Velox Research · Backtest Study

The Prop-Firm Readiness Study

We simulated 277 separate $100,000 prop-firm assessment campaigns — one starting on every single trading day of the last year — each following the same public two-phase rulebook (5% then 10% profit targets, 4% daily loss limit, 10% trailing drawdown) with a budget of three attempts. Here is everything that happened, including the failures.

72.9%
of simulated campaigns reached funded status within 60 days (202 of 277)
34 days
median time to pass both phases, among those that passed
1.82
average assessment attempts used per campaign (of 3 budgeted)
9.4%
of campaigns lost all three attempts — the honest failure rate

Every campaign, one bar

All 277 simulated campaigns, no survivor filtering. "Unfinished" means the 60-day study window closed while the account was still alive and trading — under real assessment rules (no time limit) those simply continue.

202 funded
49 unfinished
26 failed
202 funded ≤ 60 days (72.9%) 49 unfinished, account alive (17.7%) 26 failed all attempts (9.4%)

How fast the funded ones got there

Of the 202 simulated campaigns that passed both phases: 30% of all campaigns were funded inside 30 days, 51% inside 45.

10–19 days
8 20–29 days
70 30–39 days
48 40–49 days
35 50–59 days
41

How the funded ones passed

Each campaign carried a budget of three attempts — a killed attempt restarts the next day inside the same 60-day window. Most winners never needed the budget.

126
funded on their first attempt (62% of all passes)
56
funded on the second attempt
20
funded on the third attempt
15 / 59
fastest / slowest days-to-funded among the passes

What happens with more or less time

The same 277 campaigns scored against three deadlines — pass rates are a function of patience, and the failure rate barely moves.

DEADLINE FUNDED IN TIMESHARE
30 days 83 of 27730.0%
45 days 142 of 27751.3%
60 days 202 of 27772.9%

A companion stress test — 500 synthetic accounts with the year's week-to-week market continuity deliberately scrambled — produced a lower 59.6% sixty-day pass rate. The honest planning range is therefore roughly 60–73%, not a single number.

Methodology, in plain words

Each of the 277 campaigns starts a fresh simulated $100,000 account on its own calendar day and trades the identical Velox research strategy through the last year's real price history: modeled 1.2-pip spread, stop-loss-first fills, position sizing recomputed from each morning's balance (gains and losses compound), an internal 3% daily stop and an automatic risk cut at 6% trailing drawdown — all inside the firm-style rulebook of 5% then 10% profit targets, a 4% daily loss kill-line and a 10% trailing drawdown kill-line, tracked on end-of-day equity. No configuration was changed between campaigns; no campaign was excluded.

Part 2: The $400k Simulated Account, in Full Detail →
The study's highest-return run followed for the whole year — every killed attempt, the monthly funded ledger, and the per-pair quarterly breakdown (including the pair that lost money).

How to read this honestly

The same rules we hold ourselves to everywhere else on this site:

HYPOTHETICAL PERFORMANCE DISCLOSURE: these results are based on simulated or hypothetical performance results that have certain inherent limitations. Unlike the results shown in an actual performance record, these results do not represent actual trading. Because these trades have not actually been executed, these results may have under- or over-compensated for the impact, if any, of certain market factors, such as lack of liquidity. Simulated or hypothetical trading programs in general are also subject to the fact that they are designed with the benefit of hindsight. No representation is being made that any account will or is likely to achieve profits or losses similar to these being shown. Forex trading involves substantial risk of loss and is not suitable for every investor.