What Is a Consistency Rule on a Prop Firm Funded Account?
A consistency rule caps how much of total profit one day may supply. Five firms' own pages, read September 2026: the percentages and what a failure costs.
A consistency rule on a prop firm funded account caps the share of total profit that any single trading day may contribute, typically 20% to 50%. Exceed it and the firm pages read here describe a deferral, not a closure: the pass or the payout waits until further profitable days bring the biggest day back under the cap.
That second sentence is what the explainers ranking for this question do not supply: the four this desk could read give the formula and US futures sellers’ percentages, and none reads the consequence off a named firm’s own page.
This is an evergreen explainer: the definition does not expire, and the percentages are as published on the dates given.
What is a consistency rule on a prop firm funded account?
It is a cap on concentration: a firm wants the profit that meets a target or earns a payout to arrive across several days, so it fixes a percentage that no single day’s profit may exceed as a share of the total. The cap is a ratio, measured on closed, end-of-day profit (Funded Trading Plus says open equity does not count), and a big day is not undone but diluted by later ones.
How is the consistency rule calculated?
Divide your biggest single-day profit by your total profit and compare the result with the firm’s percentage. FundedNext Futures publishes it exactly that way: highest profit day divided by total profit, times 100. Tradeify turns it round to give the balance you still need: biggest end-of-day profit divided by the percentage, so a $1,000 day under a 20% rule needs $5,000 of total profit before the rule is met.
Funded Trading Plus: on a $100,000 challenge the 7% target is $7,000, so the 35% limit makes $2,450 the largest day allowed.
What the firms’ own pages say: percentage, phase and consequence
Every row is from the firm’s own page, fetched at 200 on 20 September 2026; Alpha Capital Group’s page was also read on 19 September.
| Firm and product | Rule | Phase bound | What the page says happens | Page stamp |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tradeify (US futures), Advanced/Growth Sim Funded | 35% | Funded | Balance needed before payout, by the formula; no closure sentence in the text read | “Updated”, undated |
| Tradeify, Straight to Sim Funded | 20% | Funded | As above | As above |
| FundedNext, FNL:001 NO DLL 1-Step CFDs 50K | 40% of the profit target | Challenge phase only; “no consistency rule” in the FundedNext phase | “Your account is not breached”; the target scales up ($1,400 day lifts a $3,000 target to $3,500) | 22 July 2026; collection labelled not eligible for new purchase |
| FundedNext Futures, Rapid and Rapid Pro FundedNext accounts | 40% of total profit | Funded, as a withdrawal condition | Keep trading until under 40%; “at least 3 trading days” | 10 July 2026; Rapid and Bolt closed to new purchases and resets from that date |
| Funded Trading Plus, 2-Step Classic | 35% per step | Step 1 and Step 2 | “You will not pass your challenge” until met | “last update : 07.02.2026” |
| Funded Trading Plus, funded stage | 50% per payout evaluation period | Funded | “Unable to request a payout until” met; monitored automatically | As above |
| FTUK | 20%, per its consistency calculator | Not stated on the page read | Not stated on the page read | Issue date 24 October 2025 |
| Alpha Capital Group, 2026 rules-explained page | No consistency clause in the text read | Not applicable | Not applicable | 2026 |
Three rows need a caveat.
The FundedNext rows are rules for products no longer sold: the CFD article sits under “Not eligible for new purchase”, and the futures article notes Rapid and Bolt closed to new purchases and resets on 10 July 2026. They are not the current offer, and the currently sold CFD models were not read for the clause.
The FTUK row is thin: the calculator page states a 20% rule, takes biggest day and total profit as inputs, and says nothing about phase or consequence. Its FAQ returned only site furniture to a plain fetch, which is not evidence it lacks a clause. This site’s FTUK review reads its other terms.
The Alpha Capital row is a scoped absence: the roughly six thousand characters a plain fetch returned, ending inside the Alpha Pro section, contain no consistency clause, and the 19 September read found only a sentence about slippage and “consistent performance fees”.
Is a consistency rule breach a soft breach or a hard breach?
This site sorted breaches into two classes in its soft breach explainer: a hard breach closes the account on a loss-limit failure; a soft breach is penalised with the account open. The classes are this site’s reading; no firm page read calls the consistency rule a “soft breach”.
Against that taxonomy the rule sits in the soft class on every page that states a consequence: what is withheld is the pass or the payout, and what is kept is the account.
The difference from Alpha Capital’s news-window penalty is direction. That penalty is retrospective: one trade’s profit is forfeited. A consistency failure is prospective: nothing is forfeited, and the cost is the extra trading days needed to dilute the big day, inside the loss limits the hard breach post sets out.
Does the consistency rule apply to funded accounts?
At some firms, and it is the funded stage where it bites hardest, because there it gates payouts. Funded Trading Plus applies 50% on its funded stage per payout period and 35% per challenge step; Tradeify’s 35% and 20% figures are for its Sim Funded accounts. FundedNext’s FNL:001 CFD page is the opposite case: a 40% rule in the challenge phase and none in the funded phase.
Which prop firms have no consistency rule?
This desk can only answer for the pages it read. FundedNext’s own article states there is no consistency rule in the FNL:001 CFD funded phase. Alpha Capital Group’s 2026 rules-explained page, in the text a plain fetch returned on 20 September 2026, carries no consistency clause; that is an absence on one page, not a statement about the whole firm. FTUK’s FAQ could not be read for the clause at all.
What happens if you break the consistency rule?
On every firm page this desk read, the account stays open and something is deferred. FundedNext says outright that the account is not breached and the profit target rises instead. Funded Trading Plus says you cannot pass the step or request a payout until the limit is met. Tradeify expresses it as a balance still needed. None of the pages read describes closure, which puts the rule in the soft-breach class in this site’s terms.
The reading, and the risk line
Read at 200 on 20 September 2026: Tradeify’s consistency-rule guide, FundedNext’s FNL:001 article, FundedNext Futures’ Rapid article, Funded Trading Plus’s consistency-rule page, FTUK’s consistency calculator and Alpha Capital Group’s 2026 rules page. Nothing here says any of these firms is regulated, authorised or licensed anywhere, because no regulator’s page was read; FTUK’s own footer names FTUK LLC as the operating brand, with FTUK Markets Ltd providing the simulated trading environment and NexData-Solutions B.V. named as its European office. Every account discussed is simulated; the money at risk is the evaluation fee and the extra trading days a consistency rule can demand inside live loss limits. A fee paid to a prop firm is a purchase, not an investment, and nothing here is advice on how to trade inside one.