Futures · open dataset · verified 2026-01-15
MyFundedFutures Rapid EOD 50K pass rate: simulated odds
10,000 Monte Carlo paths per profile at seed 42, on the challenge’s exact published rules. Distributions under stated assumptions, never promises.
Developing trader
45% win rate, 1.4R average winner, 4 trades/day, risking 1% per trade
29.2%
pass per attempt · 95% CI 28.7%–29.6%
Consistent trader
48% win rate, 1.6R average winner, 4 trades/day, risking 0.75% per trade
68.3%
pass per attempt · 95% CI 67.6%–69.1%
Proven edge
52% win rate, 1.8R average winner, 3 trades/day, risking 0.5% per trade
95.3%
pass per attempt · 95% CI 94.9%–95.7%
Seed 42 · 10,000 paths per profile · engine v1.1.2. EV is net of every fee across a full journey (attempts, resets, activation, then 90 funded trading days of gated payouts); payout probability is the chance a funded account collects at least once. Assumptions and unsimulated rules: payout-minimum-500-not-modeled, trades-resolve-same-day, post-target-min-days-risk-free, consistency-stop-rule, attempts-iid, funded-withdrawal-model, trading-constraints-not-simulated. Details reproduce in the simulator run.
Precomputed odds
Not a ranking: simulated odds for three reference profiles.| Challenge | Developing trader | Consistent trader | Proven edge | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pass % | EV | Payout | Pass % | EV | Payout | Pass % | EV | Payout | |
MyFundedFutures · Rapid EOD 50K Futures | 29.2% | +$1,265 | 48.5% | 68.3% | +$6,629 | 75.6% | 95.3% | +$20,753 | 95.9% |
Seed 42 · 10,000 paths per cell · engine v1.1.2. Deterministic Monte Carlo: same seed, same numbers. Pass % is per attempt, with its 95% CI on hover; EV is net of every fee. Assumptions and unsimulated rules are listed in each challenge’s simulator view.
What the numbers say
Simulated at seed 42, 10,000 paths per archetype: reproduce every figure in the simulator on this page. The developing trader (45% win rate, 1.4R average winner, four trades a day at 1% risk) passes 29.2% of attempts (CI 28.7–29.6%), the lowest of the twelve entries in this dataset, and needs 3.43 attempts and $538 in fees on average to reach funding. The consistent trader (48%, 1.6R, 0.75% risk) passes 68.3%; the proven-edge trader (52%, 1.8R, three trades at 0.5% risk) passes 95.3%. Attribution is unambiguous: every failure is an EOD-trail breach, and the 30% consistency cap is what keeps marginal traders exposed to that trail for extra days. The matched no-consistency evaluation in this dataset passes the same developing profile 44.3% of the time.
The funded stage redeems the strict entry for traders who get there: daily payouts above a $2,100 buffer produced +$20,753 expected value for the proven-edge profile (95.9% collected at least once, 35 payout events on average, 60.1% of accounts alive at the 90-day horizon), against +$6,629 consistent and +$1,265 developing, whose funded accounts breached 99 to 100% of the time under maximum withdrawals. The structure is coherent: it filters for the exact trading style (small, even, repeatable days) that its own consistency rule demands, then pays that style quickly. Distributions under stated assumptions with the seed shown; the $500 payout minimum and contract scaling are flagged as unmodeled.
The rules, worked through
The 30% consistency rule is a moving target, and the engine simulates it that way
Best day ≤ 30% of profit is algebra with teeth: your true requirement is max($3,000, best day ÷ 0.30). A single +$1,500 day (one strong afternoon at this account size) raises what you owe to $5,000 total. The engine models a rational trader who stops a day rather than extend an already-best day (adding to it only raises the requirement) and keeps trading until the share complies; even played optimally, the rule forces extra days at risk, and days at risk are what an EOD trail converts into failures. The evaluation ledger shows the cost precisely, because this dataset contains a natural experiment, four futures evaluations with the same $3,000 target and $2,000 EOD trail, differing mainly in the consistency cap: no cap 44.3% (Take Profit Trader), 50% cap 38.1% (Topstep), 40% cap 33.5% (Tradeify), 30% cap 29.2% (here). The tighter the cap, the lower the marginal trader’s odds: about 15 percentage points from top to bottom of that ladder.
The EOD trail: floor moves at the close, kills in real time
The Maximum Loss floor equals your highest end-of-day balance minus $2,000, recalculated only at session close but enforced continuously: touching it intraday, open positions included, ends the account. Close day one at $50,900 and the floor rises from $48,000 to $48,900; an intraday spike to $52,000 that fades before the close moves nothing. The floor stops trailing at $50,100 ($100 above the start, the firm’s published convention, encoded exactly), so once your closes have banked about $2,100 the worst case is roughly breakeven. In simulation, 100% of failed attempts at every profile die on this floor: the consistency rule never fails you directly; it just holds you in front of the trail longer.
The funded stage pays down to a $2,100 buffer, daily
The sim-funded account keeps the same EOD trail and lock, and the encoded payout rule is the simplest in this dataset: once net profit exceeds a $2,100 buffer, withdrawals are available daily at a 90/10 split with no per-cycle cap (the $500 minimum per request is flagged, not modeled). Simulated over 90 funded trading days with maximum withdrawals: the proven-edge profile collected a payout in 95.9% of funded runs, averaged 35 payout events, and drove the strongest expected value of the futures entries here, +$20,753. The buffer matters structurally: because withdrawals must leave $2,100 above the start, the account always keeps cushion over its locked floor, which is why 60.1% of proven-edge funded accounts survived the full horizon while cap-free structures elsewhere in this dataset drained to their floor and died.
Verification status and encoded assumptions
This entry encodes the Rapid EOD 50K variant as introduced mid-2026: the standard Rapid plan differs (intraday trailing, larger contract cap), and the dataset notes the exact product page for the EOD variant still needs first-party confirmation, along with the $157 price. The 365-day access window is encoded as no time limit (the simulator caps unresolved attempts at 365 trading days and counts them as failures: none occurred at these profiles). Contract-size scaling is flagged, not simulated. Last verified 2026-01-15; MyFundedFutures’ own pages are authoritative, and every number above regenerates from seed 42 in the on-page simulator.
Where these rules come from
Simulated from the open-source rules dataset entry my-funded-futures/50k-rapid-eod (last verified 2026-01-15, against the firm’s published terms and cited sources), simulated with the open-source engine at github.com/LuxAlgo/prop-firm-sim. Rules change; MyFundedFutures’s own page is authoritative. Every number above is a seeded Monte Carlo estimate: re-run the same inputs and you get the same digits.
These are reference profiles. You are not one.
Open this exact challenge in the simulator (it restores the encoded rules at seed 42 and runs), then swap in your own win rate, R-multiples, and risk.
Frequent questions.
For the EOD variant we encode, it is the most trader-dependent number in our dataset: seed 42, 10,000 Monte Carlo paths give 29.2% per attempt for a 45% win-rate 1.4R trader risking 1%, 68.3% for a 48% win-rate 1.6R trader risking 0.75%, and 95.3% for a 52% win-rate 1.8R trader risking 0.5%. The 30% best-day consistency rule is the main reason the first number is the lowest of the twelve programs here. Run your own profile in the on-page simulator.