If you have spent any time in futures prop trading over the last year, you have almost certainly come across ProjectX (PX for short). For a while, it felt like the future of prop trading platforms. Sleek UI. TradingView charts. Built-in risk controls. Mobile-friendly. Fast execution. Traders liked it. Prop firms liked it. Adoption spread quickly.
Fast forward to today, and ProjectX is at the center of one of the biggest controversies the prop trading industry has seen in years.
What Is ProjectX?
ProjectX emerged as a modern, web-based futures trading platform designed specifically for proprietary trading firms. Unlike legacy desktop platforms, it offered a clean interface, tight integration with TradingView charting, customizable risk settings, and easy access for newer traders. For prop firms, it solved a major problem by enforcing risk rules automatically while still offering a trader-friendly experience.
Over the past year, many futures prop firms adopted ProjectX, either as a primary platform or as one of several options. Firms like TopOne, Tradify, Alpha Futures, and others built their evaluation and funded programs around it. At the same time, Topstep launched TopstepX, a branded version of ProjectX, and steadily pushed traders toward it.
The Topstep Announcement That Changed Everything
In late November 2025, the industry received news that completely changed the trajectory of ProjectX.
ProjectX notified prop firms that it would revoke third-party licensing and end support for all firms except Topstep, effective February 2026. Going forward, Topstep would be the only prop firm allowed to use ProjectX.
For firms that had built their business around the platform, this was a shock. For traders, it was even worse.
Firms Are Migrating and It Is a Mess
Prop firms now face a hard deadline. They must migrate thousands of traders, including evaluations, funded accounts, rules, and historical data, off ProjectX and onto alternative platforms. That kind of transition is never smooth, and this one is happening under intense pressure.
Some traders are being told they will need to:
Even firms handling the transition responsibly are facing backlash simply because traders did not ask for this change.
Why Did This Happen?
Official explanations point to operational complexity, compliance demands, and rising support costs. Unofficially, most of the industry sees this as a strategic exclusivity deal.
By going all in with Topstep, ProjectX simplifies its business model. The cost of that decision, however, is trust across the broader prop trading ecosystem.
And that trust matters.
Community Reaction: Anger, Frustration, and Fatigue
The trader response has been brutal.
Social media, Discord servers, and X are flooded with complaints:
The tone has shifted from frustration to resignation.
“ProjectX is completely cooked…”
Many traders openly say they will not touch another evaluation on ProjectX unless it is their only option. Others are actively warning new traders to stay away entirely.
“I know we all loved the UI and risk settings, but it’s toast.”
And perhaps the most telling sentiment of all:
If after today you choose to continue to trade on a platform that has displayed massive issues at an increasing frequency, you should not be complaining or upset. You should expect it.
Topstep Is Taking the Heat
Because of the exclusivity deal, Topstep now bears the full weight of ProjectX’s reliability problems. Traders are tagging Topstep leadership directly, demanding compensation, resets, refunds, or access to alternative platforms.
There is also a deeper concern being voiced by many traders:
If the prop firm you trade with owns the only platform they allow you to trade on, you should at least raise an eyebrow with some skepticism.
When platform choice disappears, traders lose leverage and risk increases.
Industry Reaction: A Wake-Up Call
Behind the scenes, many prop firms see this situation as a cautionary tale. Relying on a single proprietary platform introduces concentration risk across operations, technology, and reputation.
The ProjectX situation has accelerated industry conversations around platform redundancy, broker-powered models, and long-term stability.
What This Means for Traders
For traders, the lesson is clear. Platform risk is real.
Execution quality, uptime, data integrity, and platform choice matter just as much as rules and profit splits. Chasing the prettiest UI or the easiest evaluation is not worth it if the infrastructure cannot hold up under stress.
This is why traders should strongly consider established, broker-powered prop firms with multiple platform options, such as:
Even newer firms like Hola Prime (code: EDGE) offer at least five different trading platforms, reducing single-point failure risk.
Longevity, regulation, and platform choice matter, especially in volatile markets.
In prop trading, you are not just choosing rules. You are choosing infrastructure. And when infrastructure cracks, the consequences land squarely on the trader.
So choose wisely.