01
Run a strategy on your account
The main service. You keep the account, we run the trading strategy against the drawdown and split what the cycle produces on terms agreed before the first trade.
MEXC futures, account in the red
Clear a minus PNL on MEXC futures
We take MEXC accounts carrying a negative futures result and flip them back into circulation with a trading strategy. Every account is reviewed before anything runs, and the terms are fixed in the chat before the first trade.
−$300
from this depth
1–5
accounts per package
$0
before the result
Free review
We read the account before saying yes or no to it
One scenario per cycle
No switching strategy halfway through a bad week
Nothing paid upfront
The share comes out of the result, or out of nothing
Escrow available
Name a third party in the chat and the deal goes through them
Three ways people arrive here
They end in the same place: an account with a minus PNL trading again.
02
Hand the account over
If you would rather not watch it at all, we discuss renting the account for the length of a cycle or buying it outright — both priced against the real depth of the loss.
03
Just get an answer
Sometimes the honest call is to finish the account yourself. We say that plainly and explain why, and the chat stays open either way.
Why a minus does not clear itself
It is a closed record
A minus PNL is the sum of positions that already closed. The market recovering does not touch it — only new trades on that account move the figure.
Nobody opens the account
After a deep drawdown the terminal stops being opened at all. Months of idling do not reduce the loss, they only remove the chance of closing it.
The all-in recovery trade
Sizing up to win it back in one entry is how a fixable drawdown becomes a permanent one. Most accounts that reach us have been through this at least once.
How a cycle runs
From the first message to the split, with nothing invented in between.
Describe the account
In the chat: how many MEXC accounts, roughly how deep the minus is on each, and how long it has been sitting there.
Review, free
We separate the loss into trades, fees and idle time, check limits and open positions, and say whether a realistic scenario exists.
Terms are fixed
Order of work, working volume, rough length of the cycle and what counts as a result — all agreed before the start and not reopened after it.
Work and split
The strategy runs on the account. The cycle closes with a written summary and the result is divided as agreed.
What changes for the account
The difference is visible in the numbers, not in the pitch.
Left alone
- The minus stays exactly where it was for months
- The terminal is not opened, the account is not traded
- Every attempt to win it back adds to the drawdown
- Nobody knows the real figure per account
- The decision is postponed again
In a cycle
- The loss is broken into trades, fees and idle time
- One scenario, chosen for the depth of the drawdown
- Working volume set deliberately, not by habit
- Written summary at the close of the cycle
- The account is trading again
Terms
The split is fixed on entry and does not depend on volume. What changes is the timeframe and the number of accounts.
Single account
One MEXC account with a negative futures PNL.
Reviewfree
- Full history review
- One cycle on the agreed strategy
- Written summary at the close
- Everything handled in Telegram
Most common
Two to five
A loss spread across several accounts.
Reviewfree
- A scenario per account
- A launch queue by priority
- One combined summary
- Priority replies in the chat
Volume
Client or partner accounts in the red.
Reviewfree
- A schedule around your flow
- Streams separated by owner
- Regular summaries
- Direct contact, no queue
From the chat
Short notes from members about how the work goes.
I expected a sales pitch and got a breakdown of where the loss actually came from. Half of mine was fees, which I had never counted.
Two cycles, both closed with a written summary. Nobody promised a percentage at any point, which is why I stayed.
One of my three accounts was refused outright — too deep, no scenario. Odd thing to say if you are just after money.
Questions about a minus PNL on MEXC
The first things people ask in the chat.
Can a minus PNL be deleted from the account?
No. The figure is a record of closed trades and nothing rewrites it. It gets covered by a new result on the same account, which is what a cycle of work produces.
What is the smallest account you take?
From −$300 of negative futures PNL. Below that a cycle costs more attention than the result is worth, and we say so rather than taking it anyway.
Do I pay before anything runs?
No. The arrangement is a share of the result of a cycle. With no result there is nothing to divide, which is why it starts with a free review.
How long is a cycle?
It depends on the depth of the drawdown. Shallow scenarios close quickly, deep ones need several cycles. A range comes after the review, never before it.
Can I use a bot for this instead?
You can run one, and there is a whole page here about what MEXC PNL bots and software actually do. The short version: they execute a plan, they do not write one.
What if I would rather sell the account?
That happens often. Rent and sale are both discussed in the chat and priced against the real depth of the loss, usually with escrow.
How do I start?
Open the Telegram chat and send three facts: how many accounts, how deep the minus is on each, and how long it has been sitting there.
The minus does not move on its own
Send the numbers to the chat and get a realistic scenario, or an honest no.
Open the Telegram chatIn detail
Clearing a minus PNL on MEXC: the whole picture
What a negative futures PNL is made of, why an account carrying one is still worth trading, how a cycle is built and what gets refused.
Show the full text
What the number actually is
PNL is the combined result of an account: closed positions plus the costs around them. When the total drops below zero the account carries a minus, and on MEXC that sits in the futures statistics until new trades change it.
It is worth separating two things. Realised PNL is locked in by positions that already closed. Unrealised PNL moves with the open ones and can look dramatic without meaning much. A review reads both before naming a scenario.
Why the loss keeps growing
Most deep drawdowns were shallow once. The sequence is always the same: a loss, the urge to close it in one trade, a larger size, a larger loss. The loop ends when the deposit does.
Systematic work differs from that loop in one respect: the scenario is picked before the cycle and held to the end of it, including through the days when holding it feels wrong.
- Sizing up after a loss deepens it more often than it closes it
- Switching strategy mid-cycle makes the result impossible to read
- The cost of an emotional decision exceeds any share of the result
How a cycle is built
A cycle starts from the depth of the drawdown, not from the balance. The working volume is set against how much has to be covered and how long the account can realistically trade without stress on the margin.
The goal of one cycle is a measurable result written into a summary, not recovering everything at once. Deep drawdowns close over several cycles or they do not close at all.
Bots, scripts and software
Everyone looks for a tool first: a PNL calculator, a grid bot, a script on the MEXC API. Those are real and some are useful — a tracker that shows the fee share of your loss saves a lot of guessing.
What no tool supplies is the sizing decision and the discipline to hold one scenario. There is a dedicated page here on what MEXC PNL software does and where it stops.
Renting or selling instead
Not every owner wants to stay involved. Some hand the account over entirely — rented for the length of a cycle, or sold. Both are common in this market and both are priced against the actual size of the negative PNL.
Say which route you want in the first message. It changes the shape of the deal but not the review: the numbers still have to be seen before anything is quoted.
What gets refused
Accounts of unclear origin, accounts where access cannot be handed over cleanly, and accounts whose owners want a guaranteed percentage. None of those work, and pretending otherwise wastes both sides’ time.
Drawdowns with no realistic scenario left are refused too. That is said at the review, plainly, instead of selling a cycle that cannot deliver.
- No guaranteed returns
- No payment before a result exists
- No accounts of unclear origin
- No cycle when the review says there is nothing here