Independent review · August 2026
Trinity Trading Partners review 2026: real transparency, and one statistic that needs unpacking
This group does the rarest thing in the alerts business — it publishes its closed positions, so it can be counted. It also leads with a max-gain figure that will be misread by most people who see it. Both matter before you spend $179.
Independent and unofficial. This is not TTP's site and we do not represent them. This page is written by an affiliate: the Whop link earns us a commission if you subscribe, at no extra cost to you.
Verdict
Unusually accountable, and priced accordingly. Publishing every open and closed position is a genuine structural advantage, three named operators beat one guru, and the community is large and warm by the accounts of its own members. What holds the score back is that none of the numbers can be verified from outside, the headline 33% statistic measures peak opportunity rather than realised return, and $179 a month is $2,148 a year for an instrument that can go to zero on its own.
Before anything else. An option can expire completely worthless — a total loss of what you paid, and an ordinary outcome rather than a freak one. Short-dated contracts bleed value through time alone. Most brokers require approval before you can trade options at all. Size every position so that it going to zero changes nothing about your month.
The headline statistic
Max gain is not what you keep
The listing states 567 alerted trades, a 69% win rate, and that 33% of trades exceeded 100% in max gains. The first two are unusually specific and deserve credit. The third is the one that will mislead people, so here it is drawn out.
Why the distinction is not pedantry
Options move violently. A contract can double intraday and give most of it back before the close. Whether you captured that depends on one thing the alert cannot control: the moment you chose to sell. Two members in the same trade routinely finish tens of percentage points apart.
So a max-gain statistic describes the calls, not the members. It says the setups produced room to run — which is real and worth something. It does not say a third of members doubled their money on a third of trades, and anyone reading it that way will set expectations they cannot meet.
We are not calling the figure dishonest. It is labelled as max gains on the listing, plainly. Most readers will simply not register what those two words change, and a review page that repeated the number without explaining it would be doing the reader no favours.
The three questions worth asking in the Discord
- What is the average realised gain on a winner?
- What is the average realised loss on a loser?
- Is the 69% measured at exit, or at the best price the trade reached?
Ask before you pay if you can. The answers are the whole ballgame, and because this group posts closed positions it is one of the few that could actually produce them.
Overview
What it is
Trinity Trading Partners is a US options alerts and education community on Whop, run by three traders — Remzi, Tito and Omar — who say they have traded together for almost five years through bull and bear markets. The offer is real-time alerts and high-probability trade ideas, backed by in-depth market analysis, livestreams, the Trinity Educational Resources library and private access to the TTP Discord, with performance tracked publicly inside the room. 7,234 accounts have joined, with 16–37 online when we looked, and it is rated 4.9 from 1,336 verified buyers.
Scoring
Seven marks and the reasoning
Our own editorial assessment, not data from Whop. The product scores well; what it can prove to an outsider scores less well. Read those separately.
They publish hard numbers — 567 alerted trades, a 69% win rate — and two separate reviewers independently confirm that closed positions are posted, not just entries. Almost nobody at this price does that.
7,234 joined, 16–37 online when we looked, three named operators rather than one guru, and reviewers repeatedly describe people who explain rather than just call.
Trinity Educational Resources, livestreams and three traders with different styles. The listing does not publish a curriculum or an hour count, so it is hard to weigh against programs that do.
$179 a month is $2,148 a year — the second most expensive offer we cover. Defensible if you are trading options actively and can act on alerts; steep otherwise.
The 33% figure is expressed in MAX gains, which measures the best moment of a trade rather than what members actually realised. Explained in full below — it is the single most important thing on this page.
Every figure is self-published. No audited statement, no third-party tracked record, no way to check the win rate from outside.
The stated mission is to get new traders to profitability, and the teaching exists. But options require broker approval, can expire at a total loss, and are a harsh first instrument regardless of how good the room is.
Both columns
Pros and cons
What works
- Open and closed positions published — the group can be counted
- Hard numbers on the listing: 567 trades, a stated 69% win rate
- Three named operators with different styles, not one figurehead
- Members independently confirm the transparency claim in their reviews
- 7,234 joined and 16–37 online — an active, populated room
- Reviewers describe a team that explains rather than just calls
- At least one review notes they tell members to learn from the team's own past mistakes
What does not
- The 33% figure measures peak opportunity, not realised return
- No average win against average loss published — the ratio that actually decides profitability
- Every figure is self-published and unaudited
- $179/month is $2,148 a year, second-highest of anything we cover
- 23 one-star ratings, more than the two- and three-star ratings combined
- No published curriculum or hour count for the educational library
- Options need broker approval, which not everyone will be granted
Ratings breakdown
The full distribution, not just the average
The full distribution, not just the average. Note the shape: 23 one-star ratings, more than the two-star and three-star ratings put together. That is under two percent of 1,336 buyers, and a service with no unhappy customers at all would be the stranger result.
All ten
Every review we could collect
Summarised in our own words from the public listing, longest first. The recurring theme across them is not profit — it is transparency and people who explain. That is a meaningful signal in a market full of the opposite.
The most detailed review on the listing. Praises the engagement — funny, informative and precise — and states there is full transparency on every open and closed position, with no half-stepping on whether a call was right or wrong.
Calls them honest and upfront, and notes they keep telling members to use common sense and learn from the team's past mistakes rather than repeat them.
Says the team is with you at every step and takes the time to explain things along the way.
Rates the team very transparent, with several different trading styles to learn from.
Live action, keeping up and learning. Notes plainly that profit takes dedication and that the group helps a lot rather than doing it for you.
Rates the community and the call-outs.
Thanks Omar and Tito for the help and calls the group excellent.
Good place to learn and grow.
Describes it as a very hectic and very fun group.
Short and positive on the group.
The operators
Who are Remzi, Tito and Omar?
By their own account, three friends who have been actively trading options together for close to five years across both bull and bear markets, and who built TTP out of that. The stated mission is to get new traders to profitability and give experienced traders more edge — a more modest framing than most of this market attempts.
What we could not find is any independently verified trading record for any of the three. That is normal for this category and it is not an accusation; it does mean the 69% win rate and the 567 trade count rest entirely on the group's own reporting. The thing that partly compensates is structural rather than reputational: because closed positions are posted in the room, a member can audit the claims themselves over a month. Very few competitors allow that.
Reviewers name Omar and Tito directly when thanking the team, which suggests the value is spread across the three rather than concentrated in one name on the tin.
Why we use the brand mark, not their faces
Deliberate. This is an independent affiliate site, not theirs. Putting someone's photograph in the header of a third-party site makes it look official when it is not, so we use the group's own logo for identification and nothing else.