Algo Exchange Review
A research review of Algo Exchange, a US provider licensing a library of black-box automated futures strategies that run on its servers and trade in customers’ own brokerage accounts.
A sizeable public record exists: provider documentation, legal disclosures, a federal court docket and a large body of customer reviews. The basic delivery model — cloud execution into a customer-held broker account — is described consistently.
The strategies themselves are deliberately undisclosed, no independently verified performance record was identified, and the provider’s own disclosures describe its results as simulated or hypothetical. The contracting legal entity is also named inconsistently across official pages.
Leveraged futures trading can cause losses exceeding expectations. Provider-reported or hypothetical results do not establish a customer’s future return or maximum loss.
What is Algo Exchange?
Algo Exchange is a Florida-based software business that licenses access to automated trading strategies for US stock-index futures. It operates as a multi-strategy platform rather than a single trading bot.
According to the provider, each strategy runs on its own servers in a “master account”. When a strategy trades, the order passes through the Algo Exchange platform to the broker API of every connected customer account. The customer installs nothing and does not see the strategy rules.
The provider says its strategies come from an in-house developer, outside quants, traders whose logic it codes, and systems whose commercial rights it has purchased. These sources are not named.
A separate product, AI Portfolios, offers automated securities portfolios through Interactive Brokers. It uses different assets, a different broker requirement and its own hypothetical performance basis, and is treated separately throughout this review.
Official Algo Exchange website ↗A rotating strategy library, not one flagship bot
The homepage names only “Apollo Algo”. Most other system names come from the provider’s own Trustpilot replies and from customer reviews, so no single system is presented here as “the” current product.
Provider replies and reviews name Apollo (V2), Cairo, Tango (V3), Millennium, Pershing, Predator, Falcon (V2/V3), Blackhawk, Spartan, Cobra, Titan, Raptor and an “Ultra Growth ETF”. Raptor is listed as “Delisted” in one provider reply and with a 2025 return in another. Individual logic and settings are not public.
How Algo Exchange reaches a customer account
The flow below is the provider’s description. It is broadly consistent with customer accounts, but the broker-side permissions have not been independently mapped.
The user opens and funds a futures account at Interactive Brokers, StoneX or Dorman Trading.
After licensing a strategy, the user connects the account to the platform via the broker’s API.
The strategy fires on a master account running on Algo Exchange’s servers.
The order is passed to the customer’s broker API and filled in the customer’s account.
The provider states: “We do not have access to your account and cannot access your capital at all.” Broker-API integrations for third-party trading tools commonly grant trading authority without transfer rights, and Interactive Brokers documents a review process for such vendors. That makes the description plausible, but does not establish the permissions Algo Exchange actually receives. One reviewer reports that staff “increased the risk and leverage” on their account.
Black-box strategies and AI claims
The homepage FAQ describes systems running on provider servers and transmitting orders through broker APIs. Customer reviews describe the same set-up. No technical audit was identified.
The provider states it uses “Black Box” strategies, withholding rules, sizing and maximum position size. This is an established statement of non-disclosure.
Strategies are said to fall into these categories. Most are described as intraday; some hold overnight or swing. Only category labels are published.
A provider reply (16 May 2026) says some systems have low win rates, small losses and occasional large winners, typical of trend following.
Visible homepage copy describes rules-based systems built by people. “AI trading” appears in the site’s meta keywords, and some reviewers call the company “ALGO AI Exchange”. No machine-learning documentation exists for the futures systems.
The AI Portfolios page claims a proprietary engine evaluating 30M+ data points across 4,000+ securities, with multi-factor scoring and drawdown constraints. No architecture, training data or validation is published.
Systems are said to be tested “first on historical data, then on live data”. No test reports, correlation data or out-of-sample results are published.
The provider says rule updates are “instantly updated onto the production version”. A named system may therefore cover more than one rule set over time.
No independent performance record identified
No Myfxbook, FXBlue, Collective2, audited statement or broker-verified record attributable to Algo Exchange was found. Strategy records exist only on the provider’s login-gated platform, and every public figure comes from the provider itself. The cards below describe the evidence that exists, not returns.
What the public record establishes
- The provider says every signal is reported and shown being taken by a live brokerage account.
- A provider reply (28 June 2026) describes strategy records as an average of live client fills.
- The homepage footer says the algorithms are based on simulated data.
- AI Portfolio figures are explicitly labelled model or hypothetical results.
- Provider-reported returns in public replies include both positive and negative systems.
Important limitations
- The live, averaged, simulated and hypothetical descriptions are not reconciled.
- The performance publisher and underlying accounts are not identified.
- Per-system live start dates and methodology are not published.
- Returns quoted in replies are often selective and unverified.
- Records would not reflect the upfront and monthly fees customers pay.
- Customer version, sizing and fill equivalence is not established.
A Collective2 page (#149476882) carries a review mentioning Algo Exchange, but the strategy belongs to an unrelated German developer. It is not treated as an Algo Exchange record. For context, read backtests versus live trading results.
Figures the provider has published in public replies
Reproduced as stated, by period, without merging. These are provider statements in replies to reviews, not audited or tracked results.
| Period as stated | Provider-reported figures | Limitations |
|---|---|---|
| Year to 9 October 2025Fuller list | Cairo +41.2%, Apollo +33.8%, Tango +22.7%, Predator +21.2%, Falcon +14.6%, Blackhawk −0.1%, Millennium −0.7%, Spartan −11.2%, Cobra −16.2%, Pershing −24.3% | Unverified. Includes negative systems. |
| “Performance to date”Undated, c. 2025 | Cairo +33.8%, Tango +23.8%, Apollo +22.8%, Predator +21.4%, Falcon +12.9%, Blackhawk +2.6%, Millennium −2.6%, Spartan −14%, Cobra −19%, Pershing −27.5%, Raptor (Delisted) −30% | Undated. Excludes lower-capital variants. |
| Calendar 2025Replies Jan–Feb 2026 | Apollo +57%, Titan +47%, Cairo +32%, Tango +27%, Predator +18.8%, Raptor +11.9%, Millennium +4.9%, Blackhawk +2.8% | Positive systems only. A reviewer states 8 of 17 systems made money and 11 lost. |
| Year to mid-May 2026Reply 16 May 2026 | Pershing +38%, Tango V3 +27%, Ultra Growth ETF +20% | Selected systems only. |
| Falcon, multi-yearReply Feb 2026 | “70%+ year for 4 consecutive years” | Period appears to predate the platform’s 2023 founding; basis not established. |
The same system can appear with very different figures depending on the window chosen. Raptor appears both as “Delisted −30%” and with a +11.9% 2025 return. These figures should not be combined, annualised or read as a forecast.
Do customer accounts match the published records?
The provider says a customer on default settings should see results matching the trade log, and that user contract limits can cause divergence.
Customer reviews report a wide spread of outcomes. Examples include +37% over 18 months on Millennium (run at reduced scale) and roughly +50% over two years, alongside reported losses of about 20%, 35%, 50% and 66% over nine months to two years. These are self-reported experiences, not verified statements.
One reviewer says their drawdown was larger than the website record and suspects later fills. The provider replies that every client fill is visible on its platform.
Several reviewers note that upfront and monthly fees reduce or reverse their net result. Whether a new customer receives the same version, sizing and fills as a strategy record is not publicly established.
Algo Exchange risk controls and leverage
The provider describes per-system stops and user caps, but explicitly withholds sizing and maximum position size. The unknowns are part of the risk picture.
Because sizing is withheld and rules can change in production, a customer cannot independently evaluate how a strategy’s risk evolves. The founder criticises martingale in YouTube commentary, but commentary is not a system specification. Where stops rest — at the broker or on provider servers — is not public. Provider’s risk descriptions.
What happens during a drawdown?
The provider’s documented position is to stay with a strategy and diversify across several.
A provider reply (13 May 2026) calls switching systems “Strategy Hopping” and “the WORST thing anyone can do”. Several reviewers (January, July and September 2026) say staff advised them to switch systems, or raised risk, during drawdowns. The two accounts conflict.
Whether any system reduces size, pauses after losses or has a provider-side portfolio stop is not documented. Nor is what triggers a system’s delisting, or how open positions are handled if a user disables a system mid-drawdown.
No behaviour is inferred here from reported returns. Users should ask for a written drawdown protocol before connecting an account.
Backtests and historical evidence
No public backtest reports were identified for the futures systems.
Data sources, cost and slippage assumptions, out-of-sample segments, walk-forward tests and Monte Carlo analysis are not published. One reviewer says sales presentations showed backtests and hypothetical past gains.
The AI Portfolios page says users can review historical backtests and states its displayed returns exclude commissions, slippage and fees.
Averaged composite records, individual live accounts and backtests are three different kinds of evidence. Provider sources do not always keep them separate.
Cloud servers, brokers and hosting
No terminal or VPS is needed on the customer side; operational resilience depends on the provider’s infrastructure.
Source: Algo Exchange homepage FAQ. Showcase-account brokers and server locations are not disclosed; formal eligibility rules for non-US residents are not published.
Algo Exchange setup and customer support
The provider presents a three-step process: connect a US-regulated brokerage account, select algorithms, and switch on auto-trading.
* Described by the provider and in reviews. A Reddit user reports Slack contact with an account manager; support hours and emergency procedures are not published. Published contact page.
Reviews frequently praise patient onboarding staff, and several 2026 reviewers report visiting the Naples office. Others report unanswered emails after onboarding; the provider acknowledged one such case as below its standard.
Refunds, cancellation and licence terms
On 15 October 2026 the Return Policy and Terms & Conditions links redirected to the homepage. One research capture reports reading them earlier; that wording could not be reproduced.
Algorithms are licensed with an upfront licence and a recurring fee. Amounts are not reported here.
Provider replies state “All of our licenses are non-refundable”, with exceptions handled through a refund agreement that ends the licence.
One capture describes a generally non-refundable policy with a pro-rata exception if Algo Exchange terminates for convenience, and Florida governing law.
A reviewer says a request within a claimed Florida 3-day cancellation window was refused and recovered through a bank dispute. The provider says it refunded before onboarding.
One reviewer reports fees continuing after attempts to cancel; the provider replied that fees were refunded.
The homepage states “Algo Exchange does NOT guarantee performance.”
Notice periods, open-position handling at cancellation, licence transfer and any arbitration clause were not found.
The default position appears to be that the upfront licence is non-refundable. With the written terms unavailable at the research date, request the current Terms and Return Policy in writing before paying. A refund of software fees is separate from trading losses.
Outages, disconnections and open positions
Cloud execution removes customer-side hardware risk but concentrates dependency on the provider and the API link.
Provider server outage
Redundant power and fibre are described. If all fail, new signals stop; whether open positions keep broker-side protective orders is not public.
Broker API disconnect
Positions generally remain open at the broker until closed. Monitoring, alerts and reconciliation after a disconnect are not documented.
Auto-trading switched off
Users can toggle systems off. Whether open positions are flattened or left for the user to close is not established.
Margin stress and licence end
Brokers can liquidate below maintenance margin. How strategies reconcile forced liquidation, or licence termination with open trades, is unpublished.
Documented elsewhere: contract limits below default can cause divergence from the trade log, and rule updates go live immediately. Provider FAQ.
Who operates Algo Exchange?
Official pages name two different entities. The Disclosure page names “Tradercodes LLC DBA AlgoExchange”; the AI Portfolios page names “Algo Exchange LLC”.
* Research cites a Florida filing for ALGO EXCHANGE LLC (Doc. L26000385853, filed 21 July 2026), naming Jacob P. Goodwin as registered agent. ATI could not retrieve the registry record at capture. Which entity contracts with customers today, and which did before July 2026, is not publicly established.
Founder profiles date Algo Exchange to April 2023; Tracxn says 2019; a press release describes a June 2024 launch. Named staff include Jason Axt (Director of Customer Success) and Mhd Berhan Eddin Alestwani (Operations). A September 2026 review says the founder had left, while February 2026 replies are signed “Austin – CEO”; current leadership is unresolved.
Research also reports that Mr Alhajj is Chief Compliance Officer of Massari Asset Management LLC (CRD 343736), described as a Florida state-registered adviser for equities and ETFs approved on 6 October 2026. ATI could not retrieve that filing at capture; if confirmed, it is a separate entity from the futures software business. TheOrg · Crunchbase.
Software status, exemptions and litigation
Algo Exchange describes itself as a software provider that “does not give personalized advice or recommendations”. Its Disclosure page says the company is not registered or licensed to give investment advice.
The AI Portfolios page says Algo Exchange operates under the “Publisher’s Exclusion”, that all customers receive the same signals within a package, and that Algo Exchange LLC claims “the self-executing exemption provided by CFTC 4.14(a)(10)”. CFTC materials associate the exemption for standardised, non-tailored advice with Rule 4.14(a)(9); paragraph (a)(10) has historically been linked to a different limited-client exemption. This needs clarification and is not evidence of a breach.
No NFA, CFTC, SEC or FINRA registration was identified for Tradercodes, LLC or Algo Exchange, and no regulator warning or enforcement action was found. Direct NFA BASIC and BrokerCheck lookups were not completed. Whether an exemption applies can depend on whether advice is personalised and whether accounts are directed; reviewer reports of staff recommending systems or changing settings are facts a specialist would weigh. This profile makes no legal conclusion.
Wilson v. Tradercodes, LLC (N.D. Ga. No. 1:25-cv-03211, filed 9 June 2025) was a putative TCPA class action over appointment-confirmation text messages. A Steptoe client alert reports the complaint was dismissed by Order (ECF 33) on 17 March 2026. It is a telemarketing case, not a trading-performance case. Justia docket.
What is publicly documented
The public site consists of a marketing FAQ, an AI Portfolios page and footer links to Disclosure, Privacy, Return Policy, Terms and Contact pages.
A privacy policy and cookie banner exist. The site runs on the LeadConnector/HighLevel marketing stack. Credential and token handling, encryption, hosting jurisdiction and independent security assessments are not publicly established.
No public user manual, broker-connection guide, strategy specification, performance methodology document, permissions map or changelog was found. In-platform statistics and a “Best Practices” document are referenced by the provider but are not publicly accessible.
The general Disclosure page is written largely for securities and carries a 2025 copyright line, while the homepage carries 2026.
Algo Exchange claims compared with the evidence
| Statement | Evidence identified | ATI status |
|---|---|---|
| Trades are executed automatically from provider servers via broker APIs. | Provider FAQ; consistent customer descriptions. No technical audit. | PROVIDER CLAIM |
| Funds stay in the customer’s own broker account. | Broker list and consistent reviewer statements; no documentary custody evidence. | PARTIALLY ESTABLISHED |
| The provider cannot access or withdraw capital. | Provider statement only; API scopes unpublished. | PROVIDER CLAIM |
| Every signal is reported and mirrored in live accounts. | Records are login-gated; the footer says algorithms are based on simulated data; a reply describes averaged fills. | CONFLICTING INFORMATION |
| Performance is published by a CFTC-registered, NFA-member company. | Publisher not named. | NOT PUBLICLY ESTABLISHED |
| Default-setting clients match the trade log. | One reviewer reports divergence; provider disputes it. | CONFLICTING INFORMATION |
| AI Portfolios are built by a proprietary AI engine. | Marketing description only; no technical documentation. | PROVIDER CLAIM |
| No personalised advice is given. | Several reviewers describe staff recommending systems, scale or leverage. | CONFLICTING INFORMATION |
| 1,000+ users and $65M+ in live capital. | Homepage banner; no attestation. | PROVIDER CLAIM |
| Programmes have “full 3rd party audits”. | Stated by one reviewer; no audit found. | NOT PUBLICLY ESTABLISHED |
| Sales quoted monthly or annual return expectations. | Reviewer allegations; the provider denies a specific claim after reviewing call recordings. | CONFLICTING INFORMATION |
| CTA exemption under Rule 4.14(a)(10). | Stated on provider page; citation inconsistent with CFTC materials on standardised advice. | CONFLICTING INFORMATION |
What the research establishes
- Algo Exchange markets automated algorithms for US stock-index futures.
- Supported brokers are Interactive Brokers, StoneX and Dorman Trading.
- The provider withholds strategy rules, sizing and maximum position size.
- The provider states that rule updates go live in production immediately.
- The Disclosure page names Tradercodes LLC; the AI Portfolios page names Algo Exchange LLC.
- A federal TCPA suit named Tradercodes, LLC d/b/a Algo Exchange in June 2025.
- A law-firm alert reports that suit was dismissed on 17 March 2026.
- Official disclosures describe results as simulated or hypothetical.
- The provider states licences are non-refundable and performance is not guaranteed.
- Trustpilot showed 3.3/5 from 128 reviews on 15 October 2026.
Questions for deeper due diligence.
- Who publishes the performance records, and from which accounts.
- How simulated, averaged and live fills are combined.
- Each system’s live start date and version history.
- Sizing formulas, maximum exposure and whether any system adds to losers.
- Whether grid, martingale or recovery logic is used.
- Exact broker permissions and where stops rest.
- Open-position handling on disconnect, cancellation or outage.
- What “AI” means technically for AI Portfolios.
- The contracting entity before and after July 2026.
- Current Terms, Return Policy and arbitration wording.
- The exact regulatory exemption relied on.
- Current leadership and any broker compensation.
Algo Exchange customer reviews and complaints
On 15 October 2026, Trustpilot showed 3.3/5 (“Average”) from 128 reviews: 68% five-star and 20% one-star, with 43 reviews in the past year. Earlier snapshots showed about 3.8–3.9, indicating a downward shift during 2025–2026.
Positive themes include patient onboarding staff, easy setup, funds staying in the customer’s own account, and long-run gains, often from users running one strategy at reduced scale. Critical themes include sustained losses across several strategies, advice to switch, high upfront and recurring fees, the non-refundable licence and slower support after onboarding.
The profile is claimed, paid and invites reviews. The provider publishes system returns in replies and labels some negative reviews as fake. Reviews are self-reported experiences and are not treated as verification of trading performance.
One r/algotrading thread offers mixed discussion. The founder’s YouTube channel and a promotional Kevin Harrington interview are provider media; no independent media coverage was found. RatingFacts shows 4.81/5 from 42 reviews, but its provenance is unclear.
Trustpilot — Algo Exchange profile ↗How to interpret the public record
Entity naming differs
Official pages name Tradercodes LLC and Algo Exchange LLC. A Florida filing for the latter is reported from July 2026, after years of trading under the brand.
Performance wording varies
Live reporting, averaged fills, simulated data and hypothetical labels all appear in provider material. They describe different evidence types.
Exemption text needs clarity
The AI Portfolios page cites both a publisher exclusion and Rule 4.14(a)(10), and describes PC availability that differs from the cloud-only model.
Third-party noise
A Collective2 review, mis-captioned Facebook re-uploads of the Harrington interview and an inconsistent competitor blog are not relied on.
Questions to ask before connecting an account
Which legal entity will be named on my licence agreement?
Ask which entity contracts with customers now, and which did before July 2026, given that official pages name both Tradercodes LLC and Algo Exchange LLC.
Who publishes each strategy’s performance record?
Ask for the publisher’s name, the underlying accounts, each system’s live start date, and how much of the record is actual fills versus simulated or averaged data.
Will my account receive the same version and sizing as the record?
Confirm whether default settings at the minimum balance reproduce the published trade log, and how rule updates are versioned and communicated.
What permissions does the broker connection grant?
Request the exact API scopes at Interactive Brokers, StoneX or Dorman, and confirm in writing whether they can ever allow fund transfers.
Do any strategies add contracts to a losing position?
Ask for a product-specific answer on averaging, grid, martingale or recovery logic, and the maximum contracts and margin per system.
Where do protective stops rest?
Ask whether stops are placed as resting broker or exchange orders, or held on the provider’s servers.
What happens to open positions if automation stops?
Cover toggling off, API disconnection, provider outage, cancellation and licence termination.
Can I see the Terms and Return Policy before paying?
Request the current documents covering refunds, cancellation notice, governing law and any arbitration clause.
Which CTA exemption do you rely on?
Ask why the AI Portfolios page cites Rule 4.14(a)(10) alongside a publisher exclusion.
Do staff recommend systems, scale or leverage, or change settings?
Clarify how such interactions fit with the stated “no personalised advice” position.
Algo Exchange review: frequently asked questions
Is Algo Exchange a single trading bot?
No. It offers a library of roughly 10–17 automated futures strategies, plus a separate AI Portfolios product and a signal-alert service.
What does Algo Exchange trade?
Mainly US stock-index futures. AI Portfolios trades US securities and ETFs through Interactive Brokers.
Do I need MetaTrader or a VPS?
No. According to the provider, strategies run on its servers and connect to the customer’s broker by API.
Who holds the money?
The customer’s broker. The provider says it can place trades but cannot withdraw funds; the exact permissions are not published.
Can I see how the strategies work?
No. The provider uses a black-box model and withholds rules, sizing and maximum position size.
Is verified public performance available?
No independent tracker or audit was identified. Records are login-gated, and official disclosures describe results as simulated or hypothetical. See the performance assessment.
Does Algo Exchange use AI?
AI Portfolios is marketed as built by an in-house AI engine, without technical documentation. The futures strategies are described as rules-based.
Does it use martingale or grid trading?
Not publicly established either way. Some systems scale into trades, but the direction is not stated.
Is Algo Exchange regulated?
No provider registration was identified. The provider says it relies on a CTA exemption or exclusion; the brokers it uses are US-regulated. See the regulatory section.
Can I get a refund?
The provider states licences are non-refundable, with occasional exceptions. The written policy was unavailable at the research date.
Is the court case about trading losses?
No. It concerned telemarketing text messages under the TCPA and was reported dismissed in March 2026.
How this review was prepared
This is a review of public evidence. It does not report an ATI account connection, trading test or inspection of any strategy code.
The research combines three independent dossiers with ATI checks on 15 October 2026 of the homepage, AI Portfolios, Disclosure, Return Policy and Terms pages, the Trustpilot profile and the reported court dismissal. Corporate-registry and adviser-registration details cited in research could not be re-retrieved and are qualified accordingly.
- Established
- The cited record or published provision supports the stated fact. This is not an endorsement or proof of future performance.
- Partially established
- Public evidence supports part of the statement, with a material limitation.
- Provider / third-party claim
- The statement is attributed to its source and has not been independently reproduced by ATI.
- Not publicly established / conflicting
- The reviewed material did not resolve the question, or sources disagree. This does not prove a feature is absent.
See ATI’s research framework, publication information and commercial disclosures.
Sources used in this review
Research cutoff: 15 October 2026. Links lead to each source’s present content, which may differ from the captured record. Check dates and current terms before relying on them.
This review distinguishes public records, provider statements, third-party experiences and unresolved questions. It is educational research, not a performance guarantee or a recommendation to use or avoid a trading system. Leveraged futures trading involves substantial risk; actual customer outcomes can differ from published figures.