The part the marketing leaves out

The reality of prop trading

Prop firm marketing shows the top 1% - the funded payout screenshot, the Discord screenshot, the Lambo. Here is the rest of the funnel, built from peer-reviewed research and regulator filings.

1%
reliably profitable
97%
futures day traders lose past Y1
$2.3K
avg fees per challenge customer
Out of every 100 active retail day traders

The funnel nobody markets

Active retail day traders100
Still trading after three years13
Still trading after five years7
Reliably profitable after fees1

Survival and profitability figures from Barber, Lee, Liu and Odean on Taiwan day traders, the largest and most-cited day-trading dataset published. See sources.

Most of these traders had an edge. They just sized it wrong.

The evidence

Four studies. One story.

We did not run a survey. We pulled the most-cited research on retail day trading, futures, and CFDs, plus the public CFTC complaint. The numbers line up.

1
%
of active day traders are reliably profitable

After fees and taxes, only roughly one in a hundred active day traders produced reliable profits over the period studied.

Barber, Lee, Liu, Odean - University of California
97
%
of futures day traders past 300 days lost money

A long-horizon study of Brazilian futures day traders found that nearly all who persisted past one year still ended up losing money overall.

Chague, De-Losso, Giovannetti (2020)
74-89
%
of retail CFD accounts lose money

European regulators forced brokers to publish loss rates on their own platforms. The range has stayed remarkably stable across years and firms.

ESMA - European Securities and Markets Authority
$2,300
average fees per evaluation customer

In its 2023 complaint, the CFTC stated one firm collected about $310M in fees from 135,000+ customers. We cite this for the scale of fee revenue, not as proof of wrongdoing.

CFTC v. My Forex Funds (2023)
How we decide what is real

The method behind everything on this page

We did not run a survey. Every number above comes from peer-reviewed research or a regulator filing, and every claim we make elsewhere on this site sits on the same rule: default to "this does nothing," then let the data force us to change our mind. Markets are mostly noise. The job of quantitative analysis is not to predict tomorrow, it is to kill the ideas that only looked good on the last three charts before they cost you an evaluation fee.

Nine out of ten setups we test die on out-of-sample data. That is not a failure of the method, that is the method working. The survivors are what we trade, and the risk sizing around them is what keeps the accounts alive long enough for the edge to matter.

The typical week

How most accounts actually die

Same pattern, again and again. Not bad analysis. Bad sizing under emotional pressure. Reproduce it yourself in the survival simulator.

Day 0
Buy the challenge

$150 to $700, often after watching three highlight reels in a row. The trader feels they finally have a real shot.

Day 1 to 5
Early lead

A few clean wins. The account is 60 percent of the way to the profit target. The trader thinks they have it solved.

Day 6
First red day

Two losers. Size doubles to make it back. One more loser. The trailing drawdown is suddenly very close.

Day 7
Account blown

Either a single oversized trade or a tilt sequence breaches the daily loss limit. Evaluation fee is gone. New challenge bought within 48 hours.

The cause of death
Sizing, not skill

Most blown accounts hit a loss limit, not a profit target. A trader with a real 55% win rate and a 1.5R reward who risks 5% per trade blows up roughly 10 times more often than the same trader risking 0.5%. Same edge. Different outcome. This is risk of ruin math, not a survey - reproduce it yourself in the survival simulator.

Prop firm specifics

Most prop traders lose the fees they pay

This follows directly from the loss studies above plus the fee-based business model. There is no audited public dataset of prop-firm pass rates, so we will never quote a precise number. We also do not need to - the underlying math is the same as any other retail day-trading population, plus a paid evaluation on top.

When a single firm collects roughly $310M from 135,000 customers in fees alone (CFTC complaint, scale only), the business model tells you who is being optimized for. It is not the median trader.

"The defendant collected approximately $310 million in fees from over 135,000 customers."

CFTC complaint, 2023. Case later dismissed over regulator misconduct. Cited here for scale of fee revenue only.
The other side

What the consistently paid few do

Six habits that show up in every trader we know who actually withdraws. None of them are secret. All of them are boring.

Risk tiny

Around 0.3% to 0.7% of account per trade. Boring on purpose.

One tested setup

Not five edges, not a watchlist of twelve symbols. One thing they have proven on paper.

A hard daily stop

Two losers, walk away. The day is over. They protect tomorrow.

Even boring days

If the setup is not there, they do not trade. They are paid to wait.

Withdraw early

Take payouts as soon as eligible. Move risk off the table, not onto it.

Scale by accounts

Add another account, do not double the contracts on the one you have.

The funnel is fixable. The math is not.

You cannot out-trade bad sizing. You can out-size a mediocre edge. The tools below run the math in front of you in seconds.

Get the monthly forward log recap

Once a month, what the bot actually did. Win rate, profit factor, the losing weeks. No pitch, no signals, unsubscribe any time.

We will never sell your address or send you somebody else's offer.