Let $U\colon \textbf{AbGp}\longrightarrow \textbf{Set}$ be the forgetful functor. By the Crude Monadicity Theorem, it is monadic.
Any reflection is monadic, so $I \colon \textbf{tfAbGp}\longrightarrow \textbf{AbGp}$ is also monadic.
I am trying to show that its composite is not monadic. The left adjoint of $U$ is the free functor and the explanation that I have found is the following: Free abelian groups are torsion free and so the monad on $\textbf{Set}$ induced by the composition is isomorphic so that induced by $F$ and $U$.
However, I do not understand why that contradicts the fact of being monadic. The comparison functor in the first case is $K\colon \textbf{AbGp}\longrightarrow \mathcal{C}^{\mathbb{T}}$ sending $B$ to $(UB, U\epsilon_{B})$, so it is faithful, full and essentially surjective (because the forgetful functor is monadic).
In the second case the comparison functor would have domain $\textbf{tfAbGp}$, so I have been thinking why can't that be faithful, full or essentially surjective. Nevertheless, I do not find any example.
Can anyone help me, please?