Best Futures Prop Firms, Ranked by the Odds You Actually Get Paid
Every major US futures prop firm below is ranked by a single number: the simulated probability that a balanced trader passes the evaluation and reaches a withdrawal on the funded account. The ranking comes from each firm's published ruleset — trailing drawdown, daily loss limit, consistency rule, minimum days and funded payout gates — not from marketing pages or affiliate deals.
Independent research by Merx Research. No affiliate links. See how the simulator works.
- On a balanced trading profile, MyFundedFutures shows the highest simulated probability of reaching a withdrawal (23.3%) among the futures firms tracked here.
- Drawdown type is the biggest single driver: intraday trailing floors cut simulated pass rates hardest.
- The cheapest evaluation is rarely the cheapest funded account — the number that matters is fee divided by your real pass rate.
- Rankings shift with your own win rate, average win and trade frequency; run your numbers before paying.
Futures prop firms ranked (balanced trader)
Balanced archetype: 50% win rate, 1.2% average win, 1.0% average loss, 3 trades per day. Sorted by probability of passing and then withdrawing.
| # | Firm | Structure | Drawdown | Eval | Pass | Withdrawal | P&L · 50 evals |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | MyFundedFutures | One-phase | Trailing (EOD) · 4% | $80 | 58.5% | 23.3% | $29.9k |
| 2 | Take Profit Trader | One-phase | Static · 3% | $150 | 58.4% | 22.4% | $17k |
| 3 | Elite Trader Funding | One-phase | Trailing (EOD) · 5% | $175 | 58.6% | 21.4% | $35k |
| 4 | Tradeify | One-phase | Trailing (EOD) · 4% | $130 | 58.5% | 20.7% | $34.6k |
| 5 | Apex Trader Funding | One-phase | Trailing (EOD) · 5% | $167 | 58.6% | 18.7% | $59.8k |
| 6 | Bulenox | One-phase | Trailing (EOD) · 5% | $105 | 58.6% | 18.7% | $40k |
| 7 | Lucid Trading | One-phase | Trailing (intraday) · 4% | $149 | 57.8% | 17.9% | $37.1k |
| 8 | Topstep | One-phase | Trailing (EOD) · 4% | $165 | 0.5% | 0.5% | -$8k |
| 9 | FundedNext Futures | One-phase | Static · 4% | $175 | 0.5% | 0.5% | -$8k |
| 10 | Funded Futures Family | One-phase | Static · 3% | $145 | 0.5% | 0.5% | -$6.6k |
Firm by firm
1. MyFundedFutures
23.3% withdrawalMFFU's Starter plan is one of the highest theoretical pass rates in futures — one phase, static-until-lock drawdown, no daily loss on some plans. Payouts require a small profit buffer and a handful of trading days. Attractive for high-frequency scalpers; less kind to swing traders who take one big loser.
Full ruleset and simulated odds →2. Take Profit Trader
22.4% withdrawalTPT is one of the friendlier eval structures — static drawdown, no daily loss on core plans, generous max days. Simulated pass rates run high across archetypes. Where it costs you is the profit split and payout cadence versus more aggressive competitors.
Full ruleset and simulated odds →3. Elite Trader Funding
21.4% withdrawalETF is the classic Apex-style ruleset with tweaks — trailing-until-target, no daily loss, high theoretical pass rate for scalpers. Consistency and multiple funded-account rules matter more than the eval itself. Frequent promo pricing makes cost-adjusted EV attractive.
Full ruleset and simulated odds →4. Tradeify
20.7% withdrawalTradeify's Advanced plan uses end-of-day trailing drawdown, which meaningfully raises pass rates versus intraday-trailing competitors. One phase, no consistency rule on the eval, and reasonable payout gates. Solid middle-of-the-road choice — not the cheapest, not the strictest.
Full ruleset and simulated odds →5. Apex Trader Funding
18.7% withdrawalApex is one of the cheaper, more forgiving futures evaluations — no daily loss limit and a trailing-until-target drawdown that locks once you clear the target. The catch is on the funded side: strict consistency (30%) and multiple funded rules trip up traders who pass easily. Best for disciplined swing/scalpers; punishes lumpy P&L.
Full ruleset and simulated odds →6. Bulenox
18.7% withdrawalBulenox runs Apex-like rules at aggressive promo prices — the reason many high-volume traders test strategies here first. Trailing drawdown is the killer; passing is one thing, but stacking payouts on the funded side is where most traders leak edge.
Full ruleset and simulated odds →7. Lucid Trading
17.9% withdrawalLucid runs a one-phase eval with intraday trailing drawdown on some plans — the strictest floor in retail futures. High skill ceiling required to keep the trailing above your worst intraday spike. Pays fast when you clear the funded gates, but the eval attrition is severe.
Full ruleset and simulated odds →8. Topstep
0.5% withdrawalTopstep is the industry veteran and has the cleanest funded-account structure — no consistency rule at any stage, real payouts on schedule. The Trading Combine is one of the tougher single-phase evaluations because of the strict daily loss and the trailing max loss on both eval and funded. Traders who blow up on daily-loss gates elsewhere blow up here too.
Full ruleset and simulated odds →9. FundedNext Futures
0.5% withdrawalFundedNext's futures arm is newer than its forex flagship. One-phase static drawdown option makes it attractive for cautious traders. Split is competitive; the main tradeoff is a smaller track record of consistent payouts vs. Apex or Topstep.
Full ruleset and simulated odds →10. Funded Futures Family
0.5% withdrawalFFF's headline draw is the static drawdown on some plans — a genuine rarity in this market. Costs are mid-range. Fewer historical payout data points than Topstep/Apex, so long-run reliability is the open question.
Full ruleset and simulated odds →How to choose for your own trading
A ranking built on one archetype is a starting point, not an answer. The same ruleset that suits a patient swing trader can be close to unpassable for someone taking eight trades a day, because daily loss limits and consistency rules bite in proportion to how your profit is distributed, not how much of it there is.
Three checks decide it. First, match your worst realistic open drawdown against the firm's floor — trailing intraday floors punish traders who let winners run back. Second, check whether a single strong day would break the consistency rule. Third, look past the evaluation to the funded gates: profit buffers, minimum profitable days and payout frequency are where most funded accounts quietly die.
The simulator applies all three at once. Enter your own win rate, average win, average loss and trades per day, then cycle through the rulesets you are considering and compare pass rate, withdrawal probability and long-run equity.
Frequently asked questions
What is the best futures prop firm?
There is no single best futures prop firm — the right one depends on how you trade. A high-frequency scalper is punished by consistency rules, while a swing trader is punished by tight intraday trailing drawdown. This page ranks firms by the probability that a balanced trader passes the evaluation and reaches a withdrawal, which is a better starting point than marketing claims.
Which futures prop firm has the highest pass rate?
Firms with one-phase evaluations, static or lock-at-target drawdown and no daily loss limit produce the highest simulated pass rates. The ranking table on this page shows the simulated pass rate for every major futures firm, calculated from its published ruleset rather than self-reported numbers.
Are futures prop firms better than forex prop firms?
Futures firms usually charge lower monthly evaluation fees and run one-phase evaluations, but most use trailing drawdown, which is far less forgiving than the static drawdown common in forex. Whether that trade is good for you depends on how large your open drawdown gets relative to your profit target.
How much does a futures prop firm evaluation cost?
Mid-tier futures evaluations typically run between roughly $80 and $200, often billed monthly until you pass. The cost that matters is not the sticker price but the expected cost per funded account, which is the fee divided by your real pass rate.
How were these rankings calculated?
Each firm's published ruleset — profit target, drawdown type and size, daily loss limit, consistency rule, minimum days and funded-account payout gates — is run against three trader archetypes over many simulated evaluations. Firms are ranked by the joint probability of passing and then reaching a withdrawal. These are estimates from public rules, not guarantees.
Related
- Trailing drawdown explained
- One-phase vs two-phase evaluations
- What percentage of traders actually pass
- Why most funded traders never get paid
Based on publicly listed rules as of the date shown on each firm's page. Independent — not affiliated with any prop firm. Rules change; verify before paying. Simulations are estimates, not guarantees.