SabioTrade — Verification Record
Advanced · Essential · Plus · Prime · Ultimate · Our recorded checks and their evidence. A corpus correction does not establish when a firm changed its rules.
Value stands · re-sourcing citation
looked · cited sentence not found at 3 URL(s)
Inspect the evidence or run your numbers
Run SabioTrade in the simulator — freeCitation findings
The recorded source wording was not found at the following locations. This does not establish that the firm's rule changed.
- https://sabiotrade.com/ (the site has moved)
- https://sabiotrade.com/terms (the site has moved)
- https://sabiotrade.com/blog/sabiotrade-challenge-explained-a-complete-guide-to-the-evaluation (new rule page)
Dated source-check records
- Confirmed, no changes
Advanced · Normal corpus review current first party
USD 100,000 · recorded field scope; not a whole-plan verification
Field-by-field: 1 confirmed (1 field touched this pass).
Manifest row 161; auto_promote:false; Assessment10%target/5%daily/6%closedHWM, per-size split80or90/price table; midnightclosedbalance dailybasis.55%bestDAY plus55%singleTRADE anddiscretionary review means wholeconsistency objectheld. Scoped field review, not whole-plan acceptance. Held fields are deliberately absent from the confirmation map.
daily loss amount basis: 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://sabiotrade.com/terms - Confirmed, no changes
Advanced · Normal corpus review current first party
USD 100,000 · recorded field scope; not a whole-plan verification
Field-by-field: 4 confirmed (4 fields touched this pass).
Manifest row 162; auto_promote:false; Assessment10%target/5%daily/6%closedHWM, per-size split80or90/price table; midnightclosedbalance dailybasis.55%bestDAY plus55%singleTRADE anddiscretionary review means wholeconsistency objectheld. 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 includes unrealized: confirmed max drawdown type: 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://sabiotrade.com/terms - Confirmed · sources disagree on 0 field(s)
Advanced · Normal corpus review current first party
USD 100,000 · recorded field scope; not a whole-plan verification
Manifest row 163; auto_promote:false; Sabio55% best day is supported but source ALSO imposes single-trade55% and discretionary assessment/payout review. Stored day-only object is incomplete; hold full-object acceptance. Scoped field review, not whole-plan acceptance. Held fields are deliberately absent from the confirmation map.
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:Link to this check
https://sabiotrade.com/terms - Confirmed, no changes
Advanced · Normal corpus review current first party
USD 100,000 · recorded field scope; not a whole-plan verification
Field-by-field: 1 confirmed (1 field touched this pass).
Manifest row 164; auto_promote:false; Assessment10%target/5%daily/6%closedHWM, per-size split80or90/price table; midnightclosedbalance dailybasis.55%bestDAY plus55%singleTRADE anddiscretionary review means wholeconsistency objectheld. Scoped field review, not whole-plan acceptance. Held fields are deliberately absent from the confirmation map.
payout cycle days: 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://sabiotrade.com/ - Confirmed, no changes
Essential · Normal corpus review current first party
USD 20,000 · recorded field scope; not a whole-plan verification
Field-by-field: 1 confirmed (1 field touched this pass).
Manifest row 161; auto_promote:false; Assessment10%target/5%daily/6%closedHWM, per-size split80or90/price table; midnightclosedbalance dailybasis.55%bestDAY plus55%singleTRADE anddiscretionary review means wholeconsistency objectheld. Scoped field review, not whole-plan acceptance. Held fields are deliberately absent from the confirmation map.
daily loss amount basis: 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://sabiotrade.com/terms - Confirmed · sources disagree on 0 field(s)
Essential · Normal corpus review current first party
USD 20,000 · recorded field scope; not a whole-plan verification
Manifest row 163; auto_promote:false; Sabio55% best day is supported but source ALSO imposes single-trade55% and discretionary assessment/payout review. Stored day-only object is incomplete; hold full-object acceptance. Scoped field review, not whole-plan acceptance. Held fields are deliberately absent from the confirmation map.
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:Link to this check
https://sabiotrade.com/terms - Confirmed, no changes
Essential · Normal corpus review current first party
USD 20,000 · recorded field scope; not a whole-plan verification
Field-by-field: 1 confirmed (1 field touched this pass).
Manifest row 164; auto_promote:false; Assessment10%target/5%daily/6%closedHWM, per-size split80or90/price table; midnightclosedbalance dailybasis.55%bestDAY plus55%singleTRADE anddiscretionary review means wholeconsistency objectheld. Scoped field review, not whole-plan acceptance. Held fields are deliberately absent from the confirmation map.
payout cycle days: 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://sabiotrade.com/ - Confirmed, no changes
Essential · Normal corpus review current first party
USD 20,000 · recorded field scope; not a whole-plan verification
Field-by-field: 4 confirmed (4 fields touched this pass).
Manifest row 160; auto_promote:false; Assessment10%target/5%daily/6%closedHWM, per-size split80or90/price table; midnightclosedbalance dailybasis.55%bestDAY plus55%singleTRADE anddiscretionary review means wholeconsistency objectheld. Scoped field review, not whole-plan acceptance. Held fields are deliberately absent from the confirmation map.
payout profit split pct: confirmed daily loss amount pct: confirmed max drawdown amount pct: confirmed profit target pct: 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://sabiotrade.com/ - Confirmed, no changes
Essential · Normal corpus review current first party
USD 20,000 · recorded field scope; not a whole-plan verification
Field-by-field: 4 confirmed (4 fields touched this pass).
Manifest row 162; auto_promote:false; Assessment10%target/5%daily/6%closedHWM, per-size split80or90/price table; midnightclosedbalance dailybasis.55%bestDAY plus55%singleTRADE anddiscretionary review means wholeconsistency objectheld. 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 includes unrealized: confirmed max drawdown type: 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://sabiotrade.com/terms - Confirmed, no changes
Plus · Normal corpus review current first party
USD 50,000 · recorded field scope; not a whole-plan verification
Field-by-field: 1 confirmed (1 field touched this pass).
Manifest row 164; auto_promote:false; Assessment10%target/5%daily/6%closedHWM, per-size split80or90/price table; midnightclosedbalance dailybasis.55%bestDAY plus55%singleTRADE anddiscretionary review means wholeconsistency objectheld. Scoped field review, not whole-plan acceptance. Held fields are deliberately absent from the confirmation map.
payout cycle days: 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://sabiotrade.com/ - Confirmed, no changes
Plus · Normal corpus review current first party
USD 50,000 · recorded field scope; not a whole-plan verification
Field-by-field: 1 confirmed (1 field touched this pass).
Manifest row 161; auto_promote:false; Assessment10%target/5%daily/6%closedHWM, per-size split80or90/price table; midnightclosedbalance dailybasis.55%bestDAY plus55%singleTRADE anddiscretionary review means wholeconsistency objectheld. Scoped field review, not whole-plan acceptance. Held fields are deliberately absent from the confirmation map.
daily loss amount basis: 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://sabiotrade.com/terms - Confirmed, no changes
Plus · Normal corpus review current first party
USD 50,000 · recorded field scope; not a whole-plan verification
Field-by-field: 4 confirmed (4 fields touched this pass).
Manifest row 162; auto_promote:false; Assessment10%target/5%daily/6%closedHWM, per-size split80or90/price table; midnightclosedbalance dailybasis.55%bestDAY plus55%singleTRADE anddiscretionary review means wholeconsistency objectheld. 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 includes unrealized: confirmed max drawdown type: 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://sabiotrade.com/terms - Confirmed · sources disagree on 0 field(s)
Plus · Normal corpus review current first party
USD 50,000 · recorded field scope; not a whole-plan verification
Manifest row 163; auto_promote:false; Sabio55% best day is supported but source ALSO imposes single-trade55% and discretionary assessment/payout review. Stored day-only object is incomplete; hold full-object acceptance. Scoped field review, not whole-plan acceptance. Held fields are deliberately absent from the confirmation map.
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:Link to this check
https://sabiotrade.com/terms - Confirmed · sources disagree on 0 field(s)
Prime · Normal corpus review current first party
USD 650,000 · recorded field scope; not a whole-plan verification
Manifest row 163; auto_promote:false; Sabio55% best day is supported but source ALSO imposes single-trade55% and discretionary assessment/payout review. Stored day-only object is incomplete; hold full-object acceptance. Scoped field review, not whole-plan acceptance. Held fields are deliberately absent from the confirmation map.
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:Link to this check
https://sabiotrade.com/terms - Confirmed, no changes
Prime · Normal corpus review current first party
USD 650,000 · recorded field scope; not a whole-plan verification
Field-by-field: 1 confirmed (1 field touched this pass).
Manifest row 164; auto_promote:false; Assessment10%target/5%daily/6%closedHWM, per-size split80or90/price table; midnightclosedbalance dailybasis.55%bestDAY plus55%singleTRADE anddiscretionary review means wholeconsistency objectheld. Scoped field review, not whole-plan acceptance. Held fields are deliberately absent from the confirmation map.
payout cycle days: 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://sabiotrade.com/ - Confirmed, no changes
Prime · Normal corpus review current first party
USD 650,000 · recorded field scope; not a whole-plan verification
Field-by-field: 1 confirmed (1 field touched this pass).
Manifest row 161; auto_promote:false; Assessment10%target/5%daily/6%closedHWM, per-size split80or90/price table; midnightclosedbalance dailybasis.55%bestDAY plus55%singleTRADE anddiscretionary review means wholeconsistency objectheld. Scoped field review, not whole-plan acceptance. Held fields are deliberately absent from the confirmation map.
daily loss amount basis: 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://sabiotrade.com/terms - Confirmed, no changes
Prime · Normal corpus review current first party
USD 650,000 · recorded field scope; not a whole-plan verification
Field-by-field: 4 confirmed (4 fields touched this pass).
Manifest row 162; auto_promote:false; Assessment10%target/5%daily/6%closedHWM, per-size split80or90/price table; midnightclosedbalance dailybasis.55%bestDAY plus55%singleTRADE anddiscretionary review means wholeconsistency objectheld. 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 includes unrealized: confirmed max drawdown type: 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://sabiotrade.com/terms - Confirmed, no changes
Ultimate · Normal corpus review current first party
USD 200,000 · recorded field scope; not a whole-plan verification
Field-by-field: 4 confirmed (4 fields touched this pass).
Manifest row 162; auto_promote:false; Assessment10%target/5%daily/6%closedHWM, per-size split80or90/price table; midnightclosedbalance dailybasis.55%bestDAY plus55%singleTRADE anddiscretionary review means wholeconsistency objectheld. 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 includes unrealized: confirmed max drawdown type: 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://sabiotrade.com/terms - Confirmed, no changes
Ultimate · Normal corpus review current first party
USD 200,000 · recorded field scope; not a whole-plan verification
Field-by-field: 1 confirmed (1 field touched this pass).
Manifest row 161; auto_promote:false; Assessment10%target/5%daily/6%closedHWM, per-size split80or90/price table; midnightclosedbalance dailybasis.55%bestDAY plus55%singleTRADE anddiscretionary review means wholeconsistency objectheld. Scoped field review, not whole-plan acceptance. Held fields are deliberately absent from the confirmation map.
daily loss amount basis: 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://sabiotrade.com/terms - Confirmed, no changes
Ultimate · Normal corpus review current first party
USD 200,000 · recorded field scope; not a whole-plan verification
Field-by-field: 1 confirmed (1 field touched this pass).
Manifest row 164; auto_promote:false; Assessment10%target/5%daily/6%closedHWM, per-size split80or90/price table; midnightclosedbalance dailybasis.55%bestDAY plus55%singleTRADE anddiscretionary review means wholeconsistency objectheld. Scoped field review, not whole-plan acceptance. Held fields are deliberately absent from the confirmation map.
payout cycle days: 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://sabiotrade.com/ - Confirmed · sources disagree on 0 field(s)
Ultimate · Normal corpus review current first party
USD 200,000 · recorded field scope; not a whole-plan verification
Manifest row 163; auto_promote:false; Sabio55% best day is supported but source ALSO imposes single-trade55% and discretionary assessment/payout review. Stored day-only object is incomplete; hold full-object acceptance. Scoped field review, not whole-plan acceptance. Held fields are deliberately absent from the confirmation map.
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:Link to this check
https://sabiotrade.com/terms - Confirmed · sources disagree on 0 field(s)
Advanced · 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: 12 confirmed · 3 preserved for the record (15 fields touched this pass).
Two blind independent first-party readers agree on every headline number for this Advanced $100,000 tier: 10% profit target ($10,000), 5% daily loss limit ($5,000, previous day's closed-balance basis), 6% maximum trailing drawdown ($6,000, fixed off the initial balance per the firm's own formula "Equity <= Highest Closed Balance - (Initial Balance x 6%)"), 55% best-day consistency rule, one-time pricing ($479), 90% starting profit split. Reader A additionally sourced (reader B silent -- a coverage gap, not a competing value -- resolved directly rather than logged as an ambiguity): daily_loss.on_breach ("a hard breach... results in account closure" -> fail), daily_loss.includes_unrealized (the firm's own FAQ equity definition: unrealized P&L is excluded from the closed-balance reference but included on the tested equity side), payout.cycle_days (7, "payout frequency is weekly... at least 7 days since the last payout request"). DISAGREE, RESOLVED (entered in ambiguities[]): (a) daily_loss.reset_time_utc -- /terms states the closed-balance snapshot is fixed at 00:00h UTC, the homepage tooltip instead states 5pm EST (22:00 UTC); both first-party, unreconciled anywhere on the site; headline 00:00 (Terms is the operative document for the formula itself; this field is not consumed by rule-engine.js or build-firm-presets.js, so the choice is documentation-only). (b) phases[0].consistency denominator -- /terms ties the 55% best-day cap to TOTAL ACCUMULATED profit, the homepage tooltip instead ties it to the plan's FIXED TARGET profit; the two readings diverge mid-evaluation but converge exactly at the pass gate this corpus models (accumulated profit equals target at the moment of passing), so the modeled pass/fail outcome is invariant; headline = the Terms/total-profit reading, matching this schema's existing best_day_pct_of_total_profit design. OUT OF SCHEMA SCOPE (not modeled, not an ambiguity): /terms section 9's separate single-TRADE 55%-of-total-profit cap and its 5-7-comparable-trades payout gate -- reader A explicitly scopes this to the post-pass PAYOUT stage (out of this corpus's evaluation-only scope, matching the precedent set by rules/tradeify's Growth-funded consistency gate and rules/funded-trading-plus-2step's FT+ Trader gate); the omission cannot move any live product number since tools/build-firm-presets.js's consistencyPct() only reads a best_day_pct_of_total_profit/block entry and src/lib/rule-engine.js never reads phases[].consistency at all. Also out of scope, not modeled: SabioTrade's separate 'PRO Club' subscription product (multiple assessment attempts + academy access, checkout ids 111/121, distinct 7-day free-trial id=4) -- a different product line from the flagship one-step Assessment/Challenge this corpus models. Golden vector: rules/sabiotrade/golden/daily-loss-100k.json, hand-derived from the firm's own $100,000 -> $95,000 Daily Loss Limit worked example (100k tier only; see that file's own description for exactly which fields this vector does and does not discriminate). Scope note: only rules/sabiotrade/ was written this run; this addition has not yet been run through tools/corpus-pipeline.js or recorded in docs/feature1/CORPUS_SOURCING.md / FIRM_CHECK_LOG.md.
payout cycle days: confirmed payout profit split pct: confirmed consistency: disagree_resolved daily loss amount basis: confirmed daily loss amount pct: confirmed daily loss includes unrealized: confirmed daily loss on breach: confirmed daily loss reset time utc: disagree_resolved max drawdown amount pct: confirmed max drawdown anchor: confirmed max drawdown basis: disagree_resolved max drawdown type: confirmed profit target pct: confirmed pricing initial fee: confirmed pricing model: confirmedNo prior value is evidenced for this check. This is a record of our research, not a firm rule effective date.
Link to this check - Confirmed · sources disagree on 0 field(s)
Essential · Two independent readers, each working blind to the other’s output and to the stored value
USD 20,000 · recorded field scope; not a whole-plan verification
Field-by-field: 12 confirmed · 3 preserved for the record (15 fields touched this pass).
Two blind independent first-party readers agree on every headline number for this Essential $20,000 tier: 10% profit target ($2,000), 5% daily loss limit ($1,000, previous day's closed-balance basis), 6% maximum trailing drawdown ($1,200, fixed off the initial balance per the firm's own formula "Equity <= Highest Closed Balance - (Initial Balance x 6%)"), 55% best-day consistency rule, one-time pricing ($119), 80% starting profit split. Reader A additionally sourced (reader B silent -- a coverage gap, not a competing value -- resolved directly rather than logged as an ambiguity): daily_loss.on_breach ("a hard breach... results in account closure" -> fail), daily_loss.includes_unrealized (the firm's own FAQ equity definition: unrealized P&L is excluded from the closed-balance reference but included on the tested equity side), payout.cycle_days (7, "payout frequency is weekly... at least 7 days since the last payout request"). DISAGREE, RESOLVED (entered in ambiguities[]): (a) daily_loss.reset_time_utc -- /terms states the closed-balance snapshot is fixed at 00:00h UTC, the homepage tooltip instead states 5pm EST (22:00 UTC); both first-party, unreconciled anywhere on the site; headline 00:00 (Terms is the operative document for the formula itself; this field is not consumed by rule-engine.js or build-firm-presets.js, so the choice is documentation-only). (b) phases[0].consistency denominator -- /terms ties the 55% best-day cap to TOTAL ACCUMULATED profit, the homepage tooltip instead ties it to the plan's FIXED TARGET profit; the two readings diverge mid-evaluation but converge exactly at the pass gate this corpus models (accumulated profit equals target at the moment of passing), so the modeled pass/fail outcome is invariant; headline = the Terms/total-profit reading, matching this schema's existing best_day_pct_of_total_profit design. OUT OF SCHEMA SCOPE (not modeled, not an ambiguity): /terms section 9's separate single-TRADE 55%-of-total-profit cap and its 5-7-comparable-trades payout gate -- reader A explicitly scopes this to the post-pass PAYOUT stage (out of this corpus's evaluation-only scope, matching the precedent set by rules/tradeify's Growth-funded consistency gate and rules/funded-trading-plus-2step's FT+ Trader gate); the omission cannot move any live product number since tools/build-firm-presets.js's consistencyPct() only reads a best_day_pct_of_total_profit/block entry and src/lib/rule-engine.js never reads phases[].consistency at all. Also out of scope, not modeled: SabioTrade's separate 'PRO Club' subscription product (multiple assessment attempts + academy access, checkout ids 111/121, distinct 7-day free-trial id=4) -- a different product line from the flagship one-step Assessment/Challenge this corpus models. Golden vector: rules/sabiotrade/golden/daily-loss-100k.json, hand-derived from the firm's own $100,000 -> $95,000 Daily Loss Limit worked example (100k tier only; see that file's own description for exactly which fields this vector does and does not discriminate). Scope note: only rules/sabiotrade/ was written this run; this addition has not yet been run through tools/corpus-pipeline.js or recorded in docs/feature1/CORPUS_SOURCING.md / FIRM_CHECK_LOG.md.
payout cycle days: confirmed payout profit split pct: confirmed consistency: disagree_resolved daily loss amount basis: confirmed daily loss amount pct: confirmed daily loss includes unrealized: confirmed daily loss on breach: confirmed daily loss reset time utc: disagree_resolved max drawdown amount pct: confirmed max drawdown anchor: confirmed max drawdown basis: disagree_resolved max drawdown type: confirmed profit target pct: confirmed pricing initial fee: confirmed pricing model: confirmedNo prior value is evidenced for this check. This is a record of our research, not a firm rule effective date.
Link to this check - Confirmed · sources disagree on 0 field(s)
Plus · 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: 12 confirmed · 3 preserved for the record (15 fields touched this pass).
Two blind independent first-party readers agree on every headline number for this Plus $50,000 tier: 10% profit target ($5,000), 5% daily loss limit ($2,500, previous day's closed-balance basis), 6% maximum trailing drawdown ($3,000, fixed off the initial balance per the firm's own formula "Equity <= Highest Closed Balance - (Initial Balance x 6%)"), 55% best-day consistency rule, one-time pricing ($289), 80% starting profit split. Reader A additionally sourced (reader B silent -- a coverage gap, not a competing value -- resolved directly rather than logged as an ambiguity): daily_loss.on_breach ("a hard breach... results in account closure" -> fail), daily_loss.includes_unrealized (the firm's own FAQ equity definition: unrealized P&L is excluded from the closed-balance reference but included on the tested equity side), payout.cycle_days (7, "payout frequency is weekly... at least 7 days since the last payout request"). DISAGREE, RESOLVED (entered in ambiguities[]): (a) daily_loss.reset_time_utc -- /terms states the closed-balance snapshot is fixed at 00:00h UTC, the homepage tooltip instead states 5pm EST (22:00 UTC); both first-party, unreconciled anywhere on the site; headline 00:00 (Terms is the operative document for the formula itself; this field is not consumed by rule-engine.js or build-firm-presets.js, so the choice is documentation-only). (b) phases[0].consistency denominator -- /terms ties the 55% best-day cap to TOTAL ACCUMULATED profit, the homepage tooltip instead ties it to the plan's FIXED TARGET profit; the two readings diverge mid-evaluation but converge exactly at the pass gate this corpus models (accumulated profit equals target at the moment of passing), so the modeled pass/fail outcome is invariant; headline = the Terms/total-profit reading, matching this schema's existing best_day_pct_of_total_profit design. OUT OF SCHEMA SCOPE (not modeled, not an ambiguity): /terms section 9's separate single-TRADE 55%-of-total-profit cap and its 5-7-comparable-trades payout gate -- reader A explicitly scopes this to the post-pass PAYOUT stage (out of this corpus's evaluation-only scope, matching the precedent set by rules/tradeify's Growth-funded consistency gate and rules/funded-trading-plus-2step's FT+ Trader gate); the omission cannot move any live product number since tools/build-firm-presets.js's consistencyPct() only reads a best_day_pct_of_total_profit/block entry and src/lib/rule-engine.js never reads phases[].consistency at all. Also out of scope, not modeled: SabioTrade's separate 'PRO Club' subscription product (multiple assessment attempts + academy access, checkout ids 111/121, distinct 7-day free-trial id=4) -- a different product line from the flagship one-step Assessment/Challenge this corpus models. Golden vector: rules/sabiotrade/golden/daily-loss-100k.json, hand-derived from the firm's own $100,000 -> $95,000 Daily Loss Limit worked example (100k tier only; see that file's own description for exactly which fields this vector does and does not discriminate). Scope note: only rules/sabiotrade/ was written this run; this addition has not yet been run through tools/corpus-pipeline.js or recorded in docs/feature1/CORPUS_SOURCING.md / FIRM_CHECK_LOG.md.
payout cycle days: confirmed payout profit split pct: confirmed consistency: disagree_resolved daily loss amount basis: confirmed daily loss amount pct: confirmed daily loss includes unrealized: confirmed daily loss on breach: confirmed daily loss reset time utc: disagree_resolved max drawdown amount pct: confirmed max drawdown anchor: confirmed max drawdown basis: disagree_resolved max drawdown type: confirmed profit target pct: confirmed pricing initial fee: confirmed pricing model: confirmedNo prior value is evidenced for this check. This is a record of our research, not a firm rule effective date.
Link to this check - Confirmed · sources disagree on 0 field(s)
Prime · Two independent readers, each working blind to the other’s output and to the stored value
USD 650,000 · recorded field scope; not a whole-plan verification
Field-by-field: 12 confirmed · 3 preserved for the record (15 fields touched this pass).
Two blind independent first-party readers agree on every headline number for this Prime $650,000 tier: 10% profit target ($65,000), 5% daily loss limit ($32,500, previous day's closed-balance basis), 6% maximum trailing drawdown ($39,000, fixed off the initial balance per the firm's own formula "Equity <= Highest Closed Balance - (Initial Balance x 6%)"), 55% best-day consistency rule, one-time pricing ($2,989), 90% starting profit split. Reader A additionally sourced (reader B silent -- a coverage gap, not a competing value -- resolved directly rather than logged as an ambiguity): daily_loss.on_breach ("a hard breach... results in account closure" -> fail), daily_loss.includes_unrealized (the firm's own FAQ equity definition: unrealized P&L is excluded from the closed-balance reference but included on the tested equity side), payout.cycle_days (7, "payout frequency is weekly... at least 7 days since the last payout request"). DISAGREE, RESOLVED (entered in ambiguities[]): (a) daily_loss.reset_time_utc -- /terms states the closed-balance snapshot is fixed at 00:00h UTC, the homepage tooltip instead states 5pm EST (22:00 UTC); both first-party, unreconciled anywhere on the site; headline 00:00 (Terms is the operative document for the formula itself; this field is not consumed by rule-engine.js or build-firm-presets.js, so the choice is documentation-only). (b) phases[0].consistency denominator -- /terms ties the 55% best-day cap to TOTAL ACCUMULATED profit, the homepage tooltip instead ties it to the plan's FIXED TARGET profit; the two readings diverge mid-evaluation but converge exactly at the pass gate this corpus models (accumulated profit equals target at the moment of passing), so the modeled pass/fail outcome is invariant; headline = the Terms/total-profit reading, matching this schema's existing best_day_pct_of_total_profit design. OUT OF SCHEMA SCOPE (not modeled, not an ambiguity): /terms section 9's separate single-TRADE 55%-of-total-profit cap and its 5-7-comparable-trades payout gate -- reader A explicitly scopes this to the post-pass PAYOUT stage (out of this corpus's evaluation-only scope, matching the precedent set by rules/tradeify's Growth-funded consistency gate and rules/funded-trading-plus-2step's FT+ Trader gate); the omission cannot move any live product number since tools/build-firm-presets.js's consistencyPct() only reads a best_day_pct_of_total_profit/block entry and src/lib/rule-engine.js never reads phases[].consistency at all. Also out of scope, not modeled: SabioTrade's separate 'PRO Club' subscription product (multiple assessment attempts + academy access, checkout ids 111/121, distinct 7-day free-trial id=4) -- a different product line from the flagship one-step Assessment/Challenge this corpus models. Golden vector: rules/sabiotrade/golden/daily-loss-100k.json, hand-derived from the firm's own $100,000 -> $95,000 Daily Loss Limit worked example (100k tier only; see that file's own description for exactly which fields this vector does and does not discriminate). Scope note: only rules/sabiotrade/ was written this run; this addition has not yet been run through tools/corpus-pipeline.js or recorded in docs/feature1/CORPUS_SOURCING.md / FIRM_CHECK_LOG.md.
payout cycle days: confirmed payout profit split pct: confirmed consistency: disagree_resolved daily loss amount basis: confirmed daily loss amount pct: confirmed daily loss includes unrealized: confirmed daily loss on breach: confirmed daily loss reset time utc: disagree_resolved max drawdown amount pct: confirmed max drawdown anchor: confirmed max drawdown basis: disagree_resolved max drawdown type: confirmed profit target pct: confirmed pricing initial fee: confirmed pricing model: confirmedNo prior value is evidenced for this check. This is a record of our research, not a firm rule effective date.
Link to this check - Confirmed · sources disagree on 0 field(s)
Ultimate · Two independent readers, each working blind to the other’s output and to the stored value
USD 200,000 · recorded field scope; not a whole-plan verification
Field-by-field: 12 confirmed · 3 preserved for the record (15 fields touched this pass).
Two blind independent first-party readers agree on every headline number for this Ultimate $200,000 tier: 10% profit target ($20,000), 5% daily loss limit ($10,000, previous day's closed-balance basis), 6% maximum trailing drawdown ($12,000, fixed off the initial balance per the firm's own formula "Equity <= Highest Closed Balance - (Initial Balance x 6%)"), 55% best-day consistency rule, one-time pricing ($939), 90% starting profit split. Reader A additionally sourced (reader B silent -- a coverage gap, not a competing value -- resolved directly rather than logged as an ambiguity): daily_loss.on_breach ("a hard breach... results in account closure" -> fail), daily_loss.includes_unrealized (the firm's own FAQ equity definition: unrealized P&L is excluded from the closed-balance reference but included on the tested equity side), payout.cycle_days (7, "payout frequency is weekly... at least 7 days since the last payout request"). DISAGREE, RESOLVED (entered in ambiguities[]): (a) daily_loss.reset_time_utc -- /terms states the closed-balance snapshot is fixed at 00:00h UTC, the homepage tooltip instead states 5pm EST (22:00 UTC); both first-party, unreconciled anywhere on the site; headline 00:00 (Terms is the operative document for the formula itself; this field is not consumed by rule-engine.js or build-firm-presets.js, so the choice is documentation-only). (b) phases[0].consistency denominator -- /terms ties the 55% best-day cap to TOTAL ACCUMULATED profit, the homepage tooltip instead ties it to the plan's FIXED TARGET profit; the two readings diverge mid-evaluation but converge exactly at the pass gate this corpus models (accumulated profit equals target at the moment of passing), so the modeled pass/fail outcome is invariant; headline = the Terms/total-profit reading, matching this schema's existing best_day_pct_of_total_profit design. OUT OF SCHEMA SCOPE (not modeled, not an ambiguity): /terms section 9's separate single-TRADE 55%-of-total-profit cap and its 5-7-comparable-trades payout gate -- reader A explicitly scopes this to the post-pass PAYOUT stage (out of this corpus's evaluation-only scope, matching the precedent set by rules/tradeify's Growth-funded consistency gate and rules/funded-trading-plus-2step's FT+ Trader gate); the omission cannot move any live product number since tools/build-firm-presets.js's consistencyPct() only reads a best_day_pct_of_total_profit/block entry and src/lib/rule-engine.js never reads phases[].consistency at all. Also out of scope, not modeled: SabioTrade's separate 'PRO Club' subscription product (multiple assessment attempts + academy access, checkout ids 111/121, distinct 7-day free-trial id=4) -- a different product line from the flagship one-step Assessment/Challenge this corpus models. Golden vector: rules/sabiotrade/golden/daily-loss-100k.json, hand-derived from the firm's own $100,000 -> $95,000 Daily Loss Limit worked example (100k tier only; see that file's own description for exactly which fields this vector does and does not discriminate). Scope note: only rules/sabiotrade/ was written this run; this addition has not yet been run through tools/corpus-pipeline.js or recorded in docs/feature1/CORPUS_SOURCING.md / FIRM_CHECK_LOG.md.
payout cycle days: confirmed payout profit split pct: confirmed consistency: disagree_resolved daily loss amount basis: confirmed daily loss amount pct: confirmed daily loss includes unrealized: confirmed daily loss on breach: confirmed daily loss reset time utc: disagree_resolved max drawdown amount pct: confirmed max drawdown anchor: confirmed max drawdown basis: disagree_resolved max drawdown type: confirmed profit target pct: confirmed pricing initial fee: confirmed pricing model: confirmedNo prior value is evidenced for this check. This is a record of our research, not a firm rule effective date.
Link to this check
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.
2026-10-04 · earlier grouped record
- Essential · sizes 20000 — inspect this distinct check
- Essential · sizes 20000 — inspect this distinct check
- Essential · sizes 20000 — inspect this distinct check
- Essential · sizes 20000 — inspect this distinct check
- Essential · sizes 20000 — inspect this distinct check
- Plus · sizes 50000 — inspect this distinct check
- Plus · sizes 50000 — inspect this distinct check
- Plus · sizes 50000 — inspect this distinct check
- Plus · sizes 50000 — inspect this distinct check
- Advanced · sizes 100000 — inspect this distinct check
- Advanced · sizes 100000 — inspect this distinct check
- Advanced · sizes 100000 — inspect this distinct check
- Advanced · sizes 100000 — inspect this distinct check
- Ultimate · sizes 200000 — inspect this distinct check
- Ultimate · sizes 200000 — inspect this distinct check
- Ultimate · sizes 200000 — inspect this distinct check
- Ultimate · sizes 200000 — inspect this distinct check
- Prime · sizes 650000 — inspect this distinct check
- Prime · sizes 650000 — inspect this distinct check
- Prime · sizes 650000 — inspect this distinct check
- Prime · sizes 650000 — inspect this distinct check
2026-07-31 · earlier grouped record
What the rules say now
profit target pct (same across all modelled sizes)
Essential $119 Get funded Initial Balance $20K Profit Target 10% ($2,000) Daily Loss Limit 5% ($1,000) Max Trailing Drawdown 6% ($1,200) Profit Payout 80%retrieved sourced
min trading days (same across all modelled sizes)
(no minimum-trading-days figure is stated on the homepage plan tables or /terms by either reader)retrieved derived
daily loss amount pct (same across all modelled sizes)
Essential $119 Get funded Initial Balance $20K Profit Target 10% ($2,000) Daily Loss Limit 5% ($1,000) Max Trailing Drawdown 6% ($1,200) Profit Payout 80%retrieved sourced
max drawdown amount pct (same across all modelled sizes)
Essential $119 Get funded Initial Balance $20K Profit Target 10% ($2,000) Daily Loss Limit 5% ($1,000) Max Trailing Drawdown 6% ($1,200) Profit Payout 80%retrieved sourced
max drawdown type (same across all modelled sizes)
traders must not allow their equity to drop more than 6% below their highest recorded closed balanceretrieved sourced
max drawdown basis (same across all modelled sizes)
traders must not allow their equity to drop more than 6% below their highest recorded closed balanceretrieved derived
consistency (same across all modelled sizes)
Terms section 6: "The profit generated during a trader's most profitable trading day must not exceed 55% of the total profit achieved on the account. If this threshold is exceeded, the trader must continue trading until no single trading day accounts for more than 55% of the total accumulated profit." Essential plan table row (homepage): flat "55%" figure for this tier.retrieved 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 SabioTrade.