The answer: divide the best eligible day by accumulated eligible profit
FTMO Futures PRO uses a 50% best-day objective during evaluation; GROWTH uses 40%. A ratio above the selected ceiling does not, by itself, mean the account is breached. It means the current profit is too concentrated for pass eligibility and more eligible profit from other days is required.
Use one net basis and the program's day boundary. Do not delete the best day or change the history to make the ratio pass.
What this calculation can—and cannot—tell you
This guide answers one narrow question: whether the selected evaluation is consistency-eligible at a specific point in its history. It does not predict whether the trader will reach the target, survive the drawdown rules, or receive a payout later. Those are separate states with separate evidence.
The calculation uses the reviewed FTMO Futures evaluation thresholds shown above. PRO and GROWTH must not be blended into one firm-wide “consistency rule,” and the evaluation result must not be carried into Sim-Funded without checking that phase's current terms.
The formula and its denominator
Best-day share = largest eligible profitable day ÷ accumulated eligible profit. The numerator is one program day. The denominator is the eligible accumulated profit at the point being tested. Gross P&L, a local calendar day, or total lifetime profit from unrelated accounts can produce the wrong answer.
Use the same commission and fee treatment in both values. If cash-history costs reduce the accumulated total but not the stored best day, the ratio is internally inconsistent.
Why PRO and GROWTH can disagree on the same history
Suppose the largest eligible day is 1,500 units and accumulated eligible profit is 3,000 units. The share is 50%. That sits at the reviewed PRO boundary but exceeds GROWTH's 40% ceiling. To bring the same 1,500-unit best day to 40%, accumulated eligible profit must reach 3,750 units.
No winning trade was removed. The denominator grew through other eligible results. This is the central PRO/GROWTH trade-off for concentrated strategies. The plan comparison combines it with daily-loss and maximum-loss pressure.
Worked table: the same best day, three different states
| Accumulated eligible profit | Share from a 1,500 best day | Eligibility at reviewed ceilings |
|---|---|---|
| 2,400 | 62.5% | PRO: not eligible yet GROWTH: not eligible yet |
| 3,000 | 50.0% | PRO: at the reviewed boundary GROWTH: not eligible yet |
| 3,750 | 40.0% | PRO: within the reviewed ceiling GROWTH: at the reviewed boundary |
The table isolates consistency only. It does not say that the profit target, drawdown, or any other objective has been satisfied. Boundary treatment must follow the exact current official wording; a calculator should retain the raw values instead of rounding 49.96% or 50.04% into a verdict.
Reaching the profit target can still leave the account ineligible
Target and consistency are separate conditions. A trader can reach the nominal target while the best-day share remains above the selected ceiling. Additional eligible profit changes the ratio. It does not create a second target; it satisfies the concentration condition attached to the pass state.
Show both states in the journal: target reached yes/no, and consistency eligible yes/no. A single “passed” flag hides the reason an otherwise green account is still waiting.
A later loss can make the ratio worse
The best profitable day may stay unchanged while a later loss reduces accumulated profit. The denominator falls and the ratio rises. That is why a trader who was close to the ceiling should not assume every extra trading day dilutes the best day. Only net eligible profit that increases the denominator helps.
Recompute from the official state after corrections, fees and session regrouping. Do not freeze the ratio at the moment the target was first touched.
Calculate the extra profit without guessing
If the best day remains unchanged, the minimum accumulated profit required is best day ÷ rule ceiling. Additional eligible profit needed is that required total minus current accumulated eligible profit, with zero as the floor.
For a 1,500 best day, PRO's 50% denominator is 3,000 and GROWTH's 40% denominator is 3,750. If current accumulated eligible profit is 2,400, the arithmetic gap is 600 for PRO and 1,350 for GROWTH. That is a planning value, not a profit recommendation: the next result can create a new best day, reduce the denominator, or trigger a different rule first.
Day boundaries matter as much as arithmetic
Two profitable trades separated by local midnight may still belong to one program day. The reverse can also occur. Grouping them incorrectly changes both the largest day and accumulated profit path. Preserve source timestamps, official timezone/session boundary and any dashboard daily summary.
The Tradovate reconciliation guide explains how position and fee rows are prepared before daily totals are trusted.
A reproducible six-step check
- Select the exact program and evaluation phase; do not infer the threshold from the firm name.
- Normalize every fill, commission and rule-counted fee onto one net basis.
- Group rows by the official program day, not the device's local date.
- Calculate each eligible day's net result and identify the largest positive day.
- Divide that day by accumulated eligible profit using unrounded source values.
- Report target state, consistency state and the first other binding rule separately.
Keep the grouped daily ledger beside the result. Without it, a ratio cannot be audited after a timestamp correction, fee import, or rule-version change.
Consistency is not a diagnosis of the trader
A high ratio says one eligible day represents a large share of current profit. It does not prove overconfidence, luck, revenge trading, poor discipline or a bad strategy. Those explanations require different evidence. A legitimate event-driven strategy may naturally be concentrated; it can still be a poor fit for a program with a strict best-day objective.
The useful editorial verdict is fit-relative: how often the unchanged history becomes delayed and how much extra risk or time the dilution path requires. Do not turn a program rule into a personality label.
Edge cases that should return “needs review”
- Accumulated eligible profit is zero or negative, so the ratio is not decision-useful.
- The best day and denominator use different fee treatments.
- Trades cannot be assigned confidently to the official program day.
- A correction or duplicate row changes a previously reported daily result.
- The selected program, phase or rule version is missing from the export.
“Needs review” is safer than silently repairing the data. A precise-looking percentage built from incompatible inputs is worse than no answer.
The correct calculator output
A defensible calculator shows the selected program and phase, largest eligible day, accumulated eligible profit, current ratio, rule ceiling, eligibility state and additional accumulated profit needed if the numerator does not change. It also warns when the denominator is zero or negative and refuses to divide.
The general consistency tracker covers the event model across firms. This page owns the exact FTMO Futures PRO/GROWTH thresholds and their decision consequence.
Import a representative history and test the exact rule path in TSBBottom line
PRO tolerates a larger best-day share than GROWTH in the reviewed evaluation rules. Calculate the share on one net, session-correct basis; keep the winning day; and grow the denominator honestly. A profitable account can remain active but not pass-ready, which is a delay—not evidence that the account or trader has failed.
