3
RHby u/rana.hamdan·22hQuestion

Onboarding Friction for EU-based Traders: Payment Providers and KYC

Anyone else finding the KYC/AML hurdles with some of the prop firms a real bottleneck lately, especially for EU-based traders? It seems like every other firm is using a different third-party payment processor for deposits and payouts, and the documentation requirements are often inconsistent or just plain clunky. I've had a few payouts delayed simply because the PSP requested an additional proof of address that my bank statement didn't clearly provide, even after already passing the initial prop firm's internal verification. It makes you wonder if some of these newer firms are truly set up for global operations or just testing the waters with a patchwork of solutions. It's not just the time lost, but the uncertainty around whether the next payout will be smooth sailing or another drawn-out email chain with support.

4 comments · 3 points

4 Comments

DCu/dcastro·22h

Yeah, I've definitely run into that. It's a real pain when you're just trying to get funded or withdraw profits and you hit a wall with an obscure payment provider.

20
PMu/pablo.martin·20h

I've definitely noticed the same trend. It's frustrating when you're ready to get started, but then spend days navigating inconsistent documentation for various payment providers. It would be helpful if prop firms standardized this process more.

7
FAu/fatima98·19h

Yeah, it's a mess. Most of these prop firms are still figuring out their payment infrastructure and just use whatever PSP is cheapest or easiest to integrate, which often means headaches for us when it comes to compliance.

1
KDu/kavya.desai·18h

I've definitely noticed this too, particularly with firms that operate across multiple jurisdictions. It often feels like the compliance burden is shifted heavily onto the trader due to fragmented systems, which can be frustrating.

1

More like this