If you have spent time around trading Twitter, now called X, you have probably seen a screenshot with the name GuruLeaks on it. It is an anonymous account that posts about online trading teachers, courses and promoters. Nobody in the sources we could open says who runs it, and the account itself says its posts are opinion.

This post does not repeat what the account says about any person. It covers three things: what the account says it is, what one news outlet wrote about it, and how a trader can check any callout against a public record before believing it.

Quick timeline

  • 27 July 2021. The news site Business of Business publishes an article that mentions the account and says its operator declined to give their identity.
  • 2021 to March 2025. The account's threads are archived on Thread Reader. The latest one we could see is dated 13 March 2025.
  • 10 September 2026. A trading-simulation company's blog advises readers to treat accounts like this as sources of leads, not verdicts.

What does the account say about itself?

The profile text, as copied by the Thread Reader archive, is short. It thanks people for tips that help expose fraud and deception. It says the tweets are the account's opinion. It tells readers to do their own due diligence. It ends with a rule that carries a trademark sign: "IF YOU DELETE WE MUST RETWEET".

That line reads like a promise that a deleted post will be reposted. For a reader, the lesson is simple: a deleted post is not proof of anything, and a saved copy is only worth as much as its date and source.

The archive also shows that the account does not only post about trading teachers. Its threads include news about insider-trading cases, crypto exchange cases and relief-fraud prosecutions. So the account is partly a feed of market-crime news.

What did the press report?

We found one news article that describes the account itself. Christie Smythe wrote it for Business of Business, and it ran on 27 July 2021. The article was about a state lawsuit against a day-trading advice company. It says the account is anonymous and describes its mission as helping to expose fraud and deception. When the reporter reached the operator over Twitter, the operator declined to talk about who they are.

That is all the article says about the account's identity. We found no outlet that names the operator. We also found no regulator finding that confirms or rejects what the account has posted about any person.

Why do accounts like this exist?

Because regulators are slow. Look at two cases from this series. In the Warrior Trading case, the FTC's complaint covers sales from January 2018 to March 2021, and the suit came in April 2022. In the IM Mastery Academy case, the FTC says the sales ran from 2018, and the complaint came in May 2025. An anonymous account can post in a day. A regulator needs evidence, lawyers and often a court, so it takes years.

The trade-off runs the other way too. A regulator's document has a status, a date, a court number and a way to check it. A post has none of these. Both can be right, and both can be wrong, but only one can be checked by a stranger.

Where a callout and a record can say different things

The Warrior Trading case shows how the two can differ. The FTC alleged that the company's ads, built on its founder's trading results, were misleading and unsupported. The company settled without admitting or denying it. We read the complaint looking for an allegation that the founder's own trades were fake and could not find one. A callout that used the word "fake" would have gone further than the record.

The IM Mastery Academy case shows the opposite. There the FTC's complaint does contain a specific allegation of a fake trading account: it says the company discovered that an instructor's advertised "$15 million trading account" was not real. That is still an allegation. The settlement says the defendants neither admit nor deny it.

So a record can confirm a claim, narrow it or say nothing about it. That is why the record comes first.

What the other side says

The account's own position is its profile: opinion, tips welcome, do your own checking. Its operator declined to be identified in 2021, and We found no later statement. People the account names have their own side, and this post does not name any of them.

A prop-trading simulation company's blog from September 2026 describes watchdog accounts like this one as useful for generating questions and not for closing a case. That company sells its own trading challenges, so read its advice with that in mind. The advice itself is sensible.

What traders can take from it

  • Treat a callout as a lead. Find the original document before you share it or act on it: a regulator's press release, a court docket, a final order. Read the part that says what was alleged and what was decided.
  • Check the status. A complaint is an allegation. A settled order may say "neither admit nor deny". An interim order can be reversed. A post that skips this step may be skipping the important part.
  • Save your own copies. Take a dated screenshot of any sales page, rule set or promise before you pay. Pages and posts get deleted.
  • Ask for a statement, not a screenshot. For any claim about profits, ask for a full broker or exchange statement for the whole account, with dates, fees and withdrawals. Net profit after costs (net P&L) is the number that counts.
  • Keep your own record. A trading journal built from your own broker data, as SetupBook does, tells you what you really traded, whatever anyone online says about a course.

Frequently asked questions

Who runs GuruLeaks?

The sources we could open do not say. The operator declined to discuss their identity when a reporter contacted them in 2021, and We found no outlet that has named them since.

Is everything GuruLeaks posts true?

We cannot say, and no regulator or court has ruled on its posts as a whole. The account describes its tweets as its opinion. Treat each post as a lead and check it against a regulator or court record.

What does "if you delete we must retweet" mean?

It is a line in the account's profile that reads as a promise to repost anything a target deletes. A reposted post is no more or less accurate than the original.

How do I check whether a trading guru has a regulator record?

Search the regulator for your country. In the United States that means the SEC, the CFTC, the FTC and FINRA's BrokerCheck. In the UK it is the FCA register and warning list. In India it is SEBI's orders. Then read the status of the case: allegation, settlement or final order.

What if I think a course misled me?

Keep every payment record, the sales page, the cancellation terms and any messages. Then report it to your national regulator or consumer agency. A written timeline with dates will help whoever reads your complaint.

Sources

This post is based on public sources as of October 30, 2026. Found a mistake? Write to info@setupbook.io.