A veteran futures trader has filed a federal lawsuit against Topstep, one of the largest proprietary trading firms in the futures industry, accusing the company of running a “systematic and deceptive scheme” designed to collect fees from traders while using changing rules to block payouts and profitability.
Vincent McCrudden filed the complaint pro se (representing himself without an attorney) on April 9, 2026, in U.S. District Court under case number 3:26-cv-00816-WWB-LLL. The 18-page document, first publicized today on X by futures trader and prop-firm analyst @jmutrades, claims Topstep repeatedly altered trading parameters, imposed restrictive conditions on “live” funded accounts, and locked earned capital in inaccessible reserves that required “mathematically near-impossible returns” to unlock.
The claim alleges changing rules, restrictive conditions, technical issues and more
According to excerpts shared in the X thread, McCrudden alleges that after traders pass Topstep’s simulated “Trading Combine” and “XFA” (Express Funded Account) stages and begin receiving payouts, they are “called up to live” — marketed as “the big leagues” — where rules change materially. He claims he consistently profited in earlier stages trading Gold (GC), Silver (SI), Nasdaq (NQ), and E-mini S&P 500 (ES) futures, only to face liquidation after liquidation in the live program due to a tight $2,000 daily loss limit and a maximum of just three contracts.
The suit further alleges repeated technical glitches on Topstep’s platform that “invariably operate to the detriment of traders,” resulting in unfair liquidations with no adequate remediation. It cites “tens of thousands of complaints” across Reddit, Discord, and Facebook describing similar patterns of rule changes, withheld payouts, and poor dispute resolution.
Topstep, founded in 2012 and based in Chicago, is a prominent futures prop firm. Traders pay for access to its Trading Combine evaluation program, then progress to funded accounts where Topstep supplies the capital and traders keep up to 90% of profits (subject to strict risk rules). The company markets the program as a low-risk path for skilled traders to trade live futures without risking their own money.
McCrudden’s filing does not yet include a response from Topstep, which has not publicly commented on the suit as of this writing. Prop firms commonly include mandatory arbitration clauses in their terms of service, which could become a point of contention.
Plaintiff’s Background Adds Context McCrudden is a former commodities trader with a notable regulatory and legal history. In 2011, he pleaded guilty in federal court to two counts of transmitting threats to kill more than 40 current and former officials at the SEC, FINRA, NFA, and CFTC. The threats stemmed from ongoing enforcement actions against him and included an email titled “You’re a Dead Man” and a public website featuring an “Execution List” of regulators. He had been in custody since his January 2011 arrest and faced a maximum of 10 years in prison.
The X thread that broke the story also shared links to these 2011 press releases, noting McCrudden’s past while highlighting the new lawsuit. Community reactions on the platform are sharply divided: some traders cheer the suit as overdue scrutiny of prop-firm practices, while others question the plaintiff’s suitability to lead industry reform and point to Topstep’s long-standing terms of service.
What This Means for the Prop Trading Industry Proprietary trading firms have boomed in recent years by promising retail traders access to large capital pools. Critics, however, have long complained about opaque rule changes, high failure rates in evaluations, and difficulty withdrawing profits — issues McCrudden’s complaint echoes on a broader scale. The case could draw attention to whether such firms function more like subscription services than true profit-sharing partnerships, especially if claims of an “unregistered commodity pool” or inadequate accounting hold up.
As of now, the lawsuit remains in its earliest stages. No hearing date has been set, and Topstep has not filed any response. The trading community will be watching closely — @jmutrades has promised updates and shared the full complaint PDF for public review.
This story is developing. Stay tuned for any official statements from Topstep or court filings.
