About this guide: Pass rate estimates are compiled from public firm disclosures, community surveys (Reddit, Discord), and anonymized TSB user data. No prop firm publishes exact pass rates — all numbers here are approximations. Behavioral comparisons (passers vs non-passers) are based on limited TSB user samples and may not generalize. See our editorial methodology.
Last updated: March 2026. Pass rate data compiled from FTMO public statistics, Topstep disclosures, community surveys (Reddit, Discord), and anonymized TSB user evaluation tracking. We update this page quarterly.
Pass Rate Overview by Firm
No major prop firm publishes exact pass rates in their marketing. The numbers below are compiled from public disclosures, community surveys, third-party tracking sites, and TSB user evaluation data.
| Prop Firm | Approx. Pass Rate | Evaluation Structure | Data Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| FTMO | 10-12% (both phases) | Challenge + Verification (2 phases) | Community surveys, FTMO public stats |
| Topstep | 15-20% | Trading Combine (1 phase) | Topstep public disclosures |
| Apex Trader Funding | 12-18% | Evaluation (1 phase) | Community data, TSB user tracking |
| The5%ers | 8-15% | Varies by program | Limited public data |
| FundedNext | 12-15% | Challenge + Verification | Community estimates |
Important caveat: These are estimates. Prop firms have little incentive to publish exact numbers, and the data varies by account size, time period, and how "pass" is defined (just evaluation, or evaluation + first payout). Treat these as reasonable approximations, not gospel.
A few patterns stand out. Single-phase evaluations (Topstep, Apex) tend to have higher pass rates than two-phase systems (FTMO, FundedNext). This doesn't mean they're easier — it means fewer traders quit between phases. FTMO's 10–12% rate accounts for both Challenge and Verification (for FTMO's official rules, see their evaluation page), which filters out traders who pass the first phase on luck alone.
Account size also matters. Larger accounts ($100K+) show lower pass rates across every firm because the profit targets are proportionally the same but the psychological pressure of managing larger drawdown limits changes behavior. For a full comparison of rules by firm, see the prop firm rules cheatsheet.
Why Traders Fail: The Data Behind the Losses
From TSB users who track their evaluation attempts, the failure reasons break down clearly:
| Failure Reason | % of Failures | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Hit maximum loss limit | ~50% | Account drawdown exceeded the firm's threshold |
| Hit daily loss limit | ~20% | Single-day loss exceeded daily maximum |
| Ran out of time | ~15% | Didn't reach profit target within time limit |
| Rule violation | ~8% | News trading, overnight holds, or other rule breaks |
| Gave up / abandoned | ~5% | Stopped trading before hitting any limit |
The critical insight: Roughly 70% of failures come from loss limits — maximum drawdown or daily loss. This isn't a strategy problem. These are traders who may have perfectly good strategies but size their positions too aggressively relative to the risk limits. The fix is mechanical: trade smaller.
The traders who hit the daily loss limit (21%) are particularly instructive. They're often having a bad day, getting emotional, and revenge trading to make it back. A hard personal daily loss limit set at 50% of the firm's daily limit would prevent most of these failures.
Phase-by-Phase Breakdown: Where Traders Drop
Two-phase evaluations create two distinct failure points. Here's where traders actually get eliminated:
| Stage | FTMO | FundedNext | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Start Phase 1 | 100% | 100% | All traders begin |
| Pass Phase 1 | ~25% | ~28% | Most fail on drawdown, not profit target |
| Start Phase 2 | ~20% | ~22% | Some never begin Phase 2 |
| Pass Phase 2 | ~10-12% | ~12-15% | Verification has lower target but same drawdown rules |
| First payout | ~7-9% | ~8-10% | Some pass but blow funded account before payout |
The biggest drop happens in Phase 1 — roughly 75% of traders never clear it. The primary killer is the maximum drawdown limit, not the profit target. Most traders who hit the profit target but still fail do so because they exceeded the daily loss limit or total drawdown before banking enough profit.
For strategies to survive the evaluation math, use the prop firm calculator to model your specific scenario before you start.
What Traders Who Pass Do Differently
We compared the behavior of traders who passed evaluations vs those who failed. Three patterns emerged consistently:
1. They Trade Smaller Relative to Max Risk
Traders who pass typically risk 0.5-1% of the account per trade, even when the drawdown limit would technically allow 2-3x that. Failed traders risk closer to 2-3% per trade, which means 3-4 consecutive losers can end the evaluation.
| Metric | Traders Who Passed | Traders Who Failed |
|---|---|---|
| Avg risk per trade (% of account) | ~0.5–1% | ~2–3% |
| Max position size used | Under 50% of allowed | Near the limit |
| Avg trades per day | ~3–4 | ~6–8 |
| Days to profit target | ~15–20 | N/A (failed) |
| Max drawdown used | Under 50% of limit | 100% (hit limit) |
2. They Take Fewer Trades
Passers average 3.2 trades per day vs 6.8 for failures. More trades means more exposure to commissions, more decision fatigue, and more opportunities for emotional trading. The traders who pass are more selective — they wait for their setup and skip marginal opportunities.
3. They Use the Full Time Window
Failed traders often try to hit the profit target quickly — sometimes in the first few days. This leads to over-trading and over-sizing. Traders who pass typically use 60-80% of the available evaluation time, taking a steady approach rather than swinging for the fences.
How Many Attempts to Pass?
The economics of multiple evaluation attempts is something most traders don't calculate upfront:
| Attempts | Rough Estimate of Cumulative Passers | Cumulative Eval Cost (FTMO 100K) | Cumulative Eval Cost (Topstep 50K) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | ~10–15% | $540 | $165 |
| 2 | ~25–35% | $1,080 | $330 |
| 3 (median) | ~40–50% | $1,620 | $495 |
| 5 | ~55–65% | $2,700 | $825 |
| 8+ | ~70–80% | $4,320+ | $1,320+ |
The cost reality: At the median (3 attempts), you've already spent $1,620 on FTMO evaluations for a 100K account. Your first profit split would need to exceed that just to break even on evaluation costs. For cheaper firms like Topstep ($165/attempt), the math is more forgiving, but it still adds up. Track your total evaluation spend — it's part of your real cost of trading.
After Passing: Funded Account Survival
Getting funded is not the finish line. From available data across multiple firms, funded account survival rates paint a challenging picture:
- 30 days: A majority of funded traders are still active
- 90 days: Roughly half have lost their accounts or stopped trading
- 180 days: The number drops further — many sources suggest under half remain
- 1 year: Only a fraction of originally funded traders are still active — estimates vary widely
The drop from evaluation pass to funded survival is driven by a psychological shift. During evaluations, traders know they can reset and try again. Funded accounts feel permanent, which paradoxically makes traders more fearful — a pattern consistent with loss aversion psychology and more likely to deviate from the strategy that got them funded.
The Real Cost of Failing
Pass rates become meaningful when you calculate the cost per funded account. Here's what the math looks like:
| Firm | Eval Cost | Avg Attempts to Pass | Estimated Cost to Get Funded |
|---|---|---|---|
| FTMO ($50K) | $345 one-time | 2.5-3 attempts | $860-$1,035 |
| Topstep ($50K) | $49/mo | 2-3 months active | $98-$147 |
| Apex ($50K Full) | $199/mo (often $80-100 promo) | 1.5-2 months | $160-$400 |
| FundedNext ($50K) | $229 | 2-3 attempts | $458-$687 |
Topstep's monthly model makes it the cheapest path if you need multiple attempts. FTMO's one-time fee hurts more per reset but doesn't accumulate monthly. Apex's discount promotions make the first month cheap, but slow passers accumulate fast. For a deeper cost comparison across all firms, see prop firm hidden costs guide.
How to Improve Your Odds
Based on the data patterns, here are the highest-leverage changes:
- Cut your position size to 50% of what the rules allow. This single change addresses the #1 failure reason (hitting max loss) and gives you more room to survive losing streaks.
- Set a personal daily loss limit at half the firm's limit. If the firm allows $2,000 daily loss, stop at $1,000. This prevents the revenge trading spiral that drives a large share of daily-limit failures.
- Trade fewer setups, not more. The data shows passers take 3.2 trades/day vs 6.8 for failures. Quality over quantity is not just a cliche here — the data consistently supports it.
- Use the full evaluation window. Don't try to pass in week one. Spread the profit target over the available time and let compounding work.
- Journal every trade. In our experience, traders who journal consistently tend to perform better in evaluations. During evaluations, reviewing what works and what doesn't accelerates your adaptation to the specific firm's rules.
Your Next Step
Pass rates are averages — they describe populations, not individuals. The traders who pass are the ones who treat the evaluation like a structured process, not a gamble.
Before you start your next evaluation:
- Run your stats through the prop firm calculator to see if your win rate and R:R realistically hit the target
- Read the how to pass FTMO guide for specific evaluation strategies
- Check the prop firm comparison to pick the firm whose rules match your trading style
- Start tracking your trades in a journal — the best trading journals will show you the patterns you can't see from memory
