How to Pass the MyFundedFutures Evaluation: Pick the Plan, Then Pace the Buffer

How to pass the MyFundedFutures evaluation depends first on which plan you buy, because the plan decides how the drawdown is measured, whether a consistency rule applies, and how many contracts you may hold. A failed attempt is often not a failed strategy. It is a workable strategy running on a plan whose rules punish exactly the way it trades.

Futures prop firms commonly sell more than one evaluation type, and plan names, pricing and parameters get revised. This article does not quote the current MyFundedFutures lineup or any current figure. It describes how these evaluations are commonly structured, so you can read the firm's own rule pages with the right questions in hand. Treat every number below as a hypothetical worked example, and confirm the real ones on the MyFundedFutures site the day you buy.

If you are new to futures evaluations in general, our overview of futures prop firms covers the landscape. This post stays narrow: one firm's evaluation, read as a set of rule categories, then a pacing plan built on top of them.

MyFundedFutures evaluation rules are best read as categories, because the categories are stable even when the numbers change. Before you place a trade, write down the current value of each item below from the firm's own rule pages for the exact plan and account size you bought. If any item is unclear, ask support and keep the answer in writing.

A trailing drawdown is a disqualification level that moves up as your account makes new highs, and the measurement basis decides how much room you really have. Two designs are common in futures evaluations, and the difference changes how you should trade.

Under an end of day design, the threshold is recalculated from your closing balance after the session. Open profit during the day does not lift it. That suits traders who let winners run inside a session, because an unrealised gain that partly reverses before the close does not cost buffer, as long as the closing balance is what you expected.

Under an intraday design, the threshold follows peak equity in real time, including unrealised profit. A trade that runs well in your favour and then gives most of it back can raise your floor permanently without a single losing closed trade. That design favours quick targets and tight management of open profit.

A hypothetical worked example: on a $50,000 evaluation with a $2,000 trailing drawdown, the threshold starts at $48,000. If a trade shows $1,200 of open profit and you close it at $300, an end of day plan moves the threshold to roughly $48,300 after the close, while an intraday plan may already have moved it toward $49,200. Same trade, very different remaining buffer. Many designs also stop trailing once the threshold reaches a set level, which changes the plan again, so check whether yours does. The full mechanics are in trailing drawdown explained.

A consistency rule is a cap on how much of your total profit may come from one day, and it is the rule that turns a lucky session into a delay. Where a plan applies one, a single large day can mean you must keep trading until the rest of your days catch up, even after the target is technically met.

A hypothetical worked example: with a $3,000 target and a rule that no day may exceed half of total profit, a $2,000 first day forces total profit up to at least $4,000 before that day stops being too large. The big day did not speed you up. It moved the finish line out and kept you exposed to the drawdown for longer.

The practical answer is a daily ceiling you set yourself. If you stop for the day once you reach a modest share of the target, the rule rarely binds, and you spend fewer sessions exposed to the threshold. Whether the rule applies in the evaluation, at payout or both varies by plan, so confirm it. Our consistency rule explainer shows the arithmetic across several designs.

Contract sizing on a futures evaluation is the number of contracts your current buffer can afford at the stop distance the setup needs, never the maximum the plan allows. The contract limit is a ceiling, not a target, and trading at it is the fastest way to turn a normal losing day into a breach.

Futures size is discrete. You pick the product, which fixes the dollar value per tick, then a whole number of contracts, and only then do you find out how wide a stop your risk budget can pay for. Micro contracts are what make fine adjustment possible on a smaller evaluation, and many plans express their limit in full size contracts with a micro equivalent.

A hypothetical worked example: if your buffer to the threshold is $1,800 and you decide no single trade may risk more than a sixth of it, your risk per trade is $300. On a product worth $5 per tick, that buys a 60 tick stop on one contract, or a 30 tick stop on two. If the setup needs 40 ticks, one contract is the size, whatever the cap says. Recalculate the buffer every morning, because under a trailing design the threshold rises with each new high, so profit does not widen the buffer and any give back from the peak narrows it. For the general method, see position sizing for a prop firm challenge.

Pacing is the daily share of the profit target you aim for, and on a trailing drawdown evaluation a slower pace usually carries less risk than a fast one. The goal is to finish without the threshold catching up and without one day dominating the total.

A simple structure many traders use, adapted to your plan's actual numbers:

Evaluation failures usually come from a short list of rule interactions, not from a lack of edge. Knowing the list in advance is cheaper than discovering it through a new evaluation fee, and repeat challenge fees can add up to $2,400+ a year.

The first is giving back open profit on an intraday trailing plan, which raises the floor while the account looks fine. The second is one oversized day that triggers a consistency rule and stretches the evaluation. The third is sizing to the contract cap instead of the buffer, so two ordinary losers in a row end the account. The fourth is a position left open past the session cutoff. The fifth is revenge trading after a red day, which turns a contained loss into a breach.

None of these are specific to one firm, which is why the same patterns appear in why traders fail prop firm challenges. If you are weighing a similar firm, the Tradeify version of this checklist is in how to pass the Tradeify evaluation.

Whether you may run a bot or automated strategy on a MyFundedFutures evaluation is decided by the firm's policy, not by the software, and that policy can change. Automation on futures depends on each firm's rules, which differ by plan and get revised, so ask the firm directly and keep the written answer before you connect anything.

If the firm does permit it on your plan, the software has to know the same things you do: the live threshold, the daily stop, the contract limit and the cutoff time, and it has to stop itself before any of them. PraxAI has a native NinjaTrader 8 build, but whether a given futures firm permits running it is the firm's call, not ours. For how we compare tools in this space, see our review of AI trading bots for prop firms, which PraxAI publishes.