It's well known and even advertised that it's all about the order flow data. Top Step even says something like "your trades inform our trades." The entire business model depends on that.

When performance/XFA/paid accounts are aggregate anything other than delta neutral, they must go with that flow (using hopefully a reasonably sophisticated algorithm) in order to properly pay out winners.

It's a brilliant business model. Customers pay the firm, the firm sees the flow, and the best customer performers are rewarded for it. They get real time flow and they know the performance record of every trader with those orders. Simply brilliant, more power to them.

I was looking up the concept of these firms lately and I do not seem to understand why anyone wants to deal with them.

Sure, on the surface it looks like that concept can help make you money if you do not have much capital on hand but after I checked I don't see how that can work out.

For example, I just use TopStep because they are mentioned in this thread already, but this is the same with other funded firms:

Let's take a look at the 100K account. This account gives you a maximum loss limit of $3000 and they want you to reach a profit of $6000.

If we look at the $3000 as the account size, because that is what we do not want (and can't) lose, and using the 2% risk mantra, and let's say we make 100% in a year on the account (being very generous), then we need around 1.5 years to pass to get to their profit target. That comes down to around $300 per month, BUT we have to pay $99 per month to them for being allowed to trade with them. So what is the point? I saw that there is another fee of $149 that will make these results even worse, but I stopped there already, maybe there are even more fees? And this is a really optimistic scenario.

Okay, so using only the 2% on the $3000 as the account size doesn't make sense to me.



Then the next step is to take on more risk. Let's say we risk $200 per trade. That gives us a big cushion of back to back losing trades before hitting the maximum loss limit. But that gives us a 6.67% risk on the account. I do not like that.

These firms are claiming that they do not want gamblers, but without taking a high risk, it's hard to make money with them in the first place. For me it feels like they are teaching you to trade poorly.

Keep in mind that they on top of that, are trailing the maximum loss limit. So until we are over $103.000 account size we are never allowed to lose more than $3000. Even if you started with a few winning trades, you can not use these profits as a cushion. So you are still limited in your trading and you are rather having a $3000 account instead of a 100.000 account while you are paying them $99 monthly...

This basically means you need to double your $3000 account before you even start to have more than a $3000 account.

All the while you are paying them for your troubles...

I have been using "The Trading Pit" recently (Futures VIP), it has much better target/drawdowns. There is no monthly fee and the one time sign up fee($599) is returned when you make your first profit payout. The drawdown is based on highest balance and not on unrealized equity ( only for the Futures VIP plan, the drawdowns for other plans are based on unrealized equity). To achieve the first payout (what they can Scaling Plan Level 1), you need to reach $1500 profit target with a drawdown of $5000. The payout is 70% ($1050) + the return of the $599 one-time Challenge sign up fee. It has been working out well for me.

I have been using "The Trading Pit" recently (Futures VIP), it has much better target/drawdowns. There is no monthly fee and the one time sign up fee($599) is returned when you make your first profit payout. The drawdown is based on highest balance and not on unrealized equity ( only for the Futures VIP plan, the drawdowns for other plans are based on unrealized equity). To achieve the first payout (what they can Scaling Plan Level 1), you need to reach $1500 profit target with a drawdown of $5000. The payout is 70% ($1050) + the return of the $599 one-time Challenge sign up fee. It has been working out well for me.

You get it!

With the fact that micros are available, where real emotions are at play without the safety net of renewing a blown account for $49. That’s where I’m at a loss.

You can put $100 in a ninja trader account and trade micros. Obviously the goal would not be to make money, the goal would be to develop a process that is consistent..

In the real market, you don’t need to make $1500 to get a payout and this or that. And I’m laughing because this is just rediculous. When you get into trading, the goal shouldn’t be to make money so that you can win a contest and you can get into this or that.

That shouldn’t be the goal for one to three years. But immediately people get into this funded programs and it is ‘let me get a funded account that does this and that’, which everything is simulation - If you want to engage in simulation, you can use any number of platforms and trade in simulation. You don’t have to put yourself in arbitrary contests or arbitrary pressure that only serve to ensure you lose and continue to lose.


And it boggles my mind. The premise from the start for everyone who is in the funded programs ensured failure, because the goal should not be ‘oh let me make $1500 so I can get an upgraded account that will force me to make $4000 in two weeks or three weeks’ or whatever ridiculousness that they have their players engaging in.

Get out of funded programs if you’re serious about trading. Get out of them.

How long do you think you can trade micros with $100?

When you start trading, you’re going to lose money!!!!!!!

This is an absolute fact. The goal isn’t to continually trade $100 for 10 years. Note the goal is to develop a process. With a micro account, you need $50 margin with Ninja Trader, and since you don’t know anything, it is going to take you two years to start to understand what you’re doing.

You can put another hundred dollars and another hundred dollars. Because here’s the deal, at least you’re treating in the real market where emotions are involved, what funded programs your in simulation, and you’re actually not learning anything you’re regressing. And you’re going to end up spending the same amount after blowing multiple accounts on fun programs and you’re not learning anything. Additionally is all simulation. Every platform offers you a simulated environment for free where you can develop your skill set without the arbitrary rules and structure that ensure your failure with funded programs.

This isn’t rocket science.

I am not sure what competition you are talking about. Your post makes no sense.

since you don’t know anything, it is going to take you two years to start to understand what you’re doing.

You can put another hundred dollars and another hundred dollars. Because here’s the deal, at least you’re treating in the real market where emotions are involved, what funded programs your in simulation, and you’re actually not learning anything you’re regressing. And you’re going to end up spending the same amount after blowing multiple accounts on fun programs and you’re not learning anything. Additionally is all simulation. Every platform offers you a simulated environment for free where you can develop your skill set without the arbitrary rules and structure that ensure your failure with funded programs.

This isn’t rocket science.

AND SIMPLER WORDS: Every platform offers you a simulated environment. Use that instead, don’t use funded trader programs.

It’s not so much shocking as unfortunate that you don’t realize that when you are in a funded program, you are in an arbitrary competition that gives you arbitrary rules that ensure your failure. It’s unfortunate, and if I have to explain it, you’re not at that point yet where you are approaching consistency because if so you would understand what I’m saying.