What the evidence can tell us.
People deserve a fair hearing even when their account is small. That includes checking evidence that supports the firm’s decision and correcting a finding when the records change.
From submission to a finding
Every submission starts as a report. Waitlist entries stay separate from evidence cases. We identify the firm and legal entity, specific program, payout request and dates. Multiple reports about the same payout are linked as duplicates and counted once.
The review compares the payout request and refusal with the agreement and rules that applied at the relevant time, full trading records, and relevant support exchanges. We distinguish the trader’s view from our own finding. Screenshots establish what was submitted; they do not alone prove authenticity or show the full context.
Rule findings remain separate from progress status. The options are not assessed, more records needed, records support the cited breach, reviewed records do not support the denial, or ambiguous. Documenting a refusal proves the refusal occurred; deciding whether it was justified takes further work.
How firm comparisons will work
Scorecards will disclose unique evidence cases received, cases reviewed, supported rule breaches, unsupported denials, unclear findings and reported resolutions. Reason categories and dates will be visible. Amounts stay separated by currency. Fees, simulated profit and cash payouts are different figures.
Before any public ranking, the comparison needs an explicit date range, a meaningful sample of reviewed cases, independent checks of the supporting records and an opportunity for the firm to respond, within the submitter’s permissions. Until then, the status is insufficient reviewed evidence. There is no automatic star rating or public accusation from the inbox.
Complaints are self-selected. Comparing counts alone favors smaller firms and can reflect audience reach or organized submissions. Even adding successful payouts from this intake does not create a representative industry sample. An overall denial rate requires a reliable denominator of comparable payout requests. We will state what we do and do not know.
Permission, replies and corrections
Private-only cases remain private. Aggregate-use permission, anonymous coverage and firm contact are separate choices. Outreach requires permission and happens after review. We include a substantive firm explanation and the limits of any finding. An allegation can remain disputed.
Corrections and later payments must be recorded alongside the earlier decision. We retain the review history privately and correct published coverage visibly. Submission and fair review are free. Paying for Stoic Edge cannot buy a better finding, priority coverage or removal of a supported finding. Any relevant commercial relationship must be disclosed.
Case records expire after 90 days or can be withdrawn with the receipt. The live private totals reflect the remaining active records, rather than a permanent industry history. Any later public archive requires a separately reviewed retention and permission process.
Method version: October 22, 2026. No firms are ranked or accused by this page.