⚖️#Consistency rule
10 articles
[Beginner's Guide] Futures Prop Rules Explained From Scratch: Contracts, Trailing DD, Consistency, Activation Fees, and Trading Hours
A table-based breakdown of US futures prop rules (Topstep, FTMO Futures, The5ers Futures, and others), aimed at FX traders. Covers how contracts map to lots, the difference between EOD trailing and intraday trailing, consistency rules, monthly fees and activation fees, all forced-close times in JST, and contract counts for gold futures (GC/MGC).
What Dan Cheung Means by "Rotation": It's Not About Doing More Trades — It's About Containing Losses to One Account
We looked into Dan Cheung's (London-based) account rotation, a term that comes up a lot in prop trading circles, based on his own public statements. It boils down to three lines: touch only one account at a time, close that account and move to the next once you hit your daily profit target or your stop, and never chase a losing account. People often mistake it for a way to trade more, but the real point is containing losses to a single account. We then checked whether this actually holds up under the terms of firms available from Japan, across four axes: consistency rules, minimum trading days, allocation caps, and multi-account clauses.
Funded7's Payout Was Held Under OREF "Rule 1" | Explaining the MIN(median×2.5, Q3+1.5×IQR) Consistency Review With a Real Review Email [September 2026]
A Funded7 payout request came back DELAYED for failing "Rule 1 (Consistency): Position Sizing" R1A. We break down the official FAQ's allowable threshold — MIN(median×2.5, Q3+1.5×IQR) — using real figures from a review email sent to this site's owner (median ¥1,240,946, IQR ¥17,094, threshold ¥1,274,058, largest position ¥1,294,723). Covers why keeping your lot size too consistent shrinks the threshold, why a fixed-lot BTC EA gets caught, how it differs from Rule 2/Rule 3, why profit isn't confiscated, and how to think about passing on the next review.
I Checked 10 Prop Firms on Swapping EAs Mid-Challenge: FundingPips Requires Proof of Ownership for Self-Built EAs, Funded7 Flags You by Statistics If You Change Instruments [September 2026]
Switching from a trend-following EA to a mean-reversion EA is not a rule violation at most prop firms. Only two firms clearly ban it: FundedNext and TradingCult. Funded7, however, judges by the statistics of notional value rather than logic, so changing instruments or lot size can get you flagged. I also confirmed in the official help centers that FundingPips requires proof of ownership for fully automated self-built EAs, and explicitly bans connecting via VPN/VPS — though that ban sits in a single line inside the identity-verification section, in contrast to FundedElite, which allows VPS with prior notice.
Prop Firms That Won't Let You Change Strategy: Official Rules Checked | TradingCult Bans EAs Outright, Funded7 Disqualifies Running the Same EA Across Multiple Accounts [September 2026]
TradingCult bans EA and bot use outright, and a violation is a hard breach. The firm and FundedElite also explicitly ban 'account rolling.' At Funded7, even your own EA gets you disqualified for Group Trading if its results correlate too closely with another trader's. SuperFunded allows news trading freely during the evaluation but bans it within ±10 minutes only at the Funded stage, and FundedElite's strategy risk limit only applies at the funded stage — this article rounds up 9 firms whose rules change between the challenge and funded stages, based on each firm's official FAQ.
Can You Change Strategy Mid-Way? | I Checked 20 Firms' Consistency Rules and Found They Go in Opposite Directions [September 2026]
FundedNext explicitly states you must 'maintain the same strategy through your challenge and Funded account,' banning switching from an EA that passed the challenge to manual trading. Fintokei, meanwhile, states plainly it has no consistency rule and won't add one retroactively. Even within one firm, Hantec's Enhanced has no restriction while EnhancedX caps you at 35% — opposite treatment. Here's what to check before changing your method, across 20 firms.
What Percentage of Prop Phase 1 Would a Coin Toss Pass? The Exact-Solution Answer Comes Out Above 50% [Analysis]
An exact calculation of the Phase 1 pass rate for a prop challenge using nothing but a ±¥200,000 coin toss. With zero fees, an 8% target / 10% max DD setup passes 55.6% of the time, and FTMO comes out at exactly 50.0%. With a 5% fee it drops to 43.2%, and it sinks into the 8% range for 1-step plans with a 3% daily DD. Compared with real-world pass rates of 5-14%, the average trader is losing to a coin toss.
The Consistency Rule Specifically Targets Trend-Following: What 10,000 Runs on a Real EA Showed [Opinion]
We connected a real EA to Fintokei's server and compared over-trading, trend-following, and one-sided betting with risk sized equally. Without a consistency rule, trend-following wins outright (70.4%), but the more profit concentrates in big wins, the harder it gets cut down — the purest trend-following setup dropped to a 0.0% pass rate at a 20% threshold. This gives a structural explanation for the observation that "winners cluster at firms with loose consistency rules."
Does Averaging Down Beat the Consistency Rule? What a Real EA Backtest and a Rulebook Review Actually Show [Opinion]
Averaging down (nanpin/DCA) turned out to be genuinely immune to the consistency rule. But at a 13.2% pass rate, it's useless on its own. Adding a stop-loss raises that to 41.2% while keeping the immunity — but it still falls short of trend-following's 52.9%. Checking the actual rulebooks, what's banned isn't averaging down itself — it's doubling your lot size.
Consistency rule fully explained: how it's calculated, which firms use it, and techniques to avoid tripping it
Explains the prop firm consistency rule from the formula up: the difference between 20%/30%/40% thresholds, which firms use it, and lot-sizing and day-spreading techniques to avoid violating it.