They all look the same on the landing page. Pass an eval, get funded, keep 90%. Then you read the rules and realize you’ve been comparing the wrong things.
The thing that actually decides whether you pass isn’t the profit target. It’s the drawdown type. Some firms use an end-of-day trailing drawdown that only moves on closed balance — forgiving, you can let a trade breathe. Others trail your highest unrealized equity, intraday, so a green spike you give back can fail you while you’re still up on the day. Same “$2,000 drawdown,” completely different game.
Then there’s the stuff nobody mentions until it bites:
- Consistency rules. Some firms cap how much of your total profit can come from one day. Hit your target in a single lucky session and you’re not funded — you’re flagged. A bot that wins big once and chops the rest can trip this without you noticing.
- Automation policy. A few firms quietly restrict full automation, or require you to be “present.” If you’re running a bot, read this line twice.
- Payout mechanics. Minimum trading days, minimum winning days, how often you can withdraw. The headline split means nothing if you can’t get to a payout.
My honest take after running bots across several of them: pick the firm whose drawdown matches how your strategy actually trades, not the one with the biggest target or the flashiest dashboard. A mean-reversion bot that scratches a lot wants a forgiving trailing rule. A clean trend bot can live with a tighter one.
The eval isn’t a test of your edge. It’s a test of whether your edge fits their rules. Match those first.