Is phase 2 of a prop firm challenge harder than phase 1?

Usually the opposite. 28 of the 45 multi-phase programmes read for this site ask LESS in phase two — most commonly 8% then 5%, or 10% then 5% — and 12 ask the same in both. Only 5 ask more.

Which prop firms make phase 2 harder?

FXIFY's Two Phase — Pro (Static) (4% then 8%), FXIFY's Two Phase — Classic (Static) (5% then 10%), Moneta Funded's 2-Step Challenge (5% then 10%), Moneta Funded's 2-Step Challenge (lower-cost) (5% then 10%), Maven Trading's Two Step Omo (6% then 8%). 4 of them double the target between phases.

Does the order change your chance of passing?

Not in anything this site computes, and that is a limit rather than a finding. The model sums the phases and prices the total, so FXIFY's Two Phase — Pro (Static) and FundedNext's Stellar Lite, both asking 12% in opposite orders, compute at 89% and 89%. What the order changes is WHEN you find out, and what you have already spent by then. Assumes each trade is independent. Correlated positions — three majors against the dollar — lose together and count as one.

45 multi-phase evaluations · 5 reverse the usual order

The hard half comes first, at all but 5 of them

28 of the 45 multi-phase evaluations here ask less in phase two than in phase one — usually 8% then 5%, or 10% then 5%. 12 ask the same in both. The convention front-loads the work, so a trader who cannot do it finds out before spending the calendar.

5 reverse it, and put the harder half after the fee, the minimum trading days and the first target have all been spent. 4 of those 5 double the target between phases.

The 5 that raise it

Firm	Programme	Phase 1	Phase 2	Total	Step
FXIFY	Two Phase — Pro (Static)	4%	8%	12%	doubles
FXIFY	Two Phase — Classic (Static)	5%	10%	15%	doubles
Moneta Funded	2-Step Challenge	5%	10%	15%	doubles
Moneta Funded	2-Step Challenge (lower-cost)	5%	10%	15%	doubles
Maven Trading	Two Step Omo	6%	8%	14%	+2 points

Maven Trading's Two Step Omo is the exception among the exceptions: the only one whose step up is not a doubling, and the only one of the 5 that publishes a reason for it.

One firm says why

Phase 2 asks MORE than Phase 1, 8% after 6% — one of five programmes here that reverse the usual order, and the only one whose step up is not a doubling. It is also the only one of the five that publishes a reason: "The higher Phase 2 target (8% vs 6%) ensures consistency."

Which is a coherent argument rather than a trick: a trader who reached the first target with one lucky week has to do more, not less, to finish. The other 4 publish the same shape and no reasoning, so whether they mean the same thing by it is not knowable from the rules.

What the order costs, and what it cannot

Nothing on this site can price it. Every probability sums the phases and applies the caps to the total, so two programmes asking the same amount in opposite orders come out identical — FXIFY’s Two Phase — Pro (Static) and FundedNext’s Stellar Lite, both 12%, compute at 89% and 89%.

What the order changes is when you learn the answer and what you have paid by then. On the usual shape the larger target is the first thing you meet: fail it and you have spent the fee and a few days. On the reversed shape you clear the light half, spend the minimum trading days, and meet the real target with the sunk cost already behind you.

That is a difference in how a product feels rather than in how often it is passed, and this page is careful not to dress it as the second thing. It is a shape worth seeing before you buy, not a number.

The usual shape, for comparison

28 programmes, at 19 firms.

FTMO 10→5 FundedNext 8→5 FundedNext 8→4 The5ers 10→5 Funding Pips 8→5 Funding Pips 10→6 Alpha Capital Group 8→5 Alpha Capital Group 10→5 Alpha Capital Group 8→4→4 Alpha Capital Group 10→5 Goat Funded Trader 8→6 Goat Funded Trader 10→5 HyroTrader 10→5 City Traders Imperium 10→5 Audacity Capital 10→5 FXIFY 10→5 For Traders 8→5 Funding Traders 10→5 Maven Trading 8→5 Crypto Fund Trader 8→5 OneFunded 8→5 OneFunded 8→6 DNA Funded 8→5 Blueberry Funded 8→6 Blueberry Funded 10→5 Era Trade 8→5 Blue Guardian 8→4 Blue Guardian 10→4

What this does not measure

· Whether the order matters at all. It is a claim about what a trader experiences, and this site has no way to test it. The counts are solid; the argument about sunk cost is reasoning, and it is labelled as such.
· Per-phase drawdowns. Where a firm resets or tightens the caps between phases, the second target is met under different rules from the first. That is recorded per firm rather than modelled here.
· Three-phase programmes. The groups compare phase one against phase two; the 5 programmes with a third phase are counted by their first two.
· 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 targets were read

FXIFY — assessment account rules — read 2026-08-23

Moneta Funded — product offerings — read 2026-08-23

Maven Trading — FAQ — read 2026-08-23

Questions

Is phase 2 of a prop firm challenge harder than phase 1?: Usually the opposite. 28 of the 45 multi-phase programmes read for this site ask LESS in phase two — most commonly 8% then 5%, or 10% then 5% — and 12 ask the same in both. Only 5 ask more.
Which prop firms make phase 2 harder?: FXIFY's Two Phase — Pro (Static) (4% then 8%), FXIFY's Two Phase — Classic (Static) (5% then 10%), Moneta Funded's 2-Step Challenge (5% then 10%), Moneta Funded's 2-Step Challenge (lower-cost) (5% then 10%), Maven Trading's Two Step Omo (6% then 8%). 4 of them double the target between phases.
Why would a firm put the harder target second?: Only one of the 5 says. Phase 2 asks MORE than Phase 1, 8% after 6% — one of five programmes here that reverse the usual order, and the only one whose step up is not a doubling. It is also the only one of the five that publishes a reason: "The higher Phase 2 target (8% vs 6%) ensures consistency."
Does the order change your chance of passing?: Not in anything this site computes, and that is a limit rather than a finding. The model sums the phases and prices the total, so FXIFY's Two Phase — Pro (Static) and FundedNext's Stellar Lite, both asking 12% in opposite orders, compute at 89% and 89%. What the order changes is WHEN you find out, and what you have already spent by then. Assumes each trade is independent. Correlated positions — three majors against the dollar — lose together and count as one.