Instant Funding — Verification Record
Instant Funding · Our recorded checks and their evidence. A corpus correction does not establish when a firm changed its rules.
Confirmed unchanged
looked · found
Inspect the evidence or run your numbers
Run Instant Funding in the simulator — freeDated source-check records
- Confirmed · sources disagree on 0 field(s)
Instant Funding (flagship, no-evaluation instant-funded account program) · Two independent readers, each working blind to the other’s output and to the stored value
USD 120,000 · USD 1,250 · USD 20,000 · USD 2,500 · USD 40,000 · USD 5,000 · USD 625 · USD 80,000 · recorded field scope; not a whole-plan verification
Field-by-field: 4 confirmed · 5 preserved for the record · 5 noted (14 fields touched this pass).
Two independent blind first-party readers sourced Instant Funding's flagship no-evaluation Instant Funding Accounts product across all 9 sizes ($625-$120,000). CONFIRMED, both readers agree in substance: no profit target (direct-funded, no evaluation), no minimum trading days, no standalone daily loss limit (only the account-level Max Drawdown constrains a day), 10% Max Drawdown anchored on the starting balance (static, not trailing peak equity), no consistency rule, one-time per-size fee with no subscription, 80% base profit split. DISAGREEMENTS, all resolved WITHOUT an ambiguities[] entry (see each field's own provenance.reasoning for the specific judgment call), never taken at face value: (a) phases[0].max_drawdown.type/basis/anchor/locks_at — reader A used a slug-like internal label, reader B used descriptive prose, for the identical mechanic; corroborating-quote pairs, not value conflicts. (b) phases[0].max_drawdown source_url — reader A cited the general account-terms overview page, reader B cited a dedicated "How is Max Loss Calculated?" help article carrying the arithmetic worked example; both are genuine first-party sources for the same firm and product, cited together, not conflicting. (c) phases[0].max_drawdown.amount_abs at the $10,000 size ONLY — reader A (9000) reported the post-breach FLOOR, reader B (1000) reported the ALLOWANCE (starting_balance minus floor); resolved to the ALLOWANCE by this corpus's established amount_abs convention (the same field this corpus uses elsewhere for a percentage rule's dollar mirror, e.g. rules/tradeify/50000.json's daily_loss.amount_abs), independently corroborated by the raw merge tool's own "tighter-limit" conservative-default heuristic (which also picked 1000 over 9000) and by exact arithmetic agreement (1000 = 10% x $10,000) at every other size in this ladder's single-reader (reader B only) figures. NOT AN ENGINE-SCOPE FIX: this two-reader recheck resolves WORDING/DEFINITION disagreements only. The genuinely un-representable part of this firm's rule — the permanent 10%->5% floor tightening triggered by reaching +5% total profit — is not a reader disagreement at all (both readers describe it identically); it is a real, sourced mechanic this corpus's current max_drawdown schema (static|trailing, with a trailing-only locks field) has no field for. That gap is recorded in full, with its own hand-derived breach demonstration, in documented_omissions[] and rules/instant-funding/hand-derived/max-drawdown-lock-10k.json — not silently absorbed into this file's executable fields, and not written up as a reader ambiguity, because it isn't one.
payout profit split pct: confirmed consistency: confirmed daily loss amount pct: confirmed (absence) max drawdown source url: disagree (two valid corroborating URLs) max drawdown amount abs: single-reader max drawdown amount pct: confirmed max drawdown anchor: disagree-cosmetic max drawdown basis: disagree-cosmetic max drawdown locks at (descriptive, not a schema field): disagree-cosmetic max drawdown type: disagree-cosmetic min trading days: confirmed (absence) profit target pct: confirmed (absence) pricing initial fee: single-reader pricing model: confirmedNo prior value is evidenced for this check. This is a record of our research, not a firm rule effective date.
Sources recorded for this check:Link to this check
https://instantfunding.com/instant-funding-accounts/
https://instantfunding.com/help/how-max-loss-is-calculated/
https://instantfunding.com/help/do-we-have-any-monthly-fees/ - Confirmed · sources disagree on 1 field(s)
Instant Funding (flagship, no-evaluation instant-funded account program) · Two independent readers, each working blind to the other’s output and to the stored value
USD 10,000 · recorded field scope; not a whole-plan verification
Field-by-field: 4 confirmed · 6 preserved for the record · 4 noted (14 fields touched this pass).
Two independent blind first-party readers sourced Instant Funding's flagship no-evaluation Instant Funding Accounts product across all 9 sizes ($625-$120,000). CONFIRMED, both readers agree in substance: no profit target (direct-funded, no evaluation), no minimum trading days, no standalone daily loss limit (only the account-level Max Drawdown constrains a day), 10% Max Drawdown anchored on the starting balance (static, not trailing peak equity), no consistency rule, one-time per-size fee with no subscription, 80% base profit split. DISAGREEMENTS, all resolved WITHOUT an ambiguities[] entry (see each field's own provenance.reasoning for the specific judgment call), never taken at face value: (a) phases[0].max_drawdown.type/basis/anchor/locks_at — reader A used a slug-like internal label, reader B used descriptive prose, for the identical mechanic; corroborating-quote pairs, not value conflicts. (b) phases[0].max_drawdown source_url — reader A cited the general account-terms overview page, reader B cited a dedicated "How is Max Loss Calculated?" help article carrying the arithmetic worked example; both are genuine first-party sources for the same firm and product, cited together, not conflicting. (c) phases[0].max_drawdown.amount_abs at the $10,000 size ONLY — reader A (9000) reported the post-breach FLOOR, reader B (1000) reported the ALLOWANCE (starting_balance minus floor); resolved to the ALLOWANCE by this corpus's established amount_abs convention (the same field this corpus uses elsewhere for a percentage rule's dollar mirror, e.g. rules/tradeify/50000.json's daily_loss.amount_abs), independently corroborated by the raw merge tool's own "tighter-limit" conservative-default heuristic (which also picked 1000 over 9000) and by exact arithmetic agreement (1000 = 10% x $10,000) at every other size in this ladder's single-reader (reader B only) figures. NOT AN ENGINE-SCOPE FIX: this two-reader recheck resolves WORDING/DEFINITION disagreements only. The genuinely un-representable part of this firm's rule — the permanent 10%->5% floor tightening triggered by reaching +5% total profit — is not a reader disagreement at all (both readers describe it identically); it is a real, sourced mechanic this corpus's current max_drawdown schema (static|trailing, with a trailing-only locks field) has no field for. That gap is recorded in full, with its own hand-derived breach demonstration, in documented_omissions[] and rules/instant-funding/hand-derived/max-drawdown-lock-10k.json — not silently absorbed into this file's executable fields, and not written up as a reader ambiguity, because it isn't one.
payout profit split pct: confirmed consistency: confirmed daily loss amount pct: confirmed (absence) max drawdown source url: disagree (two valid corroborating URLs) max drawdown amount abs: disagree max drawdown amount pct: confirmed max drawdown anchor: disagree-cosmetic max drawdown basis: disagree-cosmetic max drawdown locks at (descriptive, not a schema field): disagree-cosmetic max drawdown type: disagree-cosmetic min trading days: confirmed (absence) profit target pct: confirmed (absence) pricing initial fee: single-reader pricing model: confirmedNo prior value is evidenced for this check. This is a record of our research, not a firm rule effective date.
Sources recorded for this check:Link to this check
https://instantfunding.com/instant-funding-accounts/
https://instantfunding.com/help/how-max-loss-is-calculated/
https://instantfunding.com/help/do-we-have-any-monthly-fees/
Earlier record links
These retained links open the complete size and program membership of the earlier grouped record. Each distinct check now has its own link.
2026-07-31 · earlier grouped record
What the rules say now
profit target pct
How much profit you need to make: There's no minimum profit target, but to request payouts, you first need to lock in smart drawdown by reaching 5% profit. (also summarized elsewhere on the same page as: Profit target — "No evaluation")retrieved sourced
How much profit you need to make: There's no minimum profit target, but to request payouts, you first need to lock in smart drawdown by reaching 5% profit. (also summarized elsewhere on the same page as: Profit target — "No evaluation")retrieved sourced
How much profit you need to make: There's no minimum profit target, but to request payouts, you first need to lock in smart drawdown by reaching 5% profit. (also summarized elsewhere on the same page as: Profit target — "No evaluation")retrieved sourced
How much profit you need to make: There's no minimum profit target, but to request payouts, you first need to lock in smart drawdown by reaching 5% profit. (also summarized elsewhere on the same page as: Profit target — "No evaluation")retrieved sourced
How much profit you need to make: There's no minimum profit target, but to request payouts, you first need to lock in smart drawdown by reaching 5% profit. (also summarized elsewhere on the same page as: Profit target — "No evaluation")retrieved sourced
How much profit you need to make: There's no minimum profit target, but to request payouts, you first need to lock in smart drawdown by reaching 5% profit. (also summarized elsewhere on the same page as: Profit target — "No evaluation")retrieved sourced
How much profit you need to make: There's no minimum profit target, but to request payouts, you first need to lock in smart drawdown by reaching 5% profit. (also summarized elsewhere on the same page as: Profit target — "No evaluation")retrieved sourced
How much profit you need to make: There's no minimum profit target, but to request payouts, you first need to lock in smart drawdown by reaching 5% profit. (also summarized elsewhere on the same page as: Profit target — "No evaluation")retrieved sourced
How much profit you need to make: There's no minimum profit target, but to request payouts, you first need to lock in smart drawdown by reaching 5% profit. (also summarized elsewhere on the same page as: Profit target — "No evaluation")retrieved sourced
min trading days (same across all modelled sizes)
(absence-inferred — see reasoning)retrieved derived
daily loss amount pct (same across all modelled sizes)
Daily drawdown: – . How much you can lose in a single trading day: No separate daily limit—just stay within your Max drawdown to avoid losing your account. (also summarized elsewhere on the same page as: Daily drawdown — "No daily drawdown")retrieved sourced
max drawdown amount pct (same across all modelled sizes)
Max drawdown: 10%. How much you can lose in total: Keep your losses under 10% of your starting balance to avoid losing your account. Once you make 5% profit, the limit becomes 5% of your starting balance and stays at this level permanently.retrieved sourced
max drawdown type (same across all modelled sizes)
Max drawdown: 10%. How much you can lose in total: Keep your losses under 10% of your starting balance to avoid losing your account. Once you make 5% profit, the limit becomes 5% of your starting balance and stays at this level permanently.retrieved sourced
max drawdown basis (same across all modelled sizes)
Whichever of Balance or Equity is lower is checked in real time against a fixed % of starting balance: "If your Equity or Balance falls below the Max Loss Limit, the account is breached."retrieved sourced
max drawdown locks
(schema-inapplicable — see reasoning)retrieved derived
(schema-inapplicable — see reasoning)retrieved derived
(schema-inapplicable — see reasoning)retrieved derived
(schema-inapplicable — see reasoning)retrieved derived
(schema-inapplicable — see reasoning)retrieved derived
(schema-inapplicable — see reasoning)retrieved derived
(schema-inapplicable — see reasoning)retrieved derived
(schema-inapplicable — see reasoning)retrieved derived
(schema-inapplicable — see reasoning)retrieved derived
consistency (same across all modelled sizes)
No consistency rulesretrieved sourced
Rules and their verification status change without notice; the firm's own documentation is always the final authority. This page is independent research, not investment or trading advice, and PropSurvival is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by Instant Funding.