FundedNext Labs: When the Rulebook Is the Experiment
Two limited-run experimental evaluations, two different loss-limit designs, and a page that as of this writing lists both as expired. What a UK buyer can check, and what disappears with the window.
Most prop firms revise their rules quietly and date the change nowhere. FundedNext has done something more candid and, for a buyer, more awkward: it has made the revision itself the product. Its Labs programme sells limited-run evaluations built around rule sets the firm is still deciding about, framed on its own Labs page in the second person: whatever the drop is, “you are the one testing it.”
The second run put numbers on that. Per Finance Magnates’ report of 4 August, FNL:002 was a $25,000 two-step evaluation at $149.99, carrying a 12% maximum loss limit — $3,000 — alongside a 4% daily cap of $1,000, phase targets of 8% then 6%, a 3% cap on position risk, and an advertised 85% profit share from the first payout, which itself required three separate days closing at least $250 each.
Set that beside the first run and the direction of travel is not the one the headline suggests. FNL:001, per the same publication, was a $50,000 one-step at $99.99 with a $2,000 trailing end-of-day loss threshold, no daily cap at all, a 6% target, a 40% consistency rule and an advertised 80% split. Between the two, the marketing number widened while the account halved, the fee rose by half, one step became two, and the daily cap the first experiment had removed came back. The promotional case for the wider limit — that ordinary volatility, rather than bad trades, is what ends most accounts against a 10% ceiling — is an assertion, and the report records no supporting data offered with it.
What a prospective buyer can verify today is thinner still. As of this writing, the firm’s own Labs page shows FNL:001 and FNL:002 as expired, lists no live experiment, and offers a notification sign-up in place of terms. It publishes headline balances, targets and loss limits only: no fee, no profit split, no payout conditions, no seat count. Terms that exist solely inside a sales window cannot be compared before purchase or checked after it, which is an odd property for a product whose whole pitch is the rulebook.
None of this is unlawful, and running experiments openly beats changing the terms of a standard plan without telling anyone. But the experiment is being run on people who paid to be in it. Read the Labs runs against the firm’s standing products, which this desk has set out separately, and treat the fee for what it is: money at risk in a paid evaluation of simulated trading, not an investment service, with no advice offered here.