FTMO Enters Futures Trading: How Growth and Pro Compare

FTMO has officially entered the futures prop-trading market.

The firm launched FTMO Futures on September 17, 2026, introducing two account paths — Growth and Pro — for traders looking to qualify through a single-phase futures evaluation and move into a Sim-Funded Account. FTMO says both programs use simulated CME futures trading with live market data, support NinjaTrader, Tradovate, and TradingView, and offer a 90/10 payout split in the trader’s favor.

The launch expands FTMO beyond the CFD-focused model it has been best known for and puts the company directly into a futures prop market already populated by firms such as Topstep and Apex.

Growth and Pro share the same basic path

Both FTMO Futures products begin with a single Evaluation.

A trader must meet the applicable Trading Objectives without violating the maximum drawdown or any applicable daily loss rule. Once the evaluation is passed and reviewed, the trader completes identity verification and signs the FTMO Futures Sim-Funded Account agreement. The resulting account remains simulated, but the trader becomes eligible for real monetary payouts based on trading performance.

FTMO also says a small number of top-performing traders may later be invited, at the firm’s discretion, to a Live Funded Account using real capital. That is a separate stage and is not guaranteed simply by passing the Evaluation.

FTMO describes Growth as the lower-priced and more forgiving path, while Pro uses a stricter daily risk framework in exchange for stronger payout flexibility and a better profit-target-to-drawdown relationship.

Growth is built around softer daily risk rules

Growth is positioned as the more accessible of the two structures.

During the Evaluation, there is no Daily Loss Limit. Once the trader reaches the Sim-Funded stage, FTMO applies a soft Daily Loss Limit rather than an automatic account-ending violation. FTMO says Growth traders may request up to 50% of available profit during each payout cycle, with the remaining profit staying in the account.

The current Growth pricing and published account parameters include:

FTMO’s current promotional material lists a 40% consistency rule during the Growth Evaluation and four-day payout eligibility at the Sim-Funded stage. It also states that the consistency requirement no longer applies once the trader reaches the Sim-Funded Account.

Pro trades flexibility for stricter risk controls

The Pro path takes a different approach.

FTMO says Pro uses a hard Daily Loss Limit, meaning traders operate under a tighter daily risk framework. In return, Pro offers a better profit-target-to-max-drawdown ratio, higher payout caps, and the ability to request up to 100% of available profit during a payout cycle.

FTMO specifically highlights that the Pro 50K structure can reach a 1:1 profit-target-to-drawdown ratio, meaning the required target and allowed maximum drawdown are equal.

Pro payout caps currently range from $5,000 to $8,000 depending on account size.

That creates a clear structural tradeoff:

Growth gives traders softer daily-loss mechanics and lower pricing.

Pro imposes stricter daily risk limits but provides more room on payouts and more favorable target-to-drawdown economics.

The end-of-day trailing drawdown is one of the bigger design choices

Both Growth and Pro use an end-of-day trailing maximum drawdown.

That is an important distinction from intraday trailing systems.

Under an EOD model, the drawdown is recalculated based on end-of-day account performance rather than moving continuously with unrealized intraday profits. FTMO says the drawdown eventually locks at the starting balance, meaning once enough profit has been built, the loss threshold stops trailing higher.

For traders accustomed to firms where the trailing drawdown can move during an open trade, that can materially change account management.

Intraday profit spikes do not immediately tighten the risk threshold.

Contract limits scale by account size

FTMO applies maximum contract limits during Evaluation.

The current limits are:

Those limits are the same for Growth and Pro. Micro contracts count at a reduced 10:1 ratio relative to minis.

Once a trader moves to a Sim-Funded Account, contract size initially starts lower and can scale upward as profits are generated, eventually reaching the same ceiling as the Evaluation account.

That introduces a built-in scaling mechanism rather than giving the trader maximum size immediately after passing.

The consistency rule disappears after Evaluation

Another notable feature is that FTMO applies consistency requirements during Evaluation but removes them once the trader reaches the Sim-Funded stage.

The firm’s Growth product currently uses a 40% consistency requirement during evaluation, while FTMO’s futures documentation states that no consistency rule applies once the trader is Sim-Funded.

That means traders are evaluated partly on the distribution of their profits during qualification, but payout eligibility later is not constrained by the same consistency requirement.

FTMO says the minimum theoretical time to pass is three trading days for Growth and two trading days for Pro, based on their respective consistency requirements. There is otherwise no maximum time limit as long as the monthly subscription remains active.

There is no activation fee after passing

FTMO is also avoiding one of the common friction points in futures prop trading: the post-evaluation activation fee.

Once the Evaluation is passed and approved, FTMO says the trader moves into the Sim-Funded stage without an additional activation charge.

The Evaluation itself operates as a monthly subscription. If the trader fails due to a hard rule violation, FTMO says the trader may either continue through the next renewal or purchase an account reset.

Payout mechanics differ more than the 90/10 split suggests

Both products use the same 90/10 payout ratio, but the practical payout structure is different.

Growth traders may request up to 50% of available profit during a payout cycle.

Pro traders may request up to 100% of available profit, subject to the account’s payout cap.

FTMO says the minimum payout is $20, and available withdrawal methods include Wise, Revolut bank wire, Visa Direct, and Mastercard Send where available.

That means the 90/10 split alone does not tell the full story. The amount a trader can actually request during each cycle depends on which path they selected.

Platform support is broad from day one

FTMO Futures launched with support for:

• NinjaTrader
• Tradovate
• TradingView

That immediately puts the program on platforms familiar to a large share of existing futures prop traders.

For traders already using TradingView or NinjaTrader, the launch does not require adopting an unfamiliar proprietary interface simply to participate.

FTMO is entering a very different market than its traditional CFD business

The launch matters beyond the individual account rules.

FTMO has spent years building its name primarily around simulated CFD trading. Futures prop trading has developed into a distinct market with its own expectations around contract limits, trailing drawdowns, evaluation subscriptions, payout caps, and simulated funded accounts.

By launching Growth and Pro, FTMO is adapting to those conventions rather than simply transplanting its existing CFD program.

The firm is using account sizes familiar to the futures prop market, a monthly evaluation model, contract-based scaling, end-of-day trailing drawdown, and simulated funded accounts with real payouts.

At the same time, FTMO is bringing some of its existing brand structure into the product, including formal Evaluation rules, identity verification, and the possibility of discretionary progression into live capital.

Growth and Pro create two different operating environments

The more useful way to look at the two products is not simply that one is cheaper and one pays more.

They create different risk environments.

Growth removes the Evaluation Daily Loss Limit and uses a soft version once funded. That gives traders more flexibility during individual sessions, but payout withdrawals are limited to half of available profit per cycle.

Pro imposes harder daily risk constraints, but compensates with stronger payout flexibility and more favorable target-to-drawdown economics.

Neither structure is simply “easier.”

A trader who regularly experiences large intraday variance may experience the two programs very differently from a trader whose strategy naturally operates within tight daily loss limits.

That distinction may ultimately matter more than the headline account size.

What FTMO Futures adds to the industry

FTMO’s arrival gives futures prop traders another large established firm to evaluate alongside the existing market.

It also adds another variation to an industry already experimenting rapidly with account design.

Topstep has been testing fixed-payout Challenge accounts through Topstep Labs. Apex has moved toward separate EOD and Intraday account structures. FTMO is now entering with a split Growth/Pro model that separates softer risk mechanics from higher payout flexibility.

That continues a broader trend away from a single standardized “evaluation account” format.

The account balance printed on the product matters less than the combination of:

• drawdown mechanics
• consistency rules
• contract scaling
• payout caps
• daily risk limits
• funded-stage restrictions

FTMO Futures is another example of why traders increasingly need to look beyond the headline account size when comparing prop programs.