Industry Notes & Topic Index

Start here

If this is the first page of the site you're reading, the directory itself is the centre of gravity. Almost every long-form section on the site exists to help you read individual entries with context — what a 1-step evaluation actually involves, why two firms with the same "10% profit target" are not equivalent, and so on.

How prop firms make money — and why it matters to you

A retail/funded prop firm has two main revenue streams: evaluation fees from candidates, and a share of any profit produced by traders who pass and stay funded. The balance between these two streams shapes the firm's incentives and, indirectly, the rules you trade under.

A firm that earns most of its revenue from challenge fees has an incentive to keep the funnel wide and turnover high — affordable entry prices, frequent promotions, sometimes generous-looking targets paired with strict daily drawdown so the bar to a payout stays meaningful. A firm earning a real share of revenue from funded-trader profits has the opposite pull: fewer, more durable funded traders, tighter consistency rules, slower scaling, and a payout cadence that rewards continuity.

Neither is good or bad on its own. But knowing which model a firm sits closer to changes how you read its rules. A quick rule of thumb: if a firm advertises evaluation discounts more loudly than payout statistics, treat it as funnel-driven and read the daily drawdown twice.

What to read across the directory

Evaluation models

Funded firms differ on how they ask candidates to prove themselves: one phase, two phases, no time limit, instant funding with restrictions, or hybrid scaling models. Each has trade-offs in cost, time, and the type of trader it favours. The futures hub covers exchange-specific evaluations; the comparison tool lays them out by firm.

Drawdown rules

Daily vs. maximum, fixed vs. trailing, balance-based vs. equity-based — these four words drive most of what feels arbitrary about a funded account. Two firms can advertise the same "10% maximum drawdown" and behave very differently in practice. The glossary covers the terms; the futures section walks through trailing vs. fixed in worked examples.

Profit splits and payouts

Headline profit-split numbers (80%, 90%, 100%-then-90%) are not the whole story. Payout cadence, minimum withdrawal, scaling, and whether the split is held flat or steps up over time matter at least as much for compounding. Quant firms operate on a different basis altogether — base salary plus bonus instead of a profit share — and are tracked separately on the quant directory.

Platforms and execution

MetaTrader 4/5, cTrader, and TradingView dominate retail/funded; NinjaTrader, Tradovate, and Quantower dominate futures. The platform a firm supports tells you something about its execution stack and, by extension, the kind of trading style it will tolerate.

Common pitfalls when picking a firm

• Comparing only the headline profit split. Two 90% splits with different payout frequencies and scaling rules are not the same product.
• Ignoring trailing-drawdown details. A trailing drawdown that updates intraday vs. end-of-day changes how aggressively you can manage winners.
• Underestimating consistency rules. A "no day > 30% of total profit" rule can quietly invalidate a strategy that depends on a few large days.
• Reading marketing copy as policy. The terms-of-service and rulebook are the source of truth, not the homepage.
• Skipping payout history. A firm with great rules but inconsistent payouts is still a firm with inconsistent payouts.

The guides hub covers each of these in more depth.

Red flags worth taking seriously

• Sudden mid-month rule changes applied retroactively to existing accounts.
• Refusal to publish payout proof or aggregate payout statistics in any form.
• Vague language around "manipulative" or "abusive" trading that can be invoked against any payout.
• Pressure tactics — countdown timers, "today only" pricing on evaluations, large bonuses for upgrading account size.
• Heavy reliance on affiliate marketing as the firm's primary acquisition channel, especially when paired with low transparency.

Stay in touch

If a section of the directory feels stale, or a firm has changed something material, please email it in. Reader-reported corrections are the most direct way to keep listings honest.