24 instances · 10 firms · 27 read
When a firm disagrees with itself about its own rules
Reading the rules of 27 prop firms turned up 24 places where a firm publishes two different answers to the same question. Not in fine print against marketing — in terms against help centre, help centre against rules page, and in one case a worked example against the sentence above it.
14 of the 24 are about a rule that ends an account if you get it wrong.
Following the wrong one ends the account (14)
These decide whether you have breached. A trader who reads the permissive version and acts on it can lose the evaluation for doing something the firm also published as allowed.
HyroTrader · One-Step Challenge
whether there is a time limit
The published rules page states no time limit; the general terms state 30 calendar days for the Challenge and 60 for Verification. The firm has not reconciled them.
Audacity Capital · FTP (Instant Funding)
whether the daily limit trails
The 5% daily limit trails the highest equity the account has reached, per the knowledge centre, while the page selling it promises "a static drawdown" with "nothing that tightens as you start to profit". Both are published; they cannot both be true.
FXIFY · Lightning Challenge
how many trading days you need
CONTRADICTION on the minimum trading days, which is why none is recorded: the rule table gives three in the assessment column while the FAQ says three are required on the funded phase and only recommended on the challenge.
Funding Traders · 2-Step Pro (PRO6)
when a position must be closed on Friday
THREE-WAY CONTRADICTION ON THE WEEKEND RULE, and this one fails accounts. The Terms of Service say "Not allowed. All trades must be closed by market close on Friday"; the General Guidelines say at least one hour before market close on Friday; a third surface differs again. A rule that ends an evaluation should not have three published versions.
Funding Traders · 2-Step Pro (PRO10)
the weekend rule, and the payout cadence
The same three-way weekend contradiction and the same two published payout cadences as the rest of the range.
Funding Traders · 1-Step Pro
the weekend rule, and the payout cadence
The same three-way weekend contradiction and two payout cadences as the rest of the range.
Maven Trading · Prediction Markets One-Step Essential
the size of the drawdown itself
UNRECONCILED CONTRADICTION ON THE DRAWDOWN, and it is the figure everything here is computed from. The FAQ says 3%; two product cards say 5%. The stricter 3% is recorded because this field cannot hold an absence, so the figure errs against the firm rather than against a reader sizing risk. Check it at the source before paying.
OneFunded · Core Challenge
what the daily limit is measured from
UNRECONCILED CONTRADICTION on what the daily limit is a percentage OF. One help article says "Your account may not lose more than a defined percentage of your Start-of-Day Equity" and works the example off $102,000 of start-of-day equity; another says "Daily Drawdown Limit is fixed to initial account balance and is not changing together with equity changes" and works it off the $5,000 initial balance. The percentage is 5% either way; once you are in profit the dollar allowance is not.
OneFunded · Core Challenge
whether you may trade the news
UNRECONCILED CONTRADICTION on news trading. The help centre permits it — "Clients are permitted to open, modify, and close positions" during the five minutes either side of high-impact news — while Terms clause 13.14 forbids exactly that: "the Client is strictly prohibited from closing, modifying, or partially closing any positions during the restricted period."
DNA Funded · 1 Phase
how the overall drawdown is computed
CONTRADICTION in the drawdown FAQ’s own worked example: it defines the lifetime drawdown as a fixed percentage of the initial balance, then illustrates it with a figure anchored to the previous day’s equity, which is the daily-drawdown formula. The static reading is the one the Rules PDF supports.
DNA Funded · 2 Phase
the drawdown example, and payout days
Carries the same two published contradictions as the 1 Phase: three against five funded-stage payout days, and a daily-drawdown worked example printed under the total-drawdown heading.
DNA Funded · Instant Funding
how the trailing drawdown moves
THE FIRM PUBLISHES TWO INCOMPATIBLE METHODS for how this trailing limit moves, and on a grown account they differ by hundreds of dollars of room. The Rules PDF makes it a FIXED DOLLAR gap: "The drawdown limit is set as a fixed dollar amount, calculated as a percentage of the starting balance in an Account, and moves up as it makes profits" — its worked example holds a constant $250 gap as the account runs from $10,000 to $11,000. The drawdown FAQ instead recomputes the percentage against the new high, taking a $10,000 account with a $9,600 floor to a $10,560 floor at $11,000, a $440 gap. The firm has not reconciled them.
Blueberry Funded · Synthetic 2-Step
whether a consistency rule applies
CONSISTENCY CONTRADICTION: the help centre publishes a 30% funded consistency rule for this plan while the plan overview elsewhere states none.
Blueberry Funded · Synthetic 2-Step
whether expert advisors are allowed
EA CONTRADICTION: the plan overview says "EA Trading | No" while the firm’s own Trading Evaluation Outline says otherwise for the same product.
Following the wrong one costs money (5)
These decide what you are paid or charged. The account survives; the arithmetic a buyer did before paying does not.
FXIFY · Two Phase — Classic (Static)
the maximum profit split
A PUBLISHED SPLIT CONTRADICTION, and the only place on the site where 100% appears. The feature value reads "Performance split: up to 100%" while the description on that same object reads "80% to the trader as standard. Or upgrade at the checkout for a 90% split", and the site’s own payouts section caps it at 90%. FXIFY’s checkout ties 100% to accepting monthly payouts rather than to an add-on, but fxify.com never says so. Recorded as no published maximum.
For Traders · Instant Pro (Forex)
the maximum profit split
CONTRADICTION on where the profit split stops. The rules page says "With every payout your share increases by 10%, up to 100%"; the help centre article for this same product publishes a different ceiling. Recorded as no published maximum rather than picking one.
Maven Trading · Mini
the consistency rule at payout
CONTRADICTION the firm has not reconciled on the consistency rule: the paid Mini publishes a 15% cap on the largest winning trade as a share of total profit, and the promotional Mini publishes something different.
DNA Funded · 1 Phase
how many days qualify you for a payout
CONTRADICTION on funded-stage payout days: one answer requires trades opened on 5 different days, another on the same page says "at least three different days". This affects payout eligibility rather than the pass requirement above.
Blueberry Funded · 1-Step (Legacy)
what the account costs
PRICE CONTRADICTION on two rows: the pricing page publishes $82.50 for the $10K and $302.50 for the $50K, and the checkout charges different figures.
They disagree about what is for sale (5)
The least consequential and the easiest to fix, which is what makes them worth listing: a firm that has not reconciled its own catalogue has not reconciled much.
Breakout · 1-Step Turbo
how much leverage you get
UNRECONCILED CONTRADICTION on the rules page itself: the banner across the top advertises leverage the Available Leverage section of the same page does not offer.
Blueberry Funded · Flex 1-Step
which account sizes exist
SIZE CONTRADICTION: the store sells and charges for a $200,000 tier, confirmed at checkout, while the help centre states "Account sizes | $5K to $100K".
Blueberry Funded · 1-Step (Legacy)
whether the product is still sold
STATUS CONTRADICTION, and the most consequential thing published about this product. The help centre says it is retired — "The 1-Step Challenge is being replaced by the Flex 1-Step" — and its rules article is titled "[Legacy] 1-Step Challenge" and scoped to accounts bought before 17 August 2026. The store still sells it: the pricing page renders a live card with its own ladder, and the checkout presents "1 Step" as the default-active account type. It is recorded here because it is purchasable today, and a buyer lands on rules the firm itself calls legacy.
Blueberry Funded · Instant Elite
which account sizes exist
SIZE CONTRADICTION: the guide lists allocations up to $100,000 while the store sells only $2.5K to $50K.
Blueberry Funded · Instant Lite
how many trading days are required
STALE-PAGE CONTRADICTION: an older general article still lists five days for this product.
By firm
| Blueberry Funded | 7 |
| DNA Funded | 4 |
| Funding Traders | 3 |
| FXIFY | 2 |
| Maven Trading | 2 |
| OneFunded | 2 |
| HyroTrader | 1 |
| Audacity Capital | 1 |
| For Traders | 1 |
| Breakout | 1 |
The count is of contradictions found, not of contradictions present. A firm with a longer rulebook offers more surface to disagree with itself on, and a firm at the bottom of this table may simply publish less. It is not a ranking.
What to do with this
Assume the stricter version, and get it in writing before you pay rather than after you have breached. A support reply naming the rule is worth more than either published page, because it is the one you can quote back.
Where this site has had to record a single number from two, it takes the one that errs against the firm rather than against a trader sizing risk — Maven’s drawdown is recorded at the stricter 3% rather than the 5% two product cards give it, and Blue Guardian’s trail-lock at the larger 8% rather than the 6% published once. Both say so where the figure appears.
And none of this is evidence of dishonesty, which is why the page does not say it is. Documents drift, products get replaced, help centres and terms are written by different people at different times. What it is evidence of is that the terms are not settled — on a product where a sentence decides whether you keep an account you paid for.
Where each of these was read
HyroTrader — trading rules — read 2026-08-06
Audacity Capital — trading guidelines — read 2026-08-06
FXIFY — assessment account rules — read 2026-08-23
For Traders — our rules — read 2026-08-23
Funding Traders — account types and trading guidelines — read 2026-08-23
Maven Trading — FAQ — read 2026-08-23
Breakout — programme rules — read 2026-08-23
OneFunded — Terms and Conditions, clauses 13 and 14 — read 2026-08-23
DNA Funded — Rules and Conditions V2.1 — read 2026-08-23
Blueberry Funded — help centre — read 2026-08-23
Questions
- How often do prop firms contradict their own rules?
- Across the 27 firms read for this site, 10 publish at least one rule two different ways, 24 instances in total. None of them were found by digging: each turned up while reading the rules pages, help centres and terms a buyer would read before paying.
- Which contradictions actually matter?
- 14 of the 24 concern a rule that can end an account — the weekend rule, the size of the drawdown, what the daily limit is measured from, whether the news may be traded, whether expert advisors are allowed. Following the permissive version of any of those can lose an evaluation you paid for.
- What should I do if a firm’s rules disagree?
- Assume the stricter version and get the answer in writing from support before you pay, not after. Where this site has had to record a single figure it takes the reading that errs against the firm rather than against a trader sizing risk, and says so on the page where the figure appears.
- Does this mean these firms are dishonest?
- It is not evidence of that and this page does not claim it. Documentation drifts, products get replaced, help centres are written by different people from terms of service. What it is evidence of is that the rules you are agreeing to are not settled, on a product where a rule decides whether you keep your money.