The answer: separate breach rules from eligibility rules
FTMO Futures rules do three different jobs. A hard loss rule can terminate an account, a soft daily stop can pause trading until the next session, and a consistency objective can leave the account active while requiring more distributed profit. Treating all three as “fail rules” produces the wrong plan choice.
PRO and GROWTH share an EOD-trailing maximum-loss structure, but they do not share the same daily-loss consequence, maximum-loss distance, or consistency ceiling. The correct review asks which constraint binds first in the exact evaluation and then repeats the test for Sim-Funded.
PRO has two simultaneous loss boundaries
During PRO evaluation, the trader must stay inside both the hard daily-loss boundary and the EOD-trailing maximum-loss floor. Crossing the daily boundary is a breach even if the account still has room above its maximum-loss floor. Touching the maximum-loss floor is a separate breach.
This distinction matters for a strategy with infrequent but large losing sessions. Its multi-day equity curve can look survivable under the total floor while a single session still closes the account under the daily rule. Use net rule-counted results and the program's session boundary; a personal calendar-day report can group trades differently.
The 50% best-day objective is not an invitation to target exactly half the required profit in one session. It is a concentration ceiling at eligibility. A day near the ceiling leaves little tolerance for later costs or corrections and may require additional profit before the objective is satisfied.
GROWTH removes one evaluation rule, not all daily risk
GROWTH evaluation has no separate daily-loss limit. The EOD-trailing maximum-loss floor remains active and is smaller at the selected 50K scope than PRO's. “No DLL” therefore means one fewer constraint, not permission to lose without a boundary.
GROWTH also uses a 40% best-day objective. Because the maximum acceptable share is lower, a concentrated winning day requires more profit from other sessions before the account can become eligible. A trader can be positive, above the maximum-loss floor, and still need more trading because the profit distribution is too concentrated.
On Sim-Funded, GROWTH introduces a soft daily stop. The reviewed rule pack treats it as a pause: the session ends, but the account is not terminated solely by that event. The maximum-loss rule can still terminate the account. The separate PRO-versus-GROWTH decision guide applies that difference to representative trading histories.
How the EOD trailing floor moves
At overview level, the floor follows eligible end-of-day state rather than every intraday high, rises after qualifying profitable closes, and stops advancing at the reviewed lock level. A correct replay still needs the exact session boundary, rule-counted equity, costs and ordered floor state.
The dedicated FTMO Futures EOD drawdown guide owns the formula, worked PRO path, lock behavior, fee edge cases and failure-state replay. They are intentionally not duplicated here.
Consistency changes the finish line; it does not erase the winning day
Best-day consistency compares the largest eligible profitable day with accumulated eligible profit. It is an eligibility state, not a judgment about strategy quality or discipline; a history can remain active while needing a less concentrated profit distribution.
The dedicated consistency guide owns the exact denominator, PRO/GROWTH thresholds, worked states, loss-after-target case, extra-profit calculation and day-boundary edge cases.
Contract limits change after evaluation
Evaluation uses fixed caps by account size; Sim-Funded capacity begins at a lower tier and scales with accumulated EOD profit. The phase change can therefore alter entries, scale-outs and quantity rounding even when the trading idea is unchanged.
The dedicated contract-limits guide owns the complete size/phase matrix, mini-versus-micro treatment, EOD-profit tiers, multi-account risk and the six-step capacity test.
The seven-step pre-purchase rule replay
- Export a representative period with complete timestamps, side, quantity, gross result, commissions, and other rule-counted costs.
- Reconcile row count and net result to the source account before interpreting the history.
- Apply the exact program session boundary and rebuild daily net totals.
- Replay the EOD floor in the original sequence; preserve the first possible breach timestamp.
- Apply the daily-loss rule separately and label breach versus pause correctly.
- Calculate best-day concentration on the same eligible profit basis as the program.
- Repeat after the phase transition with the post-pass contract and payout constraints.
A defensible event log preserves the source row, net result, active rule version and first event timestamp. TSB can then replay the reconciled sequence, but the official rules remain authoritative.
Import a representative history and test the exact rule path in TSBRules that affect cost and payout still belong in the model
A rule can matter economically even when it never breaches an account. Extra subscription cycles created by consistency, resets after a breach, lower initial Sim-Funded size, qualifying-day requirements, and withdrawal caps all change the path from evaluation fee to received cash.
Use the pricing guide for attempt scenarios and the payout guide for request eligibility. Keeping those layers separate prevents a large split percentage from hiding a restrictive request path.
Bottom line
PRO offers more maximum-loss room and a looser consistency ceiling, but its daily stop can end the account. GROWTH removes that evaluation daily stop and later turns it into a pause, but the smaller total floor and tighter consistency objective can become the binding constraints instead. Neither plan is universally more permissive.
The only useful plan verdict is attached to an exact, reconciled history. If the data cannot reproduce daily net P&L, EOD state, and fees, the rule result is Not verified.
