ROI or follower PnL: who is actually worth copying

The return on the trader's own account is the number everyone watches and the number that matters least. The profit-sharing model means two accounts with identical ROI can leave their followers with completely different results. This guide explains the gap and how to read both numbers.

The two numbers

Field	What it is	Where it comes from
ROI / PnL of the trader	the account being copied	YieldRateE4, ProfitE8 from leader-income
Followers' PnL	what the people copying actually earned	FollowerYieldE8, cumFollowerYieldE8

On every trader page both are shown side by side, plus the trader's fee (shareProfitRateE8) which is subtracted from follower profit, not from the trader's ROI.

Why they diverge

1. Profit sharing. If the trader takes 30% of follower profit, a follower needs the account to earn ~43% gross to keep 30% net. A trader with +20% ROI and a 30% fee produces almost nothing for followers.

2. Different capital. A trader's ROI is a percentage of their AUM. If they run a small account with high leverage and you copy with a different margin, your percentage result differs.

3. The execution gap. Followers get market orders, the master may get limit orders. Slippage on a fast re-entry sequence is real money, and it lands entirely on the follower.

4. Filters and caps. Per-order minimum, daily loss limit, per-symbol margin caps and CopyGuard cause failed copies. Failed copies cost nothing but they also earn nothing - while the master keeps the whole move.

5. Timing. A trader's ROI window and the follower's window are different periods. If you subscribed three weeks ago, your result has nothing to do with their 180-day ROI.

Which one to trust

• For "is this account skilful": the trader's own return, minus the risk components (drawdown, volatility, liquidation days).
• For "is this worth subscribing to": the followers' PnL over the last 90 days, together with the fee.

Our review text prints both with a plain reading: money still flowing to followers, or not. "Followers were up 120k all-time but are down 18k over 90 days" is a materially different statement from "followers earned 120k, of which 40k came in the last 90 days" - and only the second one is useful to a new subscriber.

The cheapest possible check

Open the page and look at two numbers:

1. Return per month after the fee - it is the first tile in the review. If it is ≈0% while the trader's own monthly ROI looks impressive, the fee is eating the edge and no amount of good trading helps you.
2. Followers' PnL, 90 days - the direction matters more than the amount. A consistently negative number with a positive all-time number means the good part of the story is behind you.

Why we do not build a score out of this

Follower PnL is a consequence, not a skill: it depends on when subscribers arrived, how much they deposited, and the platform's own fee mechanics. One good month of new subscribers can make it look positive regardless of skill. So it is reported in full and used as advice, while the rating itself scores the trader's own risk-adjusted behaviour.

A practical order of operations

1. Filter by rating - this already contains the risk penalties.
2. Look at liquidations - one is a warning, three is a filter.
3. Look at return per month after fee - is there anything left for you?
4. Look at followers' PnL over 90 days - is it flowing right now?
5. Check the trader's fee and decide whether you would still subscribe at half the size with a PCSL set.

None of this is investment advice, and none of it makes a trader safe to follow. It just removes the two most expensive misunderstandings: copying a high-ROI account whose fee leaves you nothing, and copying a low-fee account that pays followers nothing.