Consistency rules, scaling plans and minimum days
Lesson 7 · about 9 min
After the drawdown rules, the next group of rules shapes how you are allowed to reach the target. They exist to stop one lucky day from passing an evaluation, and they can quietly raise the effective target or slow you down by weeks. Read them before you plan a single trade.
Consistency rules
A consistency rule caps the share of total profit that any single day may represent. Common forms:
- "No single trading day may account for more than 40% of total profit at the time of passing or of a payout request."
- "Your best day must be no more than 50% of your total profit."
- "Profit must be reached across at least N days with no day exceeding X% of the target."
The percentage varies from 20% to 50%. Some firms apply it only at payout on the funded account; others apply it to the evaluation as well.
The important thing is that this rule does not fail you. It raises the amount you must earn. If your best day is B and the rule is P%, you cannot pass until total profit reaches at least B / P.
Worked example. Target $3,000, consistency rule 40%.
| Best day | Minimum total profit to satisfy 40% | Extra profit needed beyond $3,000 target |
|---|---|---|
| $800 | $2,000 (below target; no effect) | $0 |
| $1,200 | $3,000 | $0 |
| $1,800 | $4,500 | $1,500 |
| $2,500 | $6,250 | $3,250 |
A $2,500 day on a $3,000 target sounds like a gift. Under a 40% rule it more than doubles the work remaining, and every extra dollar you must earn is extra time exposed to the drawdown rule. The rational response is to cap your daily profit at roughly P% of the target (here, $1,200) and stop for the day once you reach it. The coast rule in Module 4 builds on this.
Also check the direction of the rule on the funded account. Some firms compute consistency on profit since the last payout, so a single big day right after a payout resets the problem.
Key idea: A consistency rule converts your best day into a minimum total. Cap your daily profit at the rule's percentage of target and the rule never bites.
Scaling plans
Many firms limit position size as a function of account balance. On futures accounts it is a contract cap:
| Balance (nominal $50,000, example) | Max contracts (minis) | Max micros |
|---|---|---|
| $50,000 to $51,499 | 2 | 20 |
| $51,500 to $52,999 | 3 | 30 |
| $53,000 and above | 5 | 50 |
Some firms apply the cap only on the funded account; others in the evaluation too. Some count micros as one-tenth of a mini; others cap micros separately. Exceeding the cap for a single order is usually an immediate breach.
On forex accounts scaling shows up as a leverage cap (1:30 to 1:100) or a maximum lot size per position, plus a "scaling plan" that increases the nominal account by 25% every few months of profitable trading.
The cap matters less than you might think for the evaluation, because Module 3 will argue your risk per trade should be small enough that you rarely approach it. It matters more on the funded account, where the temptation is to size up to the cap immediately.
Minimum trading days
Most evaluations require a minimum number of days on which you trade, typically 2 to 10, before you can pass. Details that vary:
- What counts as a trading day? Usually at least one executed trade. Some firms require a minimum profit or loss (e.g. at least $50 in either direction), or a minimum number of round turns, to count the day.
- Do days need to be consecutive? Rarely, but check.
- Is there a maximum? Time limits (30, 45, 60 days) still exist at some forex firms and a few futures firms.
- Does the minimum reset on a payout? On funded accounts, "5 winning days of at least $200" style rules can gate each payout.
Minimum days interact with the target and the consistency rule. If the minimum is 5 days and the consistency cap is 40% of a $3,000 target, the most efficient path is around $600 to $1,200 per day for 3 to 5 days, not one big day and four tiny ones.
The interaction table
Put the three rules together for a "$50,000" account with a $3,000 target:
| Rule set | Effective target | Minimum time | Efficient daily profit |
|---|---|---|---|
| No consistency rule, 2 minimum days | $3,000 | 2 days | Any |
| 40% consistency, 5 minimum days | $3,000 if best day <= $1,200 | 5 days | $600 to $1,200 |
| 30% consistency, 10 minimum days | $3,000 if best day <= $900 | 10 days | $300 to $900 |
| 50% consistency at payout only, 5 min. days | $3,000 | 5 days | Any in eval; <= 50% on funded |
The third row is a very different game from the first, at the same fee and headline target.
Try it: For one firm, write the consistency percentage (and whether it applies to evaluation, funded, or both), the contract or lot cap by balance, and the minimum days with the definition of a trading day. Compute your maximum sensible daily profit as P% of target.
Recap
- A consistency rule raises the total you must earn to best day / P%; cap daily profit at P% of target to neutralise it.
- Scaling plans cap contracts or lots by balance; a single oversized order can be a breach.
- Minimum trading days have their own definition of a "day"; some firms still have maximum time limits.
- The three rules together define the efficient daily profit range; plan the evaluation around it.
See it drawn
Original diagrams for the ideas on this page. Illustrative, not real market data.