A futures prop trading firm (also called a futures funding program) is a company that lets traders access firm capital to trade futures after completing a rules-based evaluation. Read on this Best Futures Prop Trading Firms in the US to know more about each firm in detail.
Instead of funding a large personal futures account, a trader typically pays an evaluation or subscription fee and must follow strict risk constraints such as:
- Drawdown rules (trailing, end-of-day, or static/minimum balance)
- Daily loss limits (in some programs or plan types)
- Maximum position size (contract limits)
- Trading-hour and “flat by” requirements
- Payout eligibility requirements (winning days, consistency rules, payout caps, payout timing)
In practice, futures prop firms monetize risk-controlled access to simulated or live trading environments with defined rules and a payout framework.
The US is the world’s most prominent hub for listed futures trading, with deep liquidity and widely used futures products across indices, rates, energy, and metals. Futures prop firms are especially relevant in the US because they:
- Provide a structured path for traders to access larger notional exposure with defined risk rules
- Standardize performance measurement and risk compliance for disciplined trading
- Offer a capital access route for traders who do not want to allocate large personal margin
- Enable strategy testing inside a rules framework that mirrors professional risk controls
The reality is that prop rules can be more important than the strategy itself. A profitable strategy in a retail account can fail inside a prop account if the drawdown model, payout gating, or time constraints do not match the strategy’s return distribution.
Best Futures Prop Trading Firms in the US: Profit and Payout Structures
| Firm | Profit split | Payout frequency | Payout eligibility rules | Payout caps | Buffers, safety nets, and “don’t-touch” zones | Analytical rule takeaway |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Topstep | 90/10 payouts (you receive 90% of approved payouts) | Per payout request cycle (Standard: 5 winning days; Consistency: 3 days with 40% target). Live Funded: can unlock daily payouts after 30 winning days | Standard: 5 winning days (Net P&L ≥ $150), plus profit > $0 since last payout. Consistency option: 3 days meeting 40% consistency target, plus profit > $0 since last payout | Express Funded Standard: up to $5,000 or 50% of balance (whichever lower). Consistency: up to $6,000 or 50% of balance | Rule engine is “cycle-based” and resets the win-day count after each payout | Great if you can stack qualifying days repeatedly; not ideal if your edge is concentrated in a few oversized days |
| Apex Trader Funding | 100% of first $25,000 per account, then 90% thereafter | Payout requests allowed once eligible; firm rules include day-count gates | Must complete 8 trading days, with 5 of 8 showing ≥ $50 profit. Early payouts include a safety net requirement (drawdown + $100). Also enforces a 30% consistency (windfall) rule until later milestones | Caps vary by account and payout stage (firm applies structured limits in early payout phases) | Safety net applies to first payouts (drawdown + $100). Consistency rule restricts “one big day” dominating profit at payout time | Strong for consistent, repeatable profiles; harsh on “spike profit” styles because consistency math can block withdrawals even when profitable |
| Earn2Trade | 80/20 in trader’s favor | Withdrawals processed weekly (Wednesdays) with submission deadline 2:00 PM CT Friday prior | Must request via email process; minimum net withdrawal $100 (after split and fees). Funded program rules still apply (times, ladder, daily loss, etc.) | LiveSim and program-specific caps exist (varies by track), plus withdrawal fees based on method | First withdrawal can include a one-time activation fee deduction (per their policy) and payment provider fees | Predictable weekly cashflow model, but slower liquidity versus “daily eligibility” firms; best for traders who like scheduled withdrawals |
| Take Profit Trader | PRO accounts: Withdraw at 80% once buffer is built | Positioning emphasizes “withdraw day one,” but buffer must be reached first for normal withdrawals | To withdraw normally, you must reach the buffer zone (equal to max drawdown). Example: $50k account needs $52k balance to start withdrawing at 80% | Buffer determines what’s withdrawable; withdrawing inside buffer typically ties to account termination conditions per rules | Buffer = max drawdown amount. Withdrawable profits are the amount above buffer (by their PRO rule doc) | Best for traders prioritizing fast access once buffer is built; not ideal if your strategy frequently mean-reverts into drawdown after peaks |
| Tradeify | 90/10 from first payout (no grace tier) | Select Flex: payout eligibility after 5 winning days. Select Daily: daily eligibility with buffer restrictions | Select Flex: 5 winning days (threshold varies by account size), plus positive net profit in cycle after first payout. Select Daily: must respect buffer and payout caps | Flex caps: can withdraw up to 50% of total profits, capped per payout by account size (example caps shown for $50k/$100k/$150k). Daily policy also has caps and buffer constraints | Select Daily uses buffer (example: $50k buffer $2,100; higher for larger). Flex can “lock” drawdown at +$100 above start based on rules | Very rules-transparent. Flex favors traders who can produce winning days; Daily favors steady grinders who keep equity above buffer consistently |
| My Funded Futures | Core/Pro: 80%. Rapid (Sim Funded): 90% (as of Jan 12, 2026 per their policy) | Rapid: daily payout frequency (window refreshes at market close). Other plans are request-based with plan-specific timing | Eligibility and requirements vary by plan (Core/Pro/Rapid), including plan-specific payout timing and rule gates | Sim-funded maximum request value can be very high (policy references large caps) but plan constraints still apply | Rapid includes buffer targets by account size (example: 50k = $2,100; 100k = $3,100 shown in policy) | Best if you want plan segmentation with explicit payout mechanics. Pick wrong plan and payout liquidity changes dramatically |
| Elite Trader Funding | Elite Sim-Funded: “keep up to 100% of simulation profits up to $25,000” (per help rules). Live Elite: 80/20 | Elite Sim payouts processed weekly (Wednesday batch with Tuesday cutoff); Live Elite can be processed daily | Must meet Active Trading Day (ATD) requirements and safety net rules for payout cycles; payout is structured in cycles with caps and minimums depending on plan/cycle | Cycle-based maximums apply; some plans require withdrawing full cycle maximum to move to next cycle (plan-dependent) | Safety net = max drawdown + $100 concept; and ATD math includes daily profit minimums and the “23% of best day” condition in their rules | Most “rule-dense” payout engine here. Great for disciplined, repeatable profiles; punishing for traders whose edge comes from a few outsized days |
Also, you may read FundedNext vs The5ers vs Alpha Capital vs RebelsFunding
1. Topstep
Topstep is one of the most established US-focused futures prop firms, known for extensive documentation around funded account rules, drawdown mechanics, and payout eligibility.
- Maximum Loss Limit (MLL): A trailing minimum balance framework derived from end-of-day account highs, but typically enforced intraday when breached.
- Funded account rules: Clear constraints for trading hours, flat-by requirements, and account limits.
- Payout eligibility framework: Winning-day qualification logic, minimum profit thresholds per day, and payout caps.
Topstep is best for traders who want rule clarity and predictable governance. The tradeoff is that the drawdown logic can penalize strategies with larger intraday swings, even if the system is profitable over a broader horizon.
Also, you may read 10 Best Options Trading Prop Firms
Topstep: Strengths & considerations
| Strengths | Considerations |
|---|---|
| Strong documentation makes rule modeling and compliance easier | Trailing drawdown enforcement can punish volatility-heavy strategies |
| Payout eligibility rules are clearly defined | Winning-day thresholds can slow payout access for low-frequency traders |
| Trading windows and flat-by logic reduce ambiguity | Close-time restrictions may conflict with settlement or late-session strategies |
2. Apex Trader Funding
Apex Trader Funding is a high-volume futures funding brand, widely used among traders who prefer multi-account scaling and repeated evaluation attempts.
- Minimum trading days are explicitly required in evaluation.
- Trailing threshold drawdown emphasis makes it important to understand how drawdown moves as the account’s peak equity changes.
- Payout parameters include minimum payout amounts, payout timing constraints, and early payout caps based on account size.
Apex Trader Funding works well for traders who want a scalable workflow and who can operate inside a trailing drawdown structure. It is less ideal for traders whose edge depends on holding larger intraday risk or who want payout access without timing gates.
Also, you may read 4 Best Forex Prop Firms for Scalping
Apex Trader Funding: Strengths & considerations
| Strengths | Considerations |
|---|---|
| Clear published evaluation constraints including minimum trading days | Minimum-day rule can force unnecessary participation |
| Well-defined payout parameters and payout cap logic | Payout cadence rules reduce flexibility even after strong performance |
| Strong appeal for multi-account scaling workflows | Trailing drawdown can invalidate strategies with higher variance |
3. Earn2Trade
Earn2Trade is known for a progression-based evaluation approach, most notably through its Trader Career Path structure.
- Minimum traded days requirement encourages repeatability rather than one-off performance.
- End-of-day drawdown framing alongside daily loss and contract sizing limits.
- Clear operational rules including approved trading times and equity measurement logic.
Earn2Trade is suitable for disciplined traders who want a structured progression and clearly enumerated risk limits. The main constraint is that selective or highly opportunistic strategies may suffer under minimum-day expectations.
Also, you may read 10 Prop Trading Firms Australia
Earn2Trade: Strengths & considerations
| Strengths | Considerations |
|---|---|
| Minimum-day structure encourages consistent behavior | Can be inefficient for low-frequency or “only trade A+ setups” styles |
| Clear limits around daily loss and sizing reduce misunderstandings | Approved trading time rules may restrict certain session strategies |
| Transparent equity measurement rules support systematic planning | Consistency requirements can penalize lumpy return profiles |
4. Take Profit Trader
Take Profit Trader positions itself around simplified access to funding and strong emphasis on fast payout availability for eligible profits.
- Official positioning emphasizes withdrawals from day one and daily withdrawal availability for eligible profits above buffer on certain account types.
- End-of-day drawdown messaging is emphasized for specific plan tiers.
- Plan rules are documented via their official site and help center content.
TPT is best evaluated through payout mechanics and plan-level rules. If payout friction is a top priority, their messaging is compelling. The due diligence step is confirming how “buffer” interacts with your strategy’s drawdown profile and risk distribution.
Also, you may read 5 Best Prop Trading Firm Affiliate Programs Compared
Take Profit Trader: Strengths & considerations
| Strengths | Considerations |
|---|---|
| Strong focus on fast payout access | “Profit above buffer” mechanics must be modeled precisely |
| Reduced emphasis on “payout windows” in their positioning | Some constraints live in plan-specific rule documentation |
| EOD drawdown messaging can be strategy-friendly for intraday variance | If you trade into close, confirm flat-by and trading-hour constraints |
5. Tradeify
Tradeify offers multiple plan types and publishes detailed rule collections that make it easier to compare account constraints.
- End-of-day trailing drawdown recalculated at market close on funded accounts.
- Plan-level policy tables often outline drawdown type, daily loss behavior, scaling rules, and payout gates.
- Some payout policies require profitable days and include a consistency rule.
Tradeify is strong for traders who want predictable EOD drawdown mechanics and easily readable plan rules. It can be less compatible with strategies that produce a large portion of profits in occasional outlier days, because consistency rules and profitable-day thresholds can become binding constraints.
Also, you may read 10 Best Stock Trading Prop Firms
Tradeify: Strengths & considerations
| Strengths | Considerations |
|---|---|
| EOD drawdown can reduce intraday “noise failures” | Consistency rules can penalize outlier performance days |
| Plan tables help traders model scaling and payout eligibility | Payout qualification thresholds can slow withdrawals |
| Strong rule transparency across account types | Choosing the wrong plan can create avoidable restrictions |
6. My Funded Futures
My Funded Futures provides multiple plan structures and documents evaluation and funded rules in an official knowledge base.
- Evaluation rules include profit target achievement without violating drawdown and loss rules.
- Some plans include activity requirements (trading sessions and engagement expectations).
- Payout cadence differs by funded plan type, with tiered payout caps in some structures.
My Funded Futures is a reasonable option for traders who want clearly segmented plans and documented payout ladders. The main risk is plan mismatch, because payout speed and restrictions can vary meaningfully between plan types.
Also, you may read 10 Best Crypto Prop Trading Firms
My Funded Futures: Strengths & considerations
| Strengths | Considerations |
|---|---|
| Good documentation around plan differences and payout structures | Activity/session requirements can conflict with selective trading |
| Tiered payout ladders help set expectations for scaling | Fast payouts depend on plan choice, not just performance |
| Clear segmentation helps traders choose based on goals | Plan-level restrictions can change real withdrawable profit behavior |
7. Elite Trader Funding
Elite Trader Funding differentiates itself with a static drawdown evaluation option and rule structures where trailing drawdown can transition to static behavior based on realized profit thresholds.
- Static drawdown evaluation option: the minimum account balance does not trail upward, making modeling simpler.
- Elite accounts can have trailing drawdown until a condition is met, then may shift to static-style minimum balance logic.
- Flat-by requirements are explicitly emphasized, including consequences for violations.
Elite Trader Funding is interesting for traders who dislike trailing drawdown uncertainty. It rewards traders who can lock in realized profits and reduce exposure to drawdown movement. The key risk is rule strictness around close-time compliance and drawdown breaches.
Elite Trader Funding: Strengths & considerations
| Strengths | Considerations |
|---|---|
| Static drawdown evaluation is easier to model and plan around | Strict drawdown breach consequences can be unforgiving |
| Trailing-to-static behavior can reduce long-term drawdown pressure | Flat-by enforcement can conflict with end-of-session strategies |
| Minimum trading day expectations are clearly defined | Not ideal for traders who want full session flexibility |
7 Best Futures Prop Trading Firms in the US: Final verdict
| Firm | Best fit profile | Drawdown model signal | Payout model signal | Key constraints to evaluate |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Topstep | Traders who want mature rule transparency and structured funded process | Maximum loss limit that trails based on end-of-day highs but is enforced intraday | Payout eligibility uses “winning days” plus thresholds and caps | Flat-by timing, payout qualification rules, MLL behavior |
| Apex Trader Funding | Traders optimizing for multi-account scaling workflows | Trailing threshold drawdown emphasis | Minimum payout amount, payout request spacing, and early payout caps | Minimum trading days, payout cadence gating, trailing drawdown sensitivity |
| Earn2Trade | Traders who prefer a progression-style evaluation path | End-of-day drawdown framing plus daily loss and position limits | Evaluation constraints are clearly defined; payouts depend on their funding structure | Minimum traded days, approved trading times, equity measurement rules |
| Take Profit Trader | Traders prioritizing rapid payout access and reduced payout friction | End-of-day drawdown messaging for certain plans | Official messaging emphasizes withdrawals from day one for eligible profits above buffer | Buffer mechanics, plan-specific rule definitions, flat-by expectations |
| Tradeify | Traders who want plan-level rule tables and EOD drawdown logic | End-of-day trailing drawdown recalculated at close | Plan-specific payout rules; some plans include consistency and profitable-day thresholds | Consistency rule exposure, payout qualification, scaling limits |
| My Funded Futures | Traders who want structured plan segmentation and documented payout ladders | Trailing drawdown language in evaluation; plan-specific funded rules | Payout timelines vary by plan with winning-day thresholds and caps | Activity requirements, plan-specific payout schedules, drawdown type by plan |
| Elite Trader Funding | Traders who want static drawdown evaluation or evolving drawdown mechanics | Static drawdown evaluation; Elite accounts can stop trailing after a threshold | Drawdown hit can void payout eligibility depending on account rules | Flat-by requirements, trailing-to-static transition conditions |
Also, you may read BrightFunded vs DNA Funded vs Funded Trading Plus
Conclusion
In Conclusion while selecting Best Futures Prop Trading Firms in the US, most traders fail not because of market incompetence but because their strategy is incompatible with the prop firm’s rule geometry. Trailing drawdowns punish volatility, profitable-day requirements punish low-frequency strategies, and consistency rules punish lumpy edge. The best futures prop firm is the one whose drawdown model and payout gates match your strategy’s distribution of returns, while allowing your preferred trading session and contract sizing.
Frequently Asked Questions
Are futures prop firms the same as brokerages?
No. A brokerage provides market access for your own capital. A prop funding program provides access to capital only after a rules-based evaluation and ongoing compliance.
Is End-of-Day drawdown better than trailing drawdown?
For many intraday strategies, EOD drawdown can be easier because the threshold updates at close instead of constantly intraday. But enforcement details still matter.
How should systematic traders pick a firm?
Model the rule set like a risk constraint. Simulate your strategy returns against drawdown and payout rules before choosing.
