Stage 2–3 Bridge · Free
The evaluation and the funded account share the same rule names — trailing drawdown, consistency rule, daily loss limit — but the mechanics behind each name change when the funded account activates. The DTF formula stays the same, but applies from the funded account's starting balance, not from the evaluation balance at the moment of passing. The consistency rule resets its window to the payout period, not the all-time evaluation cumulative. The trailing drawdown floor may eventually lock at a static level rather than trailing indefinitely. The DLL amount is the same contractually, but its consequence in the funded account involves the accumulated floor-room from prior sessions. This article compares each rule side by side across both phases with the specific adjustment each requires on day one of the funded account.
Part 1 of 4 — DTF: same formula, different starting balance
This distinction matters most on day one of the funded account, when traders often expect to continue from the evaluation's final floor position. The funded account's floor is calculated from scratch using the funded account's starting balance — which is typically lower than the evaluation account balance at pass, because the evaluation account was started at the same funded-account starting balance and then grew to a higher point through the evaluation period.
In the evaluation, the trailing drawdown floor is calculated from the evaluation account's starting balance. If you start a $50K evaluation with a $2,500 drawdown distance, the floor begins at $47,500. As the balance climbs through profitable trading, the floor trails upward: at a balance of $53,000, the floor is at $50,500. When you pass the evaluation at a balance of, say, $53,400, the evaluation floor at that moment might be $50,900. That evaluation floor does not carry into the funded account. The funded account activates at a fresh $50,000 starting balance with its own DTF — which may be the same $2,500 distance (common) or a different amount specified in the funded account agreement. The funded account's floor on day one is $47,500 — calculated from the funded account's $50,000 starting balance, regardless of where the evaluation floor was at the moment of passing. See the full floor calculation in how trailing drawdown rules change after you pass.
The practical implication is that the funded account's day-one floor is typically lower than the evaluation's floor at the point of passing. If the evaluation floor at pass was $50,900 and the funded account floor on day one is $47,500, the funded account has $3,400 more floor-room on day one than the evaluation had at the end. This is not necessarily an invitation to take more risk — the funded account's floor now starts trailing again from the funded balance, and the funded period's payout calculation requires profit growth to clear the consistency rule and meet the minimum trading days gate. Understanding that the funded account's floor resets to a lower level on day one is the key insight: it changes the pre-session sizing calculation for the very first funded session. The per-trade ceiling from the DTF-based formula (floor-distance ÷ 10) is lower in the funded account on day one if the funded DTF distance is smaller than the evaluation DTF distance, and higher if the funded DTF distance is larger. Verify the funded agreement for the exact DTF amount before the first session.
Some funded futures firms apply a different drawdown distance to the funded account than to the evaluation. The evaluation might carry a 5% trailing drawdown while the funded account applies a 4% trailing drawdown, or vice versa. The direction of the change affects which way the per-trade ceiling moves on day one. A funded account with a smaller DTF percentage has a tighter per-trade ceiling from the very first session — the floor is closer to the starting balance, the floor-distance is smaller, and the DTF ÷ 10 formula produces a lower per-trade maximum. A funded account with a larger DTF percentage has more floor-room on day one, but this does not translate to a blanket permission to size up — the DLL ÷ 4 ceiling is the binding constraint when floor-room exceeds the DLL's per-trade cap, which is the common situation on well-managed funded accounts.
The position sizing checklist uses both the DTF-based ceiling and the DLL-based ceiling and applies the smaller of the two. On day one of the funded account, run the checklist with the funded account's specific DTF distance and DLL amount — do not carry over the evaluation's pre-session inputs. The funded agreement is the source for both values. If the funded account's DTF amount is not explicitly stated, use the evaluation's DTF amount as a conservative default while confirming with the firm, because an assumed larger drawdown distance that is later corrected requires an immediate position size reduction mid-period. See the full sizing calculation in position sizing for funded futures accounts.
On day one of the funded account, the floor is typically at its lowest point relative to the funded account's balance — the funded balance starts at the contractual amount and the floor starts at the contractual amount minus the DTF distance. There is no history of profitable sessions that advanced the floor; the first session has the maximum available floor-room. This maximum floor-room on day one is a structural feature of the funded account reset, not a license to trade larger. The funded account's first payout period starts from zero cumulative profit, the consistency window is empty, and the minimum trading days count starts at zero. The funded account is operationally at its most fragile position on day one — full floor-room but no established consistency buffer, no qualifying sessions, and no cumulative profit to serve as a denominator for the consistency hold calculation.
The behavior pattern that fits day one is the same as early evaluation behavior: the DTF-based ceiling applies conservatively, the DLL ÷ 4 ceiling applies regardless of floor-room, and the daily profit stop ceiling applies as soon as there is cumulative period profit to calculate it from. In the first session before cumulative profit is established, the daily profit stop ceiling may default to a conservative manual cap rather than the net_profit × 0.28 formula — which produces a very low ceiling in the early sessions of the period. See the daily profit stop's early-period behavior in funded futures daily profit stop and the full funded account activation process in what happens after you pass a funded futures evaluation.
Part 2 of 4 — Consistency rule: all-time scope (evaluation) vs payout-period window (funded)
The window reset is the most operationally significant difference. A trader who produced a strong best-day session in the final week of the evaluation does not carry that best-day benchmark into the funded account's first period. The funded account's first period starts from a clean slate — zero best-day, zero cumulative, zero hold.
During the evaluation, the consistency rule applies to all sessions from evaluation start to the moment of passing. The best day is the largest single-session profit across the entire evaluation. The denominator is cumulative net profit across all evaluation sessions. Both values grow throughout the evaluation period and never reset. A strong single session on evaluation day 3 that produced the best day remains the best day until a later session exceeds it — and the denominator grows by adding all subsequent sessions. If the evaluation ran 14 sessions, the denominator includes all 14 sessions and the best day is the single highest profit from any of those 14 sessions. The hold activates whenever the ratio exceeds the threshold; the hold cannot be cleared by resetting any window, only by growing the denominator further or by reducing the numerator through a new best-day session that is lower than the prior best day (which requires the best-day session to be the only session above the threshold — not a common path). See the evaluation consistency mechanics in consistency rule walkthrough.
The implication for evaluations that pass with an active consistency hold: a trader who passes the evaluation while the best-day ratio is above the threshold is not penalized in the funded account. The funded account activates with a fresh period, the hold does not carry, and the funded account's first session starts the new window at zero. The evaluation consistency hold is only relevant to whether the evaluation itself can be passed under the firm's rules — some firms require the consistency rule to be cleared at the time of the pass notification, while others allow a pass with an active hold. If the evaluation firm's rules require the consistency rule to be below the threshold at evaluation pass, the hold must clear before the pass is recognized — check the funded agreement for this requirement. See the full evaluation consistency rule mechanics in the consistency rule explained.
In the funded account, the consistency rule window is the current payout period — the span from account activation (or from the last payout approval) to the current session. The best day is the best single-session result in the current period. The denominator is the cumulative net profit in the current period (or positive-sessions-only profit, depending on the firm — verify the funded agreement). After an approved payout, the period closes and a new period opens. The new period's window starts at zero: zero cumulative profit, zero best day, zero qualifying sessions. The funded account consistency hold can only activate from sessions within the current period, not from sessions in a prior period. See the full funded-phase consistency mechanics in funded account consistency rule.
The funded account window reset changes the hold clearance timeline compared to the evaluation. In the evaluation, the denominator accumulates across the entire evaluation period — a hold that was activated by a strong session on day 3 might take 8 more sessions to clear as cumulative builds. In the funded account, the hold must be cleared within the current period. If the period has 10 sessions and the best day occurred on session 3, the hold clears when the cumulative from the remaining sessions in the period exceeds the clearing threshold. The funded account's shorter window (one payout period rather than the entire evaluation) means the hold must be managed more actively within each period. The upside: a hold that did not clear within a period does not carry to the next period — it resets at payout. The downside: the hold must be cleared before a payout request is submitted, so an uncleaned hold delays the payout request rather than carrying it over. See the hold clearing calculation and the post-session tracking format in how to track funded futures account metrics between sessions.
Not all funded futures firms apply the same consistency rule in the funded account as in the evaluation. Three variations exist across firms. The first — same threshold, payout-period window — is the most common. The funded account uses the same percentage threshold (e.g., 30%) as the evaluation but resets the window per payout period instead of tracking all-time metrics. The second — no consistency rule in the funded account — applies at firms that use the consistency rule only during the evaluation to prevent artificial pass strategies. Once the funded account is active, these firms remove the rule entirely and pay out on cumulative profit above the minimum threshold alone. The third — different threshold in the funded account — applies at firms that loosen the threshold after passing (for example, a 25% evaluation threshold becomes a 30% funded threshold, meaning a more favorable hold condition).
Verify which variation applies before the first funded session by reading the funded account agreement carefully — the funded account terms are typically separate from the evaluation terms and may differ in several ways beyond just the consistency rule. If the funded agreement does not state the funded-phase consistency rule explicitly, contact the firm's support for written confirmation before the first session. An assumption that the evaluation consistency threshold carries into the funded account, when the funded account actually has no consistency rule, leads to unnecessary hold management effort. An assumption that the funded account has no consistency rule, when it does, leads to an unexpected hold at the first payout request. See the firm variation comparison across consistency, DLL, and trailing drawdown in funded futures firm rule differences.
Part 3 of 4 — Trailing drawdown: continuous advancement (evaluation) vs lock mechanism (funded)
The floor lock is the most operationally significant structural change in the trailing drawdown mechanics between phases. Before lock, the funded account trailing drawdown behaves identically to the evaluation: the floor trails the balance, both upward exposure and downward floor-room change with every new balance high. After lock, the floor stops moving and the floor-room grows proportionally with profits — the risk profile becomes fundamentally different.
During the evaluation, the trailing drawdown floor advances whenever the balance reaches a new high. There is no threshold at which the floor stops trailing. If the evaluation starts with a $50K balance and a $2,500 DTF, the floor begins at $47,500 and advances to $48,000 when the balance reaches $50,500, to $48,500 when the balance reaches $51,000, and so on — the floor always stays $2,500 below the running balance high-water mark. The floor never locks; it will continue advancing until the evaluation is passed or the account is breached. This continuous advancement model is the same across nearly all funded futures evaluation programs regardless of whether the firm uses an EOD or intraday floor model — the EOD vs intraday distinction is about when the floor updates within a session (at settlement vs in real time), not about whether the floor eventually locks. See the evaluation trailing drawdown mechanics in how evaluation trailing drawdown works.
The continuous advancement model means the evaluation's risk profile is symmetric with profit growth: as the balance grows, the floor grows proportionally, and the floor-room (balance minus floor) stays approximately fixed at the drawdown distance. A trader who builds the evaluation balance to $55,000 has a floor at $52,500 — the same $2,500 floor-room as on day one. Profit growth does not accumulate floor-room; it simply moves the floor upward at the same rate. This is why the evaluation feels equally constrained at every balance level: the per-trade ceiling based on floor-distance ÷ 10 is approximately constant throughout the evaluation regardless of how much profit has been built. The key behavioral implication is that a strong evaluation day that produces a new high-water mark immediately advances the floor, tightening the subsequent session's floor-room from the elevated balance rather than providing any relief from the higher position.
In the funded account, the trailing drawdown floor starts at the funded account's starting balance minus the DTF distance and advances continuously as the balance climbs — identical to the evaluation — until the balance reaches the lock threshold. The lock threshold is the funded account's starting balance plus the DTF distance. For a $50K funded account with a $2,000 DTF, the lock threshold is $52,000. Before the balance reaches $52,000, the floor advances exactly as it would in an evaluation. Once the balance exceeds $52,000, the floor locks at $50,000 — the funded account's starting balance — and stops advancing regardless of how high the balance grows from that point. See the complete lock mechanics in funded futures trailing drawdown floor mechanics.
After the floor locks, the risk profile changes fundamentally. Floor-room is no longer fixed at the DTF distance — it grows with each profitable session because the floor stays at $50,000 while the balance climbs. A balance of $54,000 with a locked floor at $50,000 has $4,000 of floor-room — double the DTF distance. A balance of $58,000 has $8,000 of floor-room. This growing floor-room does not translate to a permission to size up proportionally — the DLL ÷ 4 ceiling applies regardless of floor-room, and sizing decisions after the floor locks follow the post-lock sizing model: stable or conservative sizing that uses the DLL as the binding constraint. The floor lock is a milestone that changes the trailing drawdown's behavioral model, not a trigger for sizing increases. See the post-lock sizing model in how to size up on a funded futures account.
The highest trailing drawdown risk in the funded account is in the pre-lock period — from day one through the session that first crosses the lock threshold. Before lock, the funded account trailing drawdown behaves like the evaluation: the floor trails the balance, each new balance high advances the floor, and the floor-room stays approximately fixed at the DTF distance. A loss after a new high that advanced the floor means the available floor-room is the DTF distance from the elevated floor — not from the funded account's starting balance. This is the same dynamic that creates the "earned my way to less floor-room" experience in the evaluation, and it applies equally to the funded account's pre-lock phase.
The implication for day one is that the funded account's maximum floor-room is available only at the very start — when the balance equals the starting balance and the floor is at its lowest relative position. Any profitable session that advances the floor immediately reduces the floor-room back toward the DTF distance. The pre-lock funded account period requires the same sizing discipline as the evaluation: DTF ÷ 10 and DLL ÷ 4 are the governing ceilings, the daily profit stop applies as soon as cumulative profit is established, and no single session should consume floor-room that cannot be recovered by the end of the period without missing the minimum trading days gate or the consistency hold clearance. See the complete floor lifecycle from day one through multiple payout periods in how trailing drawdown rules change after you pass.
Part 4 of 4 — DLL: same contractual amount, different consequence profile
In the evaluation, a DLL breach ends the session but is a recoverable event if the evaluation account has remaining floor-room. In the funded account, a DLL loss interacts with a floor that has potentially advanced from prior profitable sessions. The session that hits the DLL may not only end the day — it may consume most of the period's accumulated floor-room if the floor advanced significantly from a prior profitable run.
In the evaluation, the DLL ends the session for that day. The balance after a DLL session is the session-start balance minus the DLL amount. The floor at the next session start depends on where the floor was when the DLL session started — specifically, whether the floor had advanced to a new level from prior profitable sessions before the DLL session began. If the evaluation balance was $51,000 and the floor was at $48,500 (after advancing from $47,500 due to prior profits), a $1,000 DLL breach leaves the balance at $50,000 with the floor still at $48,500 — floor-room of $1,500. The DLL loss consumed $1,000 of floor-room from the $2,500 available at the prior high. The trader still has $1,500 of floor-room and can continue trading in subsequent sessions. The DLL did not end the evaluation; it reduced the available floor-room by the loss amount. See the full DLL breach mechanics in what happens when you breach the daily loss limit.
The key property of the evaluation DLL interaction with the trailing drawdown: the floor at the time of the DLL session determines how much floor-room the DLL loss consumes. If the floor is at the initial position (no prior profits have advanced it), a DLL loss of $1,000 on a $2,500 DTF account leaves $1,500 of floor-room. If the floor has advanced from prior profits to $50,500, the same $1,000 DLL loss starting from a $51,200 balance leaves a balance of $50,200 with a floor at $50,500 — a breach. The DLL loss after an advanced floor is more dangerous, not because the DLL changed but because the floor moved closer to the balance. This is the same dynamic in both the evaluation and the funded account — the distinction is the funded account's accumulated floor movement from a longer profitable history.
In the funded account, the DLL amount is typically identical to the evaluation DLL. What changes is the context: the funded account may be in the middle of a productive period where the floor has advanced significantly from prior sessions. A funded account that produced $3,200 in cumulative period profit across 12 sessions (with the floor advancing proportionally in the pre-lock period) has far more floor-room than a day-one evaluation account — but also a floor that has advanced to a higher position. A DLL session in this context removes the DLL amount from the balance against the elevated floor. If the floor advanced to $50,200 and the balance at the start of the DLL session is $53,200, a $1,000 DLL loss leaves the balance at $52,200 — still $2,000 above the floor. But if the floor advanced to $52,000 and the balance at the start of the DLL session is $53,200, the same $1,000 DLL loss leaves the balance at $52,200 — only $200 above the floor. The DLL did not change; the floor's elevated position from prior profits changed the consequence.
The funded account's DLL consequence profile is more variable than the evaluation's because the floor's position at any given session depends on the cumulative result of all prior sessions in the period and in prior periods. A well-managed funded account in a productive run has both a growing balance and an advancing floor — and the DLL session's consequence depends on how close the floor has come to the current balance, not just on the DLL amount. The practical adjustment is the same floor-room check that applies every session: pull the floor from the dashboard at session start, calculate the available floor-room, verify that the DLL does not exceed that floor-room before entering the first trade. If DLL exceeds floor-room, the session is blocked — the DLL can breach the account even if only a fraction of it is consumed. This check is one of the four steps in the position sizing checklist.
The scenario where the funded account DLL risk is highest is after a productive streak that advanced the floor repeatedly. Consider five consecutive profitable sessions on a $50K funded account with a $1,000 DLL and a $2,500 DTF. Each session ends at a new balance high, advancing the floor at EOD settlement. After the five sessions, the balance is $53,800 and the floor has advanced to $51,300. The available floor-room is $2,500 — the same as day one. On session six, a DLL loss of $1,000 leaves the balance at $52,800 with the floor at $51,300 — floor-room of $1,500. The DLL loss consumed $1,000 of the available $2,500 floor-room. On session seven, if another DLL loss occurs, the balance falls to $51,800 with the floor still at $51,300 (assuming no new highs in session seven) — floor-room of only $500. A third DLL session (session eight) would breach the account: any loss up to the DLL of $1,000 would consume the remaining $500 and continue into a breach. Three DLL sessions in sequence — a pattern common in revenge-trading or in a genuine strategy failure — can blow a funded account in the funded period in a way that a similar pattern in the evaluation might not, because the evaluation's floor is more likely to be at its initial low position early in the evaluation when the DGL streak begins.
The funded account streak risk is why the DLL interaction with the trailing drawdown requires awareness of both the current session's loss potential and the floor's current position relative to the balance. The pre-session checklist floor-room check protects against the scenario where the DLL exceeds available floor-room, but only for the current session. Managing the streak scenario — three or more DLL-adjacent sessions in sequence — requires an additional rule: at what point does the streak trigger a sizing reduction or a planned session off. The streak management protocol is covered in how to handle a losing streak on a funded futures account. The DLL breach mechanics at each stage are covered in what happens when you breach the daily loss limit.
Four rules change when a funded futures evaluation ends and the funded account begins: (1) DTF starting balance — the DTF formula stays the same but applies from the funded account's contractual starting balance, not from the evaluation balance at the moment of passing; (2) consistency rule scope — the evaluation tracks the best-day percentage against all-time cumulative profit, while the funded account tracks within the current payout period only and resets after each approved payout; (3) trailing drawdown model — in the evaluation the floor advances continuously, while in many funded accounts the floor eventually locks at the starting balance when the balance exceeds the starting balance by the DTF distance; (4) DLL consequence profile — the DLL amount is typically the same contractually, but in a funded account the DLL loss interacts with a floor that tracks cumulative balance across sessions, making a DLL session after a productive streak more dangerous than an equivalent DLL session early in the evaluation.
The funded account activates at the firm's contractual funded starting balance — typically $25K, $50K, $100K, or another tier — not at the evaluation account balance at the moment of passing. If you built the evaluation balance to $53,400 before passing, the funded account does not start at $53,400. It starts at the contractual funded balance, often $50,000, with a fresh DTF applied from that starting balance. The evaluation floor at the moment of passing does not carry to the funded account. Some firms apply a different DTF percentage to the funded account than to the evaluation — verify the funded agreement for the exact funded DTF amount before the first session and use the position sizing checklist with the funded account's specific values rather than the evaluation's.
In the evaluation, the consistency rule tracks all sessions from the evaluation start to the point of passing — the best day and cumulative profit are all-time metrics. In the funded account, the consistency rule applies within the current payout period only. The window starts at zero on account activation, grows through each session in the period, and resets to zero after each approved payout. A consistency hold from the evaluation does not carry to the funded account — the funded account's first period starts fresh. After each payout, the period resets and the new period starts from zero. Verify the funded agreement for whether the same threshold applies in the funded phase and whether the funded account even has a consistency rule — some firms remove the rule after passing.
The floor locks when the funded account balance exceeds the starting balance by the DTF distance. For a $50K funded account with a $2,000 DTF, the lock threshold is $52,000. Before $52,000, the floor trails the balance continuously — exactly like the evaluation. Once the balance crosses $52,000, the floor locks at $50,000 and stays there regardless of further balance growth. After lock, floor-room grows with profits rather than staying fixed at the DTF distance. The DLL ÷ 4 ceiling typically becomes the binding constraint after lock because the DTF-based ceiling (floor-distance ÷ 10) grows as floor-room expands. The floor lock is a milestone that changes the trailing drawdown's behavioral model, not a trigger for sizing increases — the DLL and consistency rule continue to apply unchanged.
The DLL amount is typically identical in both phases, but its consequence depends on where the trailing drawdown floor is at the time of the loss. In the evaluation, a DLL session early in the period hits a floor at approximately its initial low position — leaving significant floor-room remaining. In a funded account, a DLL session after a productive streak hits a floor that has advanced repeatedly from multiple profitable sessions. A floor that advanced to $51,300 from five productive sessions leaves only $500 of floor-room after two consecutive DLL sessions at $1,000 each. The DLL itself did not change — the floor's elevated position from accumulated profits changed the risk. The pre-session floor-room check in the position sizing checklist prevents the worst scenario: a session where the DLL exceeds available floor-room and any realized loss risks a breach.
Founding 100
The Founding 100 closes when 100 members are in. After that, pricing moves to the standard rate. If you're reading the library and working through funded accounts, the founding tier is the time to join.
See the Founding 100 offer