or a clearing house either, and that follows from the account being a simulation rather than being a second, separate failing. Charging for both would count one fact twice.
What the funded account is · Conditions to reach a real market
We read its rules and scored it, but did not price every plan it sells individually.