What we checked
We fetched the published terms (including terms PDFs) of 18 major prop firms on 21 August 2026 and read them in full, looking for clauses that restrict what traders (or affiliates) may say about the firm in public.
Summary of findings:
- Clauses naming review sites, social media or blogs as prohibited venues for negative statements: 5 firms
- Clauses banning publication of support communications and internal correspondence: 5 firms
- Broad reputation clauses or promo-scoped restrictions: 2 firms
- No such clause found: 9 firms
Every record, with its verbatim excerpt, is in the tracker. Among them: a clause making criticism a “fundamental breach” with immediate forfeiture of accrued profits and reward balance; a clause reserving the right to disclose a client’s real name and personal details if they take a dispute public; and a clause banning anything “that could be construed as negative”, irrevocably and forever, with the firm the sole and final judge of breach.
Why it matters
A review score cannot tell you whether critical customers risk breaching their contract by posting. Where such clauses exist, negative voices are structurally suppressed — the same 4.5 does not mean the same thing.
Disclosure: this site is an affiliate partner of FTMO, TradeDay, Fintokei, The5%ers and Funded7; three of the five (Fintokei, The5%ers, Funded7) carry such clauses and are recorded plainly. Enforceability varies by jurisdiction; this is information, not legal advice.