Funded Futures Family Micro-Scalping + Promo Code COMPARE

Funded Futures Family's micro-scalping policy has two tests: more than half of trades and more than half of total profits must come from positions held longer than ten seconds. Passing the trade-count test alone is insufficient. A small number of very profitable short trades can produce a different result from the duration count, so track both measures separately.

Coupon summary: COMPARE gives 80% off Velocity, 40% off Premier for the first five uses then 30%, and 30% off Prime. These are eligible initial monthly base-payment offers, not an assumed renewal discount. Yash R. confirmed the coupon: Verified on 12 October 2026. Official policies and prices were checked on 11 October 2026; see the current coupon conditions.

Read both tests before reviewing a trade history

The official micro-scalping policy applies to Evaluation and Funded accounts. It uses strict “over 50%” thresholds for both count and profit, with qualifying positions held longer than ten seconds. It also requires realistic live-executable behavior and prohibits bots or algorithms. Potential consequences include payout denial, profit reversion or closure.

A duration review therefore needs more than an average holding time. A few long positions could lift the average while most trades are very short. Conversely, many small longer-duration trades could pass the count test while most of the money comes from a few shorter positions.

Use a complete export with position identifiers, opening and closing timestamps, duration and recorded profit. Retain the platform's original report so any calculation can be traced back to a source. Do not remove losing positions or relabel partial closes to make a ratio look better.

Example one: count passes while profit fails

Consider an intentionally simple, hypothetical sample in which all twenty completed positions are profitable and have unambiguous durations. Twelve are held longer than ten seconds; eight are shorter. The longer positions produce $480 in total profit, while the shorter ones produce $720.

The count share is 12 divided by 20, or 60%. The longer-duration profit share is $480 divided by $1,200, or 40%. This sample clears the first threshold and misses the second.

The example uses all-winning positions to isolate the two tests without inventing the firm's treatment of losses. It illustrates why “most of my trades lasted long enough” does not establish that the profit test is also satisfied. The relevant source records must support both calculations.

Example two: the boundary is strict

Now take another simplified sample: twenty completed profitable positions, ten longer than ten seconds and ten not longer. The qualifying count share is exactly 50%. That is a boundary result, not “over 50%.”

Similarly, if the qualifying positions contribute $500 of a $1,000 all-positive profit total, that profit share is exactly half. A worksheet that rounds 50.01% and 49.99% to a whole-number display can conceal an important distinction. Retain sufficient precision and the underlying counts and amounts.

A timestamp reported as precisely ten seconds also does not demonstrate “longer than ten seconds.” The policy should not be converted into an instruction to exit at a calculated minimum. Trading decisions must remain genuine, repeatable and compatible with the full rulebook.

Flag unresolved measurement details

The public policy does not fully specify a technical calculation method for partial closes, timestamps with limited precision, the observation window or profit treatment when the record includes losses. A spreadsheet can identify those questions, but it cannot settle them on the firm's behalf.

Before relying on a borderline result, ask support for the applicable interpretation using a small, accurate example from the actual report. Useful questions include whether the unit is a completed position or another platform-defined trade, how partial exits are grouped and which period is reviewed. Keep the answer with the report and use the same basis throughout the calculation.

For a mixed-profit record, do not silently choose whichever denominator creates the highest percentage. Label a provisional calculation as provisional. If the total is zero or negative, a simple positive-profit percentage may become misleading; obtain the firm's method rather than declaring automatic compliance.

Avoid manufacturing a ratio

This worksheet is a pre-purchase strategy-fit and record-review tool. It is not a reason to place filler trades, extend a dangerous position merely to change a timestamp or generate nominal profits to disguise another trading pattern.

FFF's Fair Play and Integrity Policy prohibits exploiting technical conditions and manipulating payout systems or risk controls. Its separate automation restrictions remain relevant even if a duration calculation appears acceptable. The existing bot and copy-trading guide covers that broader issue.

If your ordinary strategy regularly depends on very short holding periods, review a representative complete history before buying. A discounted fee cannot solve a mismatch between the strategy and the published conduct requirements. Do not assume a later payout review will overlook a pattern because the platform accepted each order.

Price examples after the applicable COMPARE rate

The Velocity page and Premier+ page publish the regular monthly base fees used below. Premier Standard Intraday is kept separate from FastPass and EOD versions.

Those Premier rows are alternative eligibility tiers, not cumulative reductions. The full verified offer also includes Prime at 30%. Renewals, resets, add-ons, taxes and payment charges are separate; no stacking or fixed expiry is confirmed.

Select the exact plan, drawdown mode and size; enter COMPARE before payment; then verify the applicable rate, initial total and renewal terms. Save the receipt and rule version. Prop Firm Audit may earn affiliate commissions. Evaluation and simulated-funded fees can be lost, and neither a calculated ratio nor a coupon guarantees a payout.