Would this Strategy have survived a prop firm's rules?
Prop Check reads a Strategy's recorded trades against a published
proprietary-trading rulebook and reports how far inside each limit the record actually stayed:
maximum drawdown, daily drawdown, single-trade loss, profit consistency, profit target and
trading days. It measures what the book already contains. It does not predict an evaluation, and
it names no firm.
Sample figures, in the layout of the journal's Prop Check chapter. It describes trades that have already happened, under a generic rulebook, and names no firm.
Why a returns figure does not answer this question
Prop evaluations are lost on risk rules, not on profit. A Strategy can double
an account and still fail on the day it took a single loss slightly too large, or on a month
where one exceptional day carried most of the gain.
The rules are about the shape of the equity, not its end
Daily loss limits, a maximum drawdown, a cap on any single losing trade and a
consistency rule all constrain the path a record took. Two Strategies with the same annual
return can sit on opposite sides of every one of them.
So the question needs the whole record, not a summary
Answering it means walking every trade in order against an account balance and checking
each rule at the point it would have been checked. That is only possible where the trades
were recorded as they happened, which is what makes this measurable here at all.
The rules it checks
Every limit, weight and scoring curve lives in a frozen, versioned document
called the Prop Baseline, and the page names the version it used. The current one is a
generic framework in the shape the industry uses, not a copy of any firm's terms.
Rule
Phase 1
Phase 2
Funded
What it asks
Maximum Drawdown
10%
10%
10%
The largest peak to trough fall the account took.
Daily Drawdown
5%
5%
5%
The worst single day, against that day's own opening balance.
Maximum Trade Loss
3%
3%
3%
The largest loss any one position took.
Profit Consistency
40%
40%
Not applied
Whether one exceptional day carried too much of the total gain.
Profit Target
10%
5%
Not applied
How far the record progressed toward the phase's target.
Minimum Trading Days
5
5
Not applied
Whether the result came from enough separate days to count.
Funded Margin Exposure
Not applied
Not applied
25%
How much of the account was committed at once.
Funded Open Notional
Not applied
Not applied
2x
The size of open positions against the account behind them.
Prop Baseline v1.1. A rule change is a new version,
never an edit of an old one, so a score from any month can still be recomputed and explained.
How a record turns into a score
Every rule scores out of 10 for degree, not pass or fail. A Strategy that stayed
comfortably inside a limit and one that grazed it are different facts, and a rule that only
answered yes or no would report them identically.
The rules are weighted. The three that end evaluations carry the most: maximum
drawdown, daily drawdown and maximum trade loss. Minimum trading days carries the least.
The scores combine into one figure out of 100, and a configurable threshold
decides where Prop Ready begins. The threshold in force is recorded on the result, so an
older verdict stays explainable after it moves.
The verdict names which kind of problem it found. A limit that a Provider could
simply change is not the same finding as a loss the record already took.
A snapshot is frozen every month, stamped with the baseline version and the
threshold, and never rewritten. The journal charts that history, so a reader can see whether
a record has been moving toward the bar or away from it.
The four verdicts
None of them is carried by colour alone, and each prints its own name
wherever it appears.
Prop ReadyThe recorded behaviour sits inside every limit that applies, at or above the threshold in force.
Prop AdaptableWhat sits outside a limit is a setting the Provider chose, such as position size, rather than something the record did. A setting can be changed; a loss cannot.
Prop IncompatibleThe record itself breached a limit. A drawdown that already happened is not a configuration question.
Not enough dataThe book does not yet contain what a rule needs. This is stated openly rather than scored as if the rule had passed.
An absent Prop Check is never a clean one. Where a rule could not be measured
the page says so and says which rule, because a blank space next to a limit would read as
compliance. What could not be measured is part of the result.
What Prop Check is not
Not a prediction, and not eligibility
It describes trades that have already happened under one generic rulebook. It says
nothing about whether any evaluation would be passed, and nothing about whether any firm
would accept the Strategy or the trader running it.
Not a comparison with any firm's actual terms
No firm is named and no firm's rules are reproduced. Real programmes differ on
every limit here, on how drawdown is measured, and on rules this baseline does not model
at all. Read the terms of the programme you are considering.
Not something a reader can change
The chapter is read only. There is no control on it, nothing to configure, and nothing
a viewer can do that alters the Strategy or its score.
Not advice
Trading carries risk and you can lose money. Prop Check exists so a record can be judged
in more detail than a headline number allows, and for that purpose only.
Every journal carries its own.
Prop Check is the last chapter of a Provider's journal, computed from the same trades the
rest of the page is built from.