For Traders · the same challenge, twice
One upgrade, and it costs 28% or 53%
Fast and Fast Static publish 9 rules between them and 7 of those are identical. The two that differ are the drawdown — trailing on one, fixed on the other — and the single extra point of profit the fixed one asks for.
So the price gap between them buys exactly one thing, and For Traders charge 28% to 53% for it depending on which account you happen to want. The $50K and the $100K are both charged $98 — identical dollars for an identical feature, on an account twice the size.
What the upgrade costs at each size
| Account | Fast | Fast Static | Premium | As a share |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| $6K | $36 | $51 | +$15 | +42% |
| $15K | $74 | $104 | +$30 | +41% |
| $25K | $134 | $171 | +$37 | +28% |
| $50K | $186 | $284 | +$98 | +53% |
| $100K | $351 | $449 | +$98 | +28% |
Neither column moves with the account. The premium in dollars is not proportional to size, and the premium as a share is not monotonic in either direction — climbing the ladder it falls, falls, rises, falls.
What is identical
| Daily loss limit | 3% | 3% |
| What breaching it does | ends the account | ends the account |
| Overall loss limit | 6% | 6% |
| Minimum trading days | 3 | 3 |
| Time limit | none | none |
| Profit split | 80% | 80% |
| Fee refunded on passing | no | no |
| Drawdown | trails your highest closed balance | fixed at your starting balance |
| Profit target | 9% | 10% |
The greyed rows are the same figure on both, and the build fails if any of them stops being so — because if one does, the price difference is no longer buying a single thing and this page is measuring something else.
The failure figures point the wrong way here
Fast models at 95% failure and Fast Static at 97%, and taking that at face value would be a mistake this page would rather make out loud than quietly.
Every probability on this site applies a cap at its starting level. For a trailing drawdown that is exactly right — the floor really does follow you, so being in profit buys nothing. For a static one it is pessimistic, because banked profit really does move you away from the floor and the model never credits it. So Fast Static is charged for its extra 1 point of target and credited with nothing at all for the thing it is sold on.
Read them as an estimate for Fast and a floor for Fast Static. The gap between the two products is wider, in Fast Static’s favour, than these numbers can show.
What the static cap actually buys
On the trailing version, reaching 6% of profit leaves you exactly as far from failing as you were on the first morning: the floor came up with you. On the static version, the same 6% leaves you 6 points further from it than you started.
That is the entire product difference, and it grows with every point you bank — which is why the 1 extra point of target is a smaller concession than it looks, and why the model’s verdict above is the wrong way round.
What it does not tell you is whether 28 to 53 percent is a fair price for it. That depends on how far into profit you expect to get before the bad run arrives, and nobody publishes that.
What this does not measure
- · Promotions. The prices above are what was displayed on the date below. A discount on one variant and not the other would move every figure in the premium columns.
- · Whether the trail ever stops. Eight programmes on this site publish that their trailing cap locks once it reaches the starting balance, which would close most of the gap between these two. For Traders publish nothing either way, so this page assumes it trails for ever — the reading that costs the buyer more, and the one their own rules support.
- · The crypto line. For Traders sell a separate Fast for crypto on its own prices and its own rules, with six minimum days rather than three. It is not in anything above.
- · Everything in the assumptions. Assumes each trade is independent. Correlated positions — three majors against the dollar — lose together and count as one. Assumes every trade risks the same amount. Raising size after a loss shortens the streak you can survive. Uses your stated win rate. If that came from a demo account or a good month, the figure below is optimistic.
Where these rules and prices were read
For Traders — our rules — read 2026-08-23
Questions
- What is the difference between For Traders Fast and Fast Static?
- The drawdown and the target, and nothing else the firm publishes. Fast trails your highest closed balance; Fast Static is fixed at your starting balance. Fast asks 9% of profit and Fast Static 10%. The 3% daily limit, the 6% overall cap, the 3 minimum trading days, the absence of a time limit, the 80% split and the absence of a fee refund are the same on both.
- How much does the static drawdown cost?
- Between $15 and $98 depending on the account, which is 28% to 53% on top of the Fast price. The $50K and the $100K are charged the same $98 for it, so the same upgrade is 53% of one price and 28% of the other. It also costs 1 point more profit to reach.
- Is a static drawdown worth paying for?
- It is the difference between profit you bank buying you room and profit you bank lifting the floor with you. On a trailing cap, being 6% up leaves you exactly as far from failing as you were on day one; on a static one it leaves you 6 points further away. Whether that is worth 28–53% depends on how long you expect the attempt to run, which is not something this site can compute for you.
- Which of the two is more likely to pass?
- The model says Fast, at 95% failure against Fast Static's 97% — and on this pair the model is the wrong tool. Every figure here applies a cap at its starting level, which is accurate for a trailing drawdown and pessimistic for a static one, so the product with the better cap is charged for its extra 1 point of target and credited with nothing for the cap. Read the two numbers as a floor for Fast Static and an estimate for Fast. Assumes each trade is independent. Correlated positions — three majors against the dollar — lose together and count as one.