Leeloo Trading — Verification Record

Value stands · re-sourcing citation

looked 2026-10-15 · cited sentence not found at 10 URL(s)

Inspect citation findings

Citation findings

The recorded source wording was not found at the following locations. This does not establish that the firm's rule changed.

• https://support.leelootrading.com/kb/a190/understanding-the-30-rule-for-performance-accounts.aspx (the cited passage is no longer on the page)
• https://support.leelootrading.com/kb/a44/rising-trailing-max-drawdown-explained.aspx (quote ok)
• https://www.leelootrading.com/ (quote ok)
• https://www.leelootrading.com/miles-test (quote ok)
• https://support.leelootrading.com/kb/a67/how-to-reset-an-evaluation-account.aspx (new rule page)
• https://support.leelootrading.com/kb/a21/1_-i-qualified-whats-next-leeloo-performance-account-overview.aspx (quote ok)
• https://support.leelootrading.com/kb/a48/minimum-10-trading-days-no-maximum.aspx (quote ok)
• https://support.leelootrading.com/kb/a122/multiple-concurrent-evaluation-accounts-are-permitted.aspx (new rule page)
• https://support.leelootrading.com/kb/a77/1_-the-leeloo-express-promo-evaluation.aspx (new rule page)
• https://support.leelootrading.com/kb/a50/consistency-guideline.aspx (new rule page)

Dated source-check records

• 2026-10-04 Confirmed, no changes

  Foundation Practice Account · Normal corpus review current first party

  USD 100,000 · USD 150,000 · USD 25,000 · USD 250,000 · USD 300,000 · USD 50,000 · recorded field scope; not a whole-plan verification

  Field-by-field: 1 confirmed (1 field touched this pass).

  Manifest row 135; auto_promote:false; Evaluation10activeUS tradingdays/noDLL; intraday highestUNREALIZED trailing neverfreezes duringevaluation. Fundedpayout30% condition not inserted into evaluation consistency[]. Scoped field review, not whole-plan acceptance. Held fields are deliberately absent from the confirmation map.

  consistency: confirmed

  No 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:
  https://support.leelootrading.com/kb/a190/understanding-the-30-rule-for-performance-accounts.aspx

  Link to this check
• 2026-10-04 Confirmed, no changes

  Foundation Practice Account · Normal corpus review current first party

  USD 100,000 · USD 150,000 · USD 25,000 · USD 250,000 · USD 300,000 · USD 50,000 · recorded field scope; not a whole-plan verification

  Field-by-field: 4 confirmed (4 fields touched this pass).

  Manifest row 134; auto_promote:false; Evaluation10activeUS tradingdays/noDLL; intraday highestUNREALIZED trailing neverfreezes duringevaluation. Fundedpayout30% condition not inserted into evaluation consistency[]. Scoped field review, not whole-plan acceptance. Held fields are deliberately absent from the confirmation map.

  max drawdown anchor: confirmed max drawdown basis: confirmed max drawdown locks: confirmed max drawdown type: confirmed

  No 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:
  https://support.leelootrading.com/kb/a44/rising-trailing-max-drawdown-explained.aspx

  Link to this check
• 2026-10-04 Confirmed, no changes

  Foundation Practice Account · Normal corpus review current first party

  USD 100,000 · USD 150,000 · USD 25,000 · USD 250,000 · USD 300,000 · USD 50,000 · recorded field scope; not a whole-plan verification

  Field-by-field: 1 confirmed (1 field touched this pass).

  Manifest row 132; auto_promote:false; Evaluation10activeUS tradingdays/noDLL; intraday highestUNREALIZED trailing neverfreezes duringevaluation. Fundedpayout30% condition not inserted into evaluation consistency[]. Scoped field review, not whole-plan acceptance. Held fields are deliberately absent from the confirmation map.

  min trading days: confirmed

  No 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:
  https://www.leelootrading.com/

  Link to this check
• 2026-10-04 Confirmed, no changes

  Foundation Practice Account · Normal corpus review current first party

  USD 100,000 · USD 150,000 · USD 25,000 · USD 250,000 · USD 300,000 · USD 50,000 · recorded field scope; not a whole-plan verification

  Field-by-field: 1 confirmed (1 field touched this pass).

  Manifest row 133; auto_promote:false; Evaluation10activeUS tradingdays/noDLL; intraday highestUNREALIZED trailing neverfreezes duringevaluation. Fundedpayout30% condition not inserted into evaluation consistency[]. Scoped field review, not whole-plan acceptance. Held fields are deliberately absent from the confirmation map.

  daily loss amount pct: confirmed

  No 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:
  https://www.leelootrading.com/

  Link to this check
• 2026-09-13 Partial pass

  Foundation Practice Account · First party single pass

  USD 100,000 · USD 150,000 · USD 25,000 · USD 250,000 · USD 300,000 · USD 50,000 · recorded field scope; not a whole-plan verification

  Field-by-field: 2 noted (2 fields touched this pass).

  PKG-E payout/reset-fee provenance backfill, corrected 2026-09-13 after a trader-relations review flagged two errors in the same-day backfill: (1) pricing.reset_price_after_breach was marked documented-absent although Leeloo's own homepage states a flat $85 reset fee for every Foundation size -- now confirmed and populated. (2) the payout.cycle_days omission note scoped "payout eligibility" to the unfunded Practice Account and cited an unsupported "5 winning traded days" figure -- payouts apply only after funding (the Performance Account), and Leeloo's own payout-guidelines article states traded-day requirements vary by account type and must be confirmed with Support, so cycle_days correctly stays null under a corrected, properly-sourced note.

  payout cycle days: documented-absent (corrected note; was misattributed to unfunded Practice Account) pricing reset price after breach: confirmed (85, homepage reset-fee line, flat across all six Foundation sizes)

  No 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:
  https://support.leelootrading.com/kb/a48/minimum-10-trading-days-no-maximum.aspx
  https://support.leelootrading.com/kb/a21/1_-i-qualified-whats-next-leeloo-performance-account-overview.aspx
  https://www.leelootrading.com/

  Link to this check
• 2026-09-13 Documented absent

  Foundation Practice Account · First party single pass

  USD 100,000 · USD 150,000 · USD 25,000 · USD 250,000 · USD 300,000 · USD 50,000 · recorded field scope; not a whole-plan verification

  Field-by-field: 1 noted (1 field touched this pass).

  trader-relations review CONCERNS: the note referred to a "Performance Account payout-guidelines article" as if it were a source distinct from the cited kb/a21 overview URL -- a source_url/note mismatch class already corrected on FundingPips in this batch. Re-fetched the cited page directly this pass and confirmed the quoted traded-day and last-Saturday-window text is not on a different page at all: it is this same Article 21's own "Payout Request Guidelines" section, further down the same page. Reworded the note to say so explicitly instead of implying a second, uncited article. cycle_days remains correctly documented-absent (a monthly submission window and variable per-account-type traded-day count, not a fixed interval).

  payout cycle days: documented-absent (note reworded to point at the section of the cited page, not an implied separate article)

  No 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:
  https://support.leelootrading.com/kb/a21/1_-i-qualified-whats-next-leeloo-performance-account-overview.aspx

  Link to this check
• 2026-07-30 Confirmed · sources disagree on 2 field(s)

  Foundation Practice Account · Two independent readers, each working blind to the other’s output and to the stored value

  USD 300,000 · recorded field scope; not a whole-plan verification

  Field-by-field: 4 confirmed · 3 preserved for the record · 4 noted (11 fields touched this pass).

  Merged from two independent blind first-party reads of Leeloo Trading's Foundation (LL / "Leeloo Legacy") Practice Account line, Explode tier ($300,000). AGREE: profit target $20,000, trailing max drawdown $7,500 (a44: "NEVER stop trailing the highest UNREALIZED profit point ... throughout the ENTIRE Practice Account" — floor tracks the highest intraday OPEN/unrealized equity, not closed balance, and never locks during the Practice Account, only post-funding on the "Investor" Performance Account at Initial Balance + $100), NO daily loss limit at any size ("No Daily Drawdown", homepage feature list; corroborated independently by reader A from a second page, https://www.leelootrading.com/miles-test), a 30% consistency/best-day rule that both readers scope explicitly to the FUNDED Performance Account stage as a payout-eligibility gate only (not a Practice Account qualification rule — same structural pattern already found and resolved for Tradeify's Growth product in this corpus), and 10 minimum trading days. DISAGREE, RESOLVED (see ambiguities[]): whether the firm's own page states profit_target_pct/max_drawdown.amount_pct as an explicit percentage (reader B: yes, 6.67%/2.5%) or only as a dollar figure (reader A). Resolved by computing the percentage from the undisputed dollar figures, which matches reader B's number exactly. NOTE: the Explode (300K) tier's profit-target ratio (6.667%) is a genuine outlier against the clean 6% every other Foundation size hits — confirmed via two independently-rendered fetches of the homepage by reader A, not an artifact of rounding, and not smoothed to fit the ladder. DISAGREE, NOT ENTERED (citation-only, not substantive — both readers describe identical mechanics and dollar figures, differing only in which exact phrase/page they quoted): quotation-mark styling on the profit-target/drawdown dollar quotes; which of two pages (homepage vs. https://www.leelootrading.com/miles-test) was cited for the daily-loss absence; which of two pages (homepage vs. https://support.leelootrading.com/kb/a44/rising-trailing-max-drawdown-explained.aspx) was cited for the drawdown dollar figure vs. its mechanic; wording of the max_drawdown.anchor/locks/consistency descriptions (same fact, different sentences). NOT MODELED in this schema, recorded here only: a real recurring-monthly pricing structure ladder across the six Foundation sizes ($250/$280/$320/$405/$725/$850 per month at Aspire/Launch/Climb/Cruise/Burst/Explode respectively — reader B), an $85 reset fee for a failed/breached Practice Account ("This account is eligible for a reset $85" — reader B), and a separate funded-stage Performance Account fee once qualified ("$88 per month per Performance Account" or a "$250 one-time fee" alternative — reader B). Per this corpus's established convention for subscription-model firms (see rules/topstep, rules/oneup-trader, rules/earn2trade), these dollar figures are not written into pricing{} — only documented here — because this schema's pricing fields are not populated for subscription-model evaluations elsewhere in the corpus either.

  citation choices (quote/url wording): disagree (citation-only, not substantive) consistency (existence + scope): confirmed daily loss (existence): confirmed (both: none stated) max drawdown amount abs: confirmed max drawdown amount pct: disagree max drawdown anchor: confirmed (wording variance only) max drawdown basis: confirmed (wording variance only) max drawdown locks: confirmed (wording variance only) min trading days: confirmed profit target abs: confirmed profit target pct: disagree

  No 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:
  https://www.leelootrading.com/
  https://support.leelootrading.com/kb/a44/rising-trailing-max-drawdown-explained.aspx
  https://support.leelootrading.com/kb/a190/understanding-the-30-rule-for-performance-accounts.aspx
  https://www.leelootrading.com/miles-test

  Link to this check
• 2026-07-30 Confirmed · sources disagree on 2 field(s)

  Foundation Practice Account · Two independent readers, each working blind to the other’s output and to the stored value

  USD 25,000 · recorded field scope; not a whole-plan verification

  Field-by-field: 4 confirmed · 3 preserved for the record · 4 noted (11 fields touched this pass).

  Merged from two independent blind first-party reads of Leeloo Trading's Foundation (LL / "Leeloo Legacy") Practice Account line, Aspire tier ($25,000). AGREE: profit target $1,500, trailing max drawdown $1,500 (a44: "NEVER stop trailing the highest UNREALIZED profit point ... throughout the ENTIRE Practice Account" — floor tracks the highest intraday OPEN/unrealized equity, not closed balance, and never locks during the Practice Account, only post-funding on the "Investor" Performance Account at Initial Balance + $100), NO daily loss limit at any size ("No Daily Drawdown", homepage feature list; corroborated independently by reader A from a second page, https://www.leelootrading.com/miles-test), a 30% consistency/best-day rule that both readers scope explicitly to the FUNDED Performance Account stage as a payout-eligibility gate only (not a Practice Account qualification rule — same structural pattern already found and resolved for Tradeify's Growth product in this corpus), and 10 minimum trading days. DISAGREE, RESOLVED (see ambiguities[]): whether the firm's own page states profit_target_pct/max_drawdown.amount_pct as an explicit percentage (reader B: yes, 6%/6%) or only as a dollar figure (reader A). Resolved by computing the percentage from the undisputed dollar figures, which matches reader B's number exactly. DISAGREE, NOT ENTERED (citation-only, not substantive — both readers describe identical mechanics and dollar figures, differing only in which exact phrase/page they quoted): quotation-mark styling on the profit-target/drawdown dollar quotes; which of two pages (homepage vs. https://www.leelootrading.com/miles-test) was cited for the daily-loss absence; which of two pages (homepage vs. https://support.leelootrading.com/kb/a44/rising-trailing-max-drawdown-explained.aspx) was cited for the drawdown dollar figure vs. its mechanic; wording of the max_drawdown.anchor/locks/consistency descriptions (same fact, different sentences). NOT MODELED in this schema, recorded here only: a real recurring-monthly pricing structure ladder across the six Foundation sizes ($250/$280/$320/$405/$725/$850 per month at Aspire/Launch/Climb/Cruise/Burst/Explode respectively — reader B), an $85 reset fee for a failed/breached Practice Account ("This account is eligible for a reset $85" — reader B), and a separate funded-stage Performance Account fee once qualified ("$88 per month per Performance Account" or a "$250 one-time fee" alternative — reader B). Per this corpus's established convention for subscription-model firms (see rules/topstep, rules/oneup-trader, rules/earn2trade), these dollar figures are not written into pricing{} — only documented here — because this schema's pricing fields are not populated for subscription-model evaluations elsewhere in the corpus either.

  citation choices (quote/url wording): disagree (citation-only, not substantive) consistency (existence + scope): confirmed daily loss (existence): confirmed (both: none stated) max drawdown amount abs: confirmed max drawdown amount pct: disagree max drawdown anchor: confirmed (wording variance only) max drawdown basis: confirmed (wording variance only) max drawdown locks: confirmed (wording variance only) min trading days: confirmed profit target abs: confirmed profit target pct: disagree

  No 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:
  https://www.leelootrading.com/
  https://support.leelootrading.com/kb/a44/rising-trailing-max-drawdown-explained.aspx
  https://support.leelootrading.com/kb/a190/understanding-the-30-rule-for-performance-accounts.aspx
  https://www.leelootrading.com/miles-test

  Link to this check
• 2026-07-30 Confirmed · sources disagree on 2 field(s)

  Foundation Practice Account · Two independent readers, each working blind to the other’s output and to the stored value

  USD 50,000 · recorded field scope; not a whole-plan verification

  Field-by-field: 4 confirmed · 3 preserved for the record · 4 noted (11 fields touched this pass).

  Merged from two independent blind first-party reads of Leeloo Trading's Foundation (LL / "Leeloo Legacy") Practice Account line, Launch tier ($50,000). AGREE: profit target $3,000, trailing max drawdown $2,500 (a44: "NEVER stop trailing the highest UNREALIZED profit point ... throughout the ENTIRE Practice Account" — floor tracks the highest intraday OPEN/unrealized equity, not closed balance, and never locks during the Practice Account, only post-funding on the "Investor" Performance Account at Initial Balance + $100), NO daily loss limit at any size ("No Daily Drawdown", homepage feature list; corroborated independently by reader A from a second page, https://www.leelootrading.com/miles-test), a 30% consistency/best-day rule that both readers scope explicitly to the FUNDED Performance Account stage as a payout-eligibility gate only (not a Practice Account qualification rule — same structural pattern already found and resolved for Tradeify's Growth product in this corpus), and 10 minimum trading days. DISAGREE, RESOLVED (see ambiguities[]): whether the firm's own page states profit_target_pct/max_drawdown.amount_pct as an explicit percentage (reader B: yes, 6%/5%) or only as a dollar figure (reader A). Resolved by computing the percentage from the undisputed dollar figures, which matches reader B's number exactly. DISAGREE, NOT ENTERED (citation-only, not substantive — both readers describe identical mechanics and dollar figures, differing only in which exact phrase/page they quoted): quotation-mark styling on the profit-target/drawdown dollar quotes; which of two pages (homepage vs. https://www.leelootrading.com/miles-test) was cited for the daily-loss absence; which of two pages (homepage vs. https://support.leelootrading.com/kb/a44/rising-trailing-max-drawdown-explained.aspx) was cited for the drawdown dollar figure vs. its mechanic; wording of the max_drawdown.anchor/locks/consistency descriptions (same fact, different sentences). NOT MODELED in this schema, recorded here only: a real recurring-monthly pricing structure ladder across the six Foundation sizes ($250/$280/$320/$405/$725/$850 per month at Aspire/Launch/Climb/Cruise/Burst/Explode respectively — reader B), an $85 reset fee for a failed/breached Practice Account ("This account is eligible for a reset $85" — reader B), and a separate funded-stage Performance Account fee once qualified ("$88 per month per Performance Account" or a "$250 one-time fee" alternative — reader B). Per this corpus's established convention for subscription-model firms (see rules/topstep, rules/oneup-trader, rules/earn2trade), these dollar figures are not written into pricing{} — only documented here — because this schema's pricing fields are not populated for subscription-model evaluations elsewhere in the corpus either.

  citation choices (quote/url wording): disagree (citation-only, not substantive) consistency (existence + scope): confirmed daily loss (existence): confirmed (both: none stated) max drawdown amount abs: confirmed max drawdown amount pct: disagree max drawdown anchor: confirmed (wording variance only) max drawdown basis: confirmed (wording variance only) max drawdown locks: confirmed (wording variance only) min trading days: confirmed profit target abs: confirmed profit target pct: disagree

  No 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:
  https://www.leelootrading.com/
  https://support.leelootrading.com/kb/a44/rising-trailing-max-drawdown-explained.aspx
  https://support.leelootrading.com/kb/a190/understanding-the-30-rule-for-performance-accounts.aspx
  https://www.leelootrading.com/miles-test

  Link to this check
• 2026-07-30 Confirmed · sources disagree on 2 field(s)

  Foundation Practice Account · Two independent readers, each working blind to the other’s output and to the stored value

  USD 250,000 · recorded field scope; not a whole-plan verification

  Field-by-field: 4 confirmed · 3 preserved for the record · 4 noted (11 fields touched this pass).

  Merged from two independent blind first-party reads of Leeloo Trading's Foundation (LL / "Leeloo Legacy") Practice Account line, Burst tier ($250,000). AGREE: profit target $15,000, trailing max drawdown $6,500 (a44: "NEVER stop trailing the highest UNREALIZED profit point ... throughout the ENTIRE Practice Account" — floor tracks the highest intraday OPEN/unrealized equity, not closed balance, and never locks during the Practice Account, only post-funding on the "Investor" Performance Account at Initial Balance + $100), NO daily loss limit at any size ("No Daily Drawdown", homepage feature list; corroborated independently by reader A from a second page, https://www.leelootrading.com/miles-test), a 30% consistency/best-day rule that both readers scope explicitly to the FUNDED Performance Account stage as a payout-eligibility gate only (not a Practice Account qualification rule — same structural pattern already found and resolved for Tradeify's Growth product in this corpus), and 10 minimum trading days. DISAGREE, RESOLVED (see ambiguities[]): whether the firm's own page states profit_target_pct/max_drawdown.amount_pct as an explicit percentage (reader B: yes, 6%/2.6%) or only as a dollar figure (reader A). Resolved by computing the percentage from the undisputed dollar figures, which matches reader B's number exactly. DISAGREE, NOT ENTERED (citation-only, not substantive — both readers describe identical mechanics and dollar figures, differing only in which exact phrase/page they quoted): quotation-mark styling on the profit-target/drawdown dollar quotes; which of two pages (homepage vs. https://www.leelootrading.com/miles-test) was cited for the daily-loss absence; which of two pages (homepage vs. https://support.leelootrading.com/kb/a44/rising-trailing-max-drawdown-explained.aspx) was cited for the drawdown dollar figure vs. its mechanic; wording of the max_drawdown.anchor/locks/consistency descriptions (same fact, different sentences). NOT MODELED in this schema, recorded here only: a real recurring-monthly pricing structure ladder across the six Foundation sizes ($250/$280/$320/$405/$725/$850 per month at Aspire/Launch/Climb/Cruise/Burst/Explode respectively — reader B), an $85 reset fee for a failed/breached Practice Account ("This account is eligible for a reset $85" — reader B), and a separate funded-stage Performance Account fee once qualified ("$88 per month per Performance Account" or a "$250 one-time fee" alternative — reader B). Per this corpus's established convention for subscription-model firms (see rules/topstep, rules/oneup-trader, rules/earn2trade), these dollar figures are not written into pricing{} — only documented here — because this schema's pricing fields are not populated for subscription-model evaluations elsewhere in the corpus either.

  citation choices (quote/url wording): disagree (citation-only, not substantive) consistency (existence + scope): confirmed daily loss (existence): confirmed (both: none stated) max drawdown amount abs: confirmed max drawdown amount pct: disagree max drawdown anchor: confirmed (wording variance only) max drawdown basis: confirmed (wording variance only) max drawdown locks: confirmed (wording variance only) min trading days: confirmed profit target abs: confirmed profit target pct: disagree

  No 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:
  https://www.leelootrading.com/
  https://support.leelootrading.com/kb/a44/rising-trailing-max-drawdown-explained.aspx
  https://support.leelootrading.com/kb/a190/understanding-the-30-rule-for-performance-accounts.aspx
  https://www.leelootrading.com/miles-test

  Link to this check
• 2026-07-30 Confirmed · sources disagree on 2 field(s)

  Foundation Practice Account · Two independent readers, each working blind to the other’s output and to the stored value

  USD 150,000 · recorded field scope; not a whole-plan verification

  Field-by-field: 4 confirmed · 3 preserved for the record · 4 noted (11 fields touched this pass).

  Merged from two independent blind first-party reads of Leeloo Trading's Foundation (LL / "Leeloo Legacy") Practice Account line, Cruise tier ($150,000). AGREE: profit target $9,000, trailing max drawdown $5,000 (a44: "NEVER stop trailing the highest UNREALIZED profit point ... throughout the ENTIRE Practice Account" — floor tracks the highest intraday OPEN/unrealized equity, not closed balance, and never locks during the Practice Account, only post-funding on the "Investor" Performance Account at Initial Balance + $100), NO daily loss limit at any size ("No Daily Drawdown", homepage feature list; corroborated independently by reader A from a second page, https://www.leelootrading.com/miles-test), a 30% consistency/best-day rule that both readers scope explicitly to the FUNDED Performance Account stage as a payout-eligibility gate only (not a Practice Account qualification rule — same structural pattern already found and resolved for Tradeify's Growth product in this corpus), and 10 minimum trading days. DISAGREE, RESOLVED (see ambiguities[]): whether the firm's own page states profit_target_pct/max_drawdown.amount_pct as an explicit percentage (reader B: yes, 6%/3.33%) or only as a dollar figure (reader A). Resolved by computing the percentage from the undisputed dollar figures, which matches reader B's number exactly. DISAGREE, NOT ENTERED (citation-only, not substantive — both readers describe identical mechanics and dollar figures, differing only in which exact phrase/page they quoted): quotation-mark styling on the profit-target/drawdown dollar quotes; which of two pages (homepage vs. https://www.leelootrading.com/miles-test) was cited for the daily-loss absence; which of two pages (homepage vs. https://support.leelootrading.com/kb/a44/rising-trailing-max-drawdown-explained.aspx) was cited for the drawdown dollar figure vs. its mechanic; wording of the max_drawdown.anchor/locks/consistency descriptions (same fact, different sentences). NOT MODELED in this schema, recorded here only: a real recurring-monthly pricing structure ladder across the six Foundation sizes ($250/$280/$320/$405/$725/$850 per month at Aspire/Launch/Climb/Cruise/Burst/Explode respectively — reader B), an $85 reset fee for a failed/breached Practice Account ("This account is eligible for a reset $85" — reader B), and a separate funded-stage Performance Account fee once qualified ("$88 per month per Performance Account" or a "$250 one-time fee" alternative — reader B). Per this corpus's established convention for subscription-model firms (see rules/topstep, rules/oneup-trader, rules/earn2trade), these dollar figures are not written into pricing{} — only documented here — because this schema's pricing fields are not populated for subscription-model evaluations elsewhere in the corpus either.

  citation choices (quote/url wording): disagree (citation-only, not substantive) consistency (existence + scope): confirmed daily loss (existence): confirmed (both: none stated) max drawdown amount abs: confirmed max drawdown amount pct: disagree max drawdown anchor: confirmed (wording variance only) max drawdown basis: confirmed (wording variance only) max drawdown locks: confirmed (wording variance only) min trading days: confirmed profit target abs: confirmed profit target pct: disagree

  No 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:
  https://www.leelootrading.com/
  https://support.leelootrading.com/kb/a44/rising-trailing-max-drawdown-explained.aspx
  https://support.leelootrading.com/kb/a190/understanding-the-30-rule-for-performance-accounts.aspx
  https://www.leelootrading.com/miles-test

  Link to this check
• 2026-07-30 Confirmed · sources disagree on 2 field(s)

  Foundation Practice Account · Two independent readers, each working blind to the other’s output and to the stored value

  USD 100,000 · recorded field scope; not a whole-plan verification

  Field-by-field: 4 confirmed · 3 preserved for the record · 4 noted (11 fields touched this pass).

  Merged from two independent blind first-party reads of Leeloo Trading's Foundation (LL / "Leeloo Legacy") Practice Account line, Climb tier ($100,000). AGREE: profit target $6,000, trailing max drawdown $3,000 (a44: "NEVER stop trailing the highest UNREALIZED profit point ... throughout the ENTIRE Practice Account" — floor tracks the highest intraday OPEN/unrealized equity, not closed balance, and never locks during the Practice Account, only post-funding on the "Investor" Performance Account at Initial Balance + $100), NO daily loss limit at any size ("No Daily Drawdown", homepage feature list; corroborated independently by reader A from a second page, https://www.leelootrading.com/miles-test), a 30% consistency/best-day rule that both readers scope explicitly to the FUNDED Performance Account stage as a payout-eligibility gate only (not a Practice Account qualification rule — same structural pattern already found and resolved for Tradeify's Growth product in this corpus), and 10 minimum trading days. DISAGREE, RESOLVED (see ambiguities[]): whether the firm's own page states profit_target_pct/max_drawdown.amount_pct as an explicit percentage (reader B: yes, 6%/3%) or only as a dollar figure (reader A). Resolved by computing the percentage from the undisputed dollar figures, which matches reader B's number exactly. DISAGREE, NOT ENTERED (citation-only, not substantive — both readers describe identical mechanics and dollar figures, differing only in which exact phrase/page they quoted): quotation-mark styling on the profit-target/drawdown dollar quotes; which of two pages (homepage vs. https://www.leelootrading.com/miles-test) was cited for the daily-loss absence; which of two pages (homepage vs. https://support.leelootrading.com/kb/a44/rising-trailing-max-drawdown-explained.aspx) was cited for the drawdown dollar figure vs. its mechanic; wording of the max_drawdown.anchor/locks/consistency descriptions (same fact, different sentences). NOT MODELED in this schema, recorded here only: a real recurring-monthly pricing structure ladder across the six Foundation sizes ($250/$280/$320/$405/$725/$850 per month at Aspire/Launch/Climb/Cruise/Burst/Explode respectively — reader B), an $85 reset fee for a failed/breached Practice Account ("This account is eligible for a reset $85" — reader B), and a separate funded-stage Performance Account fee once qualified ("$88 per month per Performance Account" or a "$250 one-time fee" alternative — reader B). Per this corpus's established convention for subscription-model firms (see rules/topstep, rules/oneup-trader, rules/earn2trade), these dollar figures are not written into pricing{} — only documented here — because this schema's pricing fields are not populated for subscription-model evaluations elsewhere in the corpus either.

  citation choices (quote/url wording): disagree (citation-only, not substantive) consistency (existence + scope): confirmed daily loss (existence): confirmed (both: none stated) max drawdown amount abs: confirmed max drawdown amount pct: disagree max drawdown anchor: confirmed (wording variance only) max drawdown basis: confirmed (wording variance only) max drawdown locks: confirmed (wording variance only) min trading days: confirmed profit target abs: confirmed profit target pct: disagree

  No 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:
  https://www.leelootrading.com/
  https://support.leelootrading.com/kb/a44/rising-trailing-max-drawdown-explained.aspx
  https://support.leelootrading.com/kb/a190/understanding-the-30-rule-for-performance-accounts.aspx
  https://www.leelootrading.com/miles-test

  Link to this check

What the rules say now