Pine Script Strategy for FundedNext Prop Firm

FundedNext has built a reputation among newer prop firms for a clean, static-drawdown structure and a straightforward two-phase evaluation. For a Pine Script algo strategy, the static floor is the headline feature — it removes the single biggest source of surprise on a trailing-drawdown account.

FundedNext evaluation rules (50k tier)

Both phases share a single static drawdown floor of $2,500 — it doesn't reset between phases, and per firms.js it's explicitly fixed from the starting balance — explicit and repeated ("fixed at day one," "floor never rises").

Why the two-phase structure suits algo strategies

• Phase 1 is the real test — a 6% target that most strategies need two to three weeks of consistent performance to clear.
• Phase 2 is lower stakes — only a 3% target under identical rules. A strategy that cleared Phase 1 rarely struggles here.
• The drawdown limit carries over between phases, which rewards a consistent strategy rather than resetting risk tolerance partway through.

Key rules to code into a strategy

Daily loss kill switch

With a $1,000 daily loss limit on the 50k tier, an internal kill switch around $800 leaves room for slippage on the final exit. Track a running daily P&L variable that resets each session and blocks new entries once it crosses the threshold.

Minimum trading days per phase

Each phase requires trading on at least 5 separate calendar days. A very selective strategy — one or two signals a week — may need three or four weeks to log enough days per phase; make sure a session filter isn't so tight that the strategy goes dark for multiple consecutive sessions.

Weekend and holiday flatten

No positions should carry over a weekend. A Friday afternoon close trigger, extended to the day before any market holiday, keeps the account flat when nothing can be managed.

Wider ATR stops

Because the drawdown floor never trails, a slightly wider ATR multiple than a trailing-drawdown account can tolerate — roughly 0.8–1.0x ATR on MES or MNQ — cuts down on noise-driven stop-outs without adding real risk to the fixed floor.

Sample Pine Script — EMA + VWAP for a static-drawdown account

This is an original EMA-trend-plus-VWAP-filter strategy built around FundedNext's static drawdown: a wider ATR stop takes advantage of the floor never moving, and a session filter plus EOD/weekend flatten keep it inside the evaluation's structure.

//@version=5
strategy("FundedNext — EMA + VWAP", overlay = true,
     default_qty_type = strategy.fixed, default_qty_value = 1)

// ── FundedNext 50k: static drawdown, $1,000 daily loss ─────────────
dailyLossLimit = input.float(800.0, "Kill Switch ($)")
atrMult        = input.float(1.0,   "ATR Stop Multiplier")   // wider: static DD
rrRatio        = input.float(1.5,   "Reward:Risk Ratio")

// ── session window ──────────────────────────────────────────────────
inSession = not na(time("1", "0930-1130:23456", "America/New_York"))

// ── daily kill switch ────────────────────────────────────────────────
isNewDay      = ta.change(time("D")) != 0
var float dayOpenEquity = na
dayOpenEquity := isNewDay ? strategy.equity : dayOpenEquity
tradingHalted = math.min(0.0, strategy.equity - dayOpenEquity) <= -dailyLossLimit

// ── trend + mean-reversion filter ───────────────────────────────────
ema20   = ta.ema(close, 20)
ema50   = ta.ema(close, 50)
vwapVal = ta.vwap(hlc3)
atrVal  = ta.atr(14)

longCond  = ta.crossover(close, ema20)  and ema20 > ema50 and close > vwapVal and barstate.isconfirmed
shortCond = ta.crossunder(close, ema20) and ema20 < ema50 and close < vwapVal and barstate.isconfirmed
canTrade  = inSession and not tradingHalted and strategy.position_size == 0

if longCond and canTrade
    stopDist = atrMult * atrVal
    strategy.entry("L", strategy.long)
    strategy.exit("L-x", "L", profit = stopDist * rrRatio / syminfo.mintick, loss = stopDist / syminfo.mintick)

if shortCond and canTrade
    stopDist = atrMult * atrVal
    strategy.entry("S", strategy.short)
    strategy.exit("S-x", "S", profit = stopDist * rrRatio / syminfo.mintick, loss = stopDist / syminfo.mintick)

// ── weekend / EOD flatten ────────────────────────────────────────────
fridayFlat = dayofweek == dayofweek.friday and not na(time("1", "1459-1501:6", "America/New_York"))
eodFlat    = not na(time("1", "1529-1531:23456", "America/New_York"))
if (fridayFlat or eodFlat) and strategy.position_size != 0
    strategy.close_all("Flatten")

Contract sizing by account size

Why the profit split matters as accounts scale

On FundedNext's higher-tier split, a $3,000 profit month on a 50k funded account nets meaningfully more than the same result at a lower split elsewhere. That difference compounds for algo traders running the same strategy across several funded accounts simultaneously — the split, not just the win rate, decides how much of the edge reaches the trader.

FundedNext vs. TradeDay

Both firms lean toward algo-friendly rules, with a few structural differences:

• FundedNext runs a two-phase structure — more total evaluation time, but a lower Phase 2 target makes it easier to clear once Phase 1 is done.
• TradeDay is typically single-phase, which can mean a faster path to funded for a strategy that performs from day one.
• Drawdown type — FundedNext is static; TradeDay's own page describes a trailing floor without specifying EOD vs. intraday, so verify current terms before assuming either behaves like Apex's or Topstep's trail.

Running the same strategy on both a TradeDay and a FundedNext account in parallel is a common approach among algo traders — it caps any single loss at the evaluation fee rather than account capital, while doubling the chance one of the two clears first.

FAQ