Last reviewed: October 2026 · Method overview; each claim below carries its own scope and read date
The one-sentence version: every modeled firm rule carries a source URL, a supporting quote, a retrieval date and a confidence label; where a firm's own documentation is genuinely ambiguous, that is disclosed rather than guessed past — and every correction runs through the same dated, public record.
1. How this is run
PropSurvival maintains the simulation engine, published rule data and correction history. Each source reading records the account, relevant dates and fields it establishes. Automated checks verify that the product still uses the recorded version; they do not replace a source reading or an expert review.
What you can explore with Personal
Compare a fictional example or use your own trading statistics and limits. Results are conditional simulations, not predictions or firm/payout approvals.
Scope record as of 2026-10-13 (Europe/Istanbul).
Fictional Personal example
Compare the disclosed fictional strategy at two risk levels; discuss how the result changes under the stated model.
Uses fictional inputs to illustrate how risk changes a simulated outcome.
Sources and applicable scope
Exploratory feedback only. Synthetic assumptions are not verified trading history. These simulated outcomes do not predict performance, establish a firm rule or clear a payout. This record adds no independent mathematical or expert acceptance.
Account and validity: Fictional Personal account · Illustrative comparison · User-supplied or fictional inputs; no firm eligibility
Explore conditional simulated paths using the trading statistics and risk limits you enter.
Uses the statistics and limits you enter; results depend on those inputs.
Sources and applicable scope
Exploratory feedback only. Results depend on the statistics and limits entered; these inputs are not independently verified trading history. The model is not a tick-level replay or a prediction. No firm eligibility or payout clearance is established. Named-firm, imported-history and paid-report workflows require separate acceptance. First-screen scope and the simulated calculation were checked in desktop, tablet and mobile Chromium on 13 October 2026; this adds no independent mathematical or expert acceptance.
Account and validity: User-defined Personal account · Free exploratory simulation · User-supplied or fictional inputs; no firm eligibility
Checked 2026-10-13. User inputs, model scope and limitations (read 2026-10-12). Independent expert review: not recorded for this claim. Next scoped review by 2026-11-12.
FTMO 1-Step account-period distinction
Outside the Personal pilot: FTMO uses different consistency denominators for legacy and new 1-Step order cohorts; one unspecific FTMO result is insufficient.
The applicable rule depends on the original order or account merge date. Check the source and account period before using a named-firm result.
Sources and applicable scope
Outside the pilot: product integration, independent source review and live account-cohort/day/period acceptance are not established by this record. Legacy Best Day divides by summed positive daily closed P/L; new Consistency divides by net closed P/L across all days. For three distinct official days +500,+500,-300, the ratios are 50% and about 71.43%. Both have a 50% requirement; failing this requirement is not a rule breach or full payout refusal. Official days start at 00:00 CE(S)T; fees, swaps, period boundaries and actual order/merge evidence matter. Missing evidence means unknown, not eligible. Product mapping changed since this dated check; current account acceptance remains unestablished.
Account and validity: FTMO 1-Step, any recorded account size; not 2-Step, Futures or Instant · 1-Step Challenge and 1-Step FTMO Account · New orders from 2026-10-12T09:00:00+03:00; merged 1-Step accounts from 2026-10-12. Earlier direct orders retain Best Day through later accounts and reward withdrawals.
Source status: 41 historical citation findings remain unresolved. This does not mean 41 rules are proven wrong. A recent check date does not confirm every field: affected terms cannot establish current account eligibility until their source and scope are resolved. View dated findings by account and field.
The claim/source/scope record binds each calculation to its inputs, source version and verification status. Automated checks prevent a changed or expired record from silently retaining acceptance.
2. What "verified" means here
Every modeled rule — a profit target, a daily loss limit, a drawdown mechanic, a consistency clause — is transcribed from that firm's own published documentation, not from a forum post, a review site, or a competitor's summary. Each rule set carries a structured provenance record alongside its values: for the fields it covers, a source URL, the exact quote that supports it, the date it was retrieved, and a confidence label (sourced, derived, reconciled, or ambiguous) describing how directly the firm's own words support the stored value. That coverage is not uniform field-by-field — a dollar figure that is exact arithmetic on an already-cited percentage carries its source through that percentage rather than as a second copy of the same quote, and a handful of structural or not-yet-independently-cited fields are still catching up — but it is real and checkable, not decorative: open any rule file and the record is there to compare against the firm's own page. A rule that changes on the firm's site is a rule that goes stale here until it is re-read — see the changelog for the dated history of every re-read.
3. When a firm's own documentation does not settle it
Firms sometimes describe the same rule two different ways, or publish a value that admits more than one reading. When that happens, it is recorded rather than guessed past: each ambiguous field lists the candidate readings and states which one the model uses, with the reasoning attached. The default stance is conservative — the reading that makes passing harder, so the model never quietly flatters an outcome. One real example from the rule data: Topstep publishes its daily-loss-limit reset only as a local time ("5 PM CT"), which maps to two different UTC values depending on the time of year the reset falls in; both candidates are on record, and the later one is what the model uses. A second field in that same rule set is disclosed the other way around — a stricter reading is on record as the more accurate one but deliberately left un-applied, because switching to it would silently disable an unrelated check elsewhere in the simulation engine. That trade-off is written into the rule data itself, not smoothed over.
4. How a number gets checked twice
Beyond the initial read, rule sets are periodically re-verified with a two-pass blind method: the rule is re-derived independently, without looking at the stored value first, and only then compared against what is live. Where the two passes agree, the field is confirmed. Where they disagree — including cases where a firm's own page contradicts itself between two explanations of the same rule — that disagreement is recorded, not silently resolved in whichever direction is more convenient. Every recheck is dated. Dated per-firm records of those passes live at verification records — each one shows exactly what every pass found. The prop firm rules census 2026 is the single citation address for the whole corpus — one row per firm rule set, CSV/JSON download, CC BY 4.0.
As of 2026-11-01, PropSurvival's freshness ledger retains unresolved historical citation findings for 41 of its 60 tracked firm rule sets. Those earlier reads recorded that the cited passage could not be found at that time; this count does not assert that every passage is absent today. A completed scoped field check does not clear these findings or establish whole-plan currency. The stored values remain recorded, with unresolved terms held for re-verification rather than silently treated as current. Live status: rule verification freshness. Dated per-firm passes: verification records.
5. Corrections
Corrections happen. The changelog is the dated record of every one — rule re-reads, pricing-language fixes, engine corrections that changed a number. The practice is a dated changelog entry describing what was wrong and what changed, not a silent edit to the original text: a log that gets rewritten after the fact stops being a log. To report a changed rule, include the firm, account terms and primary source through the contact link in the footer. Confirmed corrections are recorded in the changelog.
6. What this product is, and is not
PropSurvival is independent analytical software. It is not financial, investment, or trading advice; not trading signals; not a broker; not a prop firm; and not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by any prop firm. It publishes no pass rates, rankings, or comparative claims about any named firm — firm rules are facts about published documents, and how a given trader fares under them is computed locally, from that trader's own statistics, never asserted by us about a firm's business.
There is no advertising on this site and no affiliate placement, and no firm pays for a listing or a favorable reading of its own rules — the network requests this product actually makes are named in full on the privacy page, and a rule corpus paid for by the firms it describes would not be independent analysis.
7. Data and reproducibility
Simulations use a seeded, deterministic pseudo-random generator, so a published figure — given its seed and path count — is exactly reproducible, not just directionally similar. Where original research is published, such as the static-vs-trailing drawdown study or the rule-volatility census (how often the same corpus's own published values change), the dataset behind it ships as machine-readable JSON under a CC BY 4.0 licence: reuse it, quote it, check it, with attribution. The same reproducibility extends past this site's own pages: two of the calculators run as free, iframe-embeddable widgets, generated from the identical engine source — a number shown in one never drifts from the number this site's own tool would show for the same inputs.
Citing this corpus
The rule corpus behind every simulation on this site is citable directly. At the time of writing it covers 60 firm rule sets across 247 account-size configurations, each read from the firm's own published documentation as described in §2 above.
Plain text
PropSurvival. (2026). Prop-firm challenge rule corpus (60 firm rule sets, 247 account-size configurations) [Dataset]. Retrieved from https://propsurvival.com/research-methodology
BibTeX
@misc{propsurvival2026corpus,
author = {PropSurvival},
title = {Prop-firm challenge rule corpus},
year = {2026},
howpublished = {\url{https://propsurvival.com/research-methodology}},
note = {60 firm rule sets, 247 account-size configurations, each field sourced from the firm's own published documentation}
}
8. Machine access
A machine-readable summary of what is published here lives in llms.txt. The rule data is written to be checked, not just read.
9. Contact
For a rule correction, include the account terms and a link to the firm's documentation.