What this simulator does
A funded-account challenge gives you a profit target, usually a maximum daily loss, a maximum total drawdown and often a time limit and a minimum number of trading days. You pass only if you reach the target before you break a loss limit or run out of time. The result is a race, and its outcome depends on how large your trades are compared with those limits.
This tool plays that race many times. Each simulated attempt takes the number of trades per day you set, with each trade winning or losing at random according to your win rate, and then checks the rules after every closed trade. It counts how many attempts passed, how many broke the daily loss limit, how many broke the drawdown limit and how many ran out of time.
How to read the results
- Chance of passing. The share of simulated attempts that reached the target, after the minimum days, without a breach.
- Daily loss, drawdown and out of time. How the other attempts ended. If both limits are broken on the same trade, it is counted as a daily loss breach.
- Time to pass. The median number of trading days among attempts that passed, with the 10th and 90th percentile.
- Loss buffer. How many full stop-outs fit inside the drawdown limit (and the daily limit) at your risk per trade.
- Risk sweep. The same rules and edge at seven risk sizes, so you can see where the pass chance peaks and where breaches take over.
What it assumes
Trades are independent, the win rate and payoffs never change, every loss costs exactly the average loss you entered, and rules are checked on closed trades. There is no slippage, no commission and no floating profit or loss inside open trades, and the same number of trades is taken every day. Real markets have clusters of volatility and news days, so treat the figures as a sense of scale, not a forecast. Trailing drawdown here follows the highest closed-trade balance, so it is the strict version of an equity-based trail that updates from floating profit as well.
Rules differ
Static drawdown stays a fixed distance below the starting balance. Trailing drawdown follows the highest balance reached, so every gain raises the floor. End-of-day trailing only moves up using the closing balance of each day. Some firms stop the trail once the floor reaches the starting balance. Firms differ and change their terms, so enter the rules from your firm's current terms. This page does not use any firm's rules and is not affiliated with any prop firm.
The math
Everything starts from the expectancy of one trade, in multiples of the amount risked (R):
At a risk of r per trade, the expected gain per trade is E × r of the starting balance. A 10% target at 1% risk needs about 10 ÷ (0.125 × 1) = 80 trades on average, which is 40 days at two trades a day. That is longer than a 30-day limit, so many attempts time out even when nothing goes wrong. Raising the risk shortens the race, but it also makes the loss limits easier to hit.
This is why the best risk is not "as high as possible". The pass chance rises as the race gets faster, then falls when breaches begin to outweigh the speed. Where the peak sits depends on the rules, the edge and the number of trades per day, which is what the risk sweep shows.
Worked examples
Three risk sizes, same edge
A 45% win rate with 1.5R winners and 1R losers, two trades a day, a 10% target, a 10% static drawdown, a 5% daily limit, a minimum of 4 trading days and a 30-day limit. Each row is 5,000 simulated attempts.
| Risk per trade | Pass | Daily loss breach | Drawdown breach | Out of time | Median days to pass |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.25% | <1% | 0% | 0% | 100% | 29 |
| 0.5% | 15% | 0% | 1% | 84% | 24 |
| 0.75% | 38% | 0% | 4% | 57% | 19 |
| 1% | 56% | 0% | 10% | 33% | 15 |
| 1.5% | 68% | 0% | 21% | 11% | 11 |
| 2% | 69% | 0% | 30% | 1% | 7 |
| 3% | 24% | 76% | 0% | 0% | 4 |
At 0.25% risk almost every attempt times out. From 1% to 2% the pass chance rises but drawdown breaches grow from 10% to 30%. At 3% risk, two losing trades in a day exceed the 5% daily limit, so 76% of attempts end that way. The best size in this table is 2%, which passes about 69% of attempts, and it only holds for these assumptions.
Static versus trailing drawdown
Same edge and 1% risk. Only the drawdown rule changes. A trailing floor follows each new high, so a drawdown of 10% is measured from the best balance reached, not from the start.
| Drawdown rule (10%) | Pass | Drawdown breach | Out of time |
|---|---|---|---|
| Static drawdown | 56% | 10% | 33% |
| Trailing drawdown | 55% | 23% | 22% |
| Trailing, locks at start balance | 55% | 23% | 22% |
| End-of-day trailing | 55% | 21% | 24% |
The trailing rule more than doubles the share of attempts that end on a drawdown breach, from 10% to 23%. The pass chance barely moves (56% against 55%) because the extra breaches mostly come from attempts that would otherwise have timed out. Locking the floor at the starting balance changes nothing here, because the target (10%) is not larger than the drawdown (10%).
How much a few points of win rate are worth
1% risk, 1.5R winners, the same rules. Only the win rate changes.
| Win rate (1.5R winners) | Expectancy | Pass | Drawdown breach | Out of time |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 40% | +0.000R | 28% | 28% | 44% |
| 45% | +0.125R | 56% | 10% | 33% |
| 50% | +0.250R | 81% | 3% | 16% |
| 55% | +0.375R | 95% | 1% | 5% |
Each 5-point step in win rate moves the pass chance by 14 to 28 points here. A pass chance estimated from a small sample of trades is therefore only as reliable as the win rate behind it. Check it with the "win rate 5 points lower" line in the result before relying on it.
Frequently asked questions
Does a higher win rate or a higher reward-to-risk matter more?
Neither matters on its own. What matters is the expectancy per trade, p × W − (1 − p) × L. In the default example a 5-point rise in win rate (45% to 50%) lifts the pass chance from 56% to 81%, while raising the average win from 1.5R to 1.75R lifts it to 77%. Both work through the same number: the expectancy.
What risk per trade maximises the pass rate?
There is a peak, and it depends on your rules and your edge. In the default example the best sizes were 1.5% to 2% (68% and 69%), but the same rules at 3% collapse to 24% because of the daily limit. Use the risk sweep with your own numbers instead of a rule of thumb, and remember that the highest pass chance is not always the size you can follow after a losing streak.
Is passing a challenge the same as staying funded?
No. The simulator stops when the target is reached. After that you still face loss limits, often without the time pressure, and a trader who sized trades up to pass can find the same size fails later. Check that the risk size you used to pass is one you can keep following after a losing streak.
Why simulate instead of backtest?
A backtest is one path through history. A challenge is a short race where the order of wins and losses decides the outcome, so two traders with the same edge can have very different results. The simulator replays your edge in many random orders and counts how often each outcome happens.
Can I trust a pass probability?
Treat it as an estimate that is only as good as its inputs. It assumes independent trades, a constant win rate and no costs, and a small number of past trades gives a wide range for your true win rate. The simulator shows a pass rate with the win rate 5 points lower for that reason. A small gap between the two is a good sign. A large gap means the number is fragile.
Does the simulator use my firm's rules?
No. It has no built-in rules from any firm. You enter the target, loss limits, drawdown type, minimum days and time limit yourself, so it stays accurate when a firm changes terms. Always read the current rules of the firm you trade with.
Know the odds, then work on the edge.
The simulator shows how much an edge is worth under challenge rules. The indicators help you look for that edge.
Guides that explain it
Last updated November 2026. For education only. Not financial advice. Results depend on your inputs and cannot predict future performance.