@RonakShahG Says $80,000 MyFundedFutures Payout Was Held After Re-KYC

On X, trader @RonakShahG publicly alleged that MyFundedFutures withheld an $80,000 payout, writing that after he requested withdrawal the firm reopened KYC and, in his words, leveled false allegations before freezing the account.

The post, dated February 15 and addressed to a thread that tagged multiple prop firms including MyFundedFutures, states the figure plainly: $80,000 made, withdrawal requested, then a re-KYC and what the trader describes as false allegations leading to the account and payout being held. The message was framed as a direct rebuke to firms comparing payout policies in public.

The post itself is the entirety of the public evidence. It does not specify which account plan was used, which futures contracts were traded, the time taken to reach the $80,000 figure, or the stated reason MyFundedFutures gave for the additional KYC step. An image was attached to the tweet, but its contents are not described in the post text, so this article treats only the written claim as established.

“$80K made. Withdrawal requested. Suddenly re-KYC, false allegations, account and payout withheld.”— @RonakShahG on X, February 15

Context from the firm matters for readers weighing the dispute. MyFundedFutures was founded in 2023 in Texas and operates across five plans with payout caps that vary by tier, ranging from $5,000 per cycle on the Core plan to a $100,000 cumulative cap on the Pro plan, as the firm reports. An $80,000 single withdrawal would therefore sit on the higher end of the firm's published structure, which typically draws closer compliance review at most prop firms.

What the post does not establish is equally important. There is no public response from MyFundedFutures attached to this thread, no documentation of the alleged KYC findings, and no confirmation that the funds remain withheld at the time of writing. The claim is the trader's account of events; the firm's side has not been published alongside it.

For the funded-trading audience, the takeaway is narrow. A public, dated, on-record allegation from an identifiable handle is itself a data point worth logging, particularly when it concerns a five-figure withdrawal. It is not, on its own, proof of wrongdoing by either party, and readers should treat it as an open dispute pending further disclosure from either side.