Comparison
Tradeify vs MyFundedFutures: Rules Compared
Both firms skip the consistency rule and let a strategy pass fast — the real differences are in how each handles daily loss and what's actually documented on payout. Here's the rule-by-rule breakdown for a Pine Script strategy.
Rule-by-rule comparison — 50k accounts
| Rule | Tradeify 50k | MyFundedFutures 50k |
|---|---|---|
| Profit target | $3,000 | $3,000 |
| Max drawdown | $2,000 | $2,000 |
| Drawdown type | EOD trailing | StaticWIN |
| Daily loss limit | Growth: a "soft limit" that pauses trading for the day rather than…WIN | $1,250 |
| Consistency rule (eval) | Growth: none. | None — explicit, no cap on single-day contribution. |
| Min trading days | 1 day | NoneWIN |
| Automation allowed | Explicitly permitted on both evaluations and funded accounts. | Explicitly permitted on both the evaluation and the live funded account —… |
| Payout split | 90%, on both the Growth and Select paths.WIN | Not published |
| Eval price | $99–$149 typical | Not published |
| Best for | A stated payout split and no hard daily cutoff | The most rule-flexible eval on paper — no minimum days, no consistency rule, static floor |
What each rule difference means for Pine Scripts
Drawdown type: MyFundedFutures is static, Tradeify trails end-of-day
MyFundedFutures uses a static drawdown — the floor is fixed at account open and never moves, regardless of how much the account grows. Tradeify's Growth path trails the floor from end-of-day closing balance, which is more forgiving than an intraday trail but still moves as the account books profitable days. For a script, MyFundedFutures' static number is the simpler one to hard-code; Tradeify's needs a recalculation after every session close.
Consistency rule: both firms decline to cap a single day
Neither firm's standard path caps how much of total profit one session can represent. MyFundedFutures has no consistency rule stated anywhere in the source. Tradeify's Growth path is the same; its stricter Select path adds a 40% cap for traders who opt into that structure instead. A strategy that books its entire target in one volatile session clears either firm's default evaluation cleanly.
Daily loss limit: Tradeify's softer structure
MyFundedFutures enforces a firm $1,250 daily loss limit on its 50k tier — a script needs a daily P&L tracker that halts new entries as that floor approaches. Tradeify's Growth path uses a soft guidance figure rather than a hard platform cutoff, giving a strategy more room to trade through a rougher stretch of a session without an automatic stop firing.
Minimum trading days: MyFundedFutures has none at all
Tradeify's Growth path requires 1 minimum trading day — already fast. MyFundedFutures requires none, per its source material's explicit, repeated statement. Practically, both let a strategy that clears its profit target in a single strong session finish the evaluation without a multi-day waiting period.
Payout split: Tradeify is the one with a published number
Tradeify pays a flat 90% split. MyFundedFutures doesn't publish a payout percentage on its main account-tier page in the source material behind this comparison — if payout economics matter to the decision, that's a figure worth confirming directly with MyFundedFutures rather than assuming a specific split.
Which firm should you choose?
You want a documented payout and softer daily handling
- No hard daily loss cutoff on the Growth path
- A published, flat 90% payout split
- Published typical eval pricing rather than an unlisted figure
- Comfortable with an EOD-trailing floor instead of a static one
You want the most rule-flexible eval on paper
- Static drawdown — the floor never moves
- No minimum trading days requirement
- No consistency rule at any stage
- Automation explicitly permitted on the funded account too