Platform · Challenge builder
The evaluation engine behind every challenge you sell.
PropXO's challenge builder turns evaluations into configurable products: 1-step, 2-step, 3-step, instant funding, and scaling plans, with every target, drawdown rule, split, fee, and retake policy set per phase. Variants run concurrently so you can test offers — and everyone who already purchased stays locked to the rules they bought.
Structures
Every evaluation structure, first-class.
A structure is a promise about how a trader reaches funding. The builder treats each one as a real product definition — independent phases, independent rules — not a template with the labels changed.
1-step evaluation
A single phase between purchase and funding. The shortest path you can sell honestly — which is exactly why its funded-stage rules usually carry more of the weight. The builder lets you set the evaluation and funded phases independently, so the structure stays coherent.
2-step evaluation
The industry's default: two phases with separate targets and rules before funding. Each phase carries its own profit target, drawdown configuration, minimum days, and consistency settings — nothing is inherited by accident.
3-step evaluation
A longer filter for firms that want to price funded exposure conservatively. Three independent phases, each with its own full rule set. Useful when your funded terms are generous and you want the evaluation to earn them.
Instant funding
No evaluation phase — the trader buys directly into a funded account governed by tighter rules from the first trade. The builder treats this as a real structure, not a hack: drawdown, splits, and scaling behavior are all first-class settings.
Scaling plans
Funded accounts that grow as traders hit milestones you define. Configure the progression rules — what triggers a scale-up, what resets, how splits and limits change at each level — as part of the challenge itself.
Mixed lineups
Structures are not modes you switch between. A 1-step, a 2-step, and an instant-funding program can be on sale simultaneously, each with its own variants, and all reporting into the same operator console.
Parameters
Every rule a challenge can have, configured per phase.
These are the levers. Each is set independently for each phase of each variant — because a rule that makes sense in evaluation often makes no sense in a funded account, and a builder that can't tell the difference forces bad design.
Profit targets per phase
Each phase has its own target. Evaluation phases and funded phases are configured separately, so a demanding evaluation doesn't force demanding funded terms — or vice versa.
Drawdown types
Daily, overall, and trailing — each computed on an equity or balance basis, chosen per phase. The distinction is not cosmetic: trailing equity drawdown behaves very differently around open profit than balance-based, and experienced traders read your choice as a signal.
Minimum trading days
Require genuine participation before a phase can be passed. Set per phase, so a firm can demand patience in evaluation without slowing down funded payouts.
Consistency rules
Constrain how concentrated a trader's profit can be, filtering single-trade lottery passes. Configurable strictness — because a consistency rule that's too aggressive punishes legitimate traders and generates support tickets.
Profit splits
Define the split for funded accounts, including how it changes under a scaling plan. Splits are part of the challenge definition, so every variant can price its funded terms differently.
Account sizes
Offer the sizes your market expects, each as its own purchasable configuration. Size, fee, and rules travel together as one product definition.
Fees
Fee configuration lives with the challenge, flows through your storefront, and connects to purchase automation. What a challenge costs is a lever of the design, not an afterthought bolted onto checkout.
Retake logic
Decide what happens after a breach: whether retakes are offered, on what terms, and how they're priced relative to the original attempt. Retake policy quietly shapes both lifetime value and how fair your firm feels.
Variants & versioning
Change your lineup without changing anyone's deal.
Offer testing and participant fairness are usually in tension. Versioned variants with purchase-time rule locking resolve it: the storefront can move fast while every sold challenge stands still.
Concurrent variants
Run several versions of an offer at once — different targets, drawdown styles, fee points, account sizes, or entire structures. Test a new configuration against your current lineup with real purchases instead of guesswork.
Rules lock at purchase
The full rule set is snapshotted to the account the moment a trader buys. Edits to the variant afterward create a new revision that applies to future buyers only. Nobody's challenge changes underneath them.
Retire cleanly
Pull a variant from sale without touching anyone mid-flight. In-progress evaluations and funded accounts continue under their locked rules until they resolve naturally.
A record that settles disputes
When a trader contests a breach, the question is answered by the rule set locked to their account — not by whatever the marketing page says today. That single fact removes most of the heat from support conversations.
publish(variant) // on sale through your storefront
purchase(trader) // rules snapshot to the account
edit(variant) // new revision — future buyers only
retire(variant) // stops sales; in-flight accounts
// finish under their locked rules
// the invariant the whole system keeps:
account.rules === rulesAtPurchase(account)Economics
Challenge design is business design.
The parameters on this page are not marketing copy. They are the levers of your revenue, your payout liability, and your reputation — and they interact in ways that punish firms who set them one at a time.
A challenge is a priced product with a liability attached. The fee is revenue on the day of purchase; every rule you set determines how much of that revenue eventually flows back out as funded payouts, refunds, and retakes. Tighten the rules and fewer traders reach funding — margin looks better this month, while refund pressure, dispute volume, and reputational drag build underneath it. Loosen the rules and more traders get funded, which is only good news if your funded-phase terms and your risk engine can actually carry the exposure you just created.
The parameters also refuse to stay in their lanes. A profit target is experienced through the drawdown that constrains it. Minimum trading days interact with consistency rules to define what a legitimate pass looks like. Retake pricing changes how a breach feels — a dead end or a second attempt — which in turn changes how traders behave near their limits. Firms get into trouble not by choosing a wrong value but by choosing an incoherent combination: an aggressive target under a tight trailing drawdown with a short evaluation window produces either almost no passers or passers you should worry about. Both outcomes fail, just on different schedules.
We won't pretend there is a universally correct configuration, because there isn't — there is a configuration that is coherent for your capital model, your market, and your appetite for funded exposure. What the platform does is make the consequences visible: pass rates per phase, payout exposure, and cohort behavior are all tracked in analytics, so you adjust the next variant from evidence rather than instinct. And because participants are locked to purchased rules, you can correct a mispriced design without breaking faith with anyone who bought it.
Target vs. drawdown
A profit target has no meaning on its own — only relative to the drawdown that constrains it. The same target reads as fair under a generous overall drawdown and as nearly impossible under a tight trailing one. Design the pair, never the parts.
Fees vs. pass rate
A cheap, brutal challenge maximizes fee revenue this quarter and burns trust for every quarter after. A passable challenge priced honestly builds a funnel that survives scrutiny. Your fee and your difficulty are one decision wearing two labels.
Consistency vs. friction
Consistency rules and minimum days filter lottery-style passes — real protection for your funded pool. But every added rule is another thing a legitimate trader can trip over, and another support conversation. Add rules that earn their friction.
Workflow
From rule sheet to live product.
Designing and shipping a challenge is operator work, not an engineering ticket. The path from an idea to a purchasable evaluation runs entirely through the console.
- 01
Model
Choose the structure — 1-step, 2-step, 3-step, instant funding, or a scaling plan — and the account sizes and fee points you intend to sell.
- 02
Parameterize
Set targets, drawdown type and basis, minimum trading days, consistency rules, splits, restrictions, and retake logic — per phase, not per program.
- 03
Publish
The variant goes on sale through your storefront. A purchase triggers account creation, KYC, and the trading account automatically — no ops queue.
- 04
Iterate
Clone a variant, move a lever, run it beside the original. Retire what underperforms. Everyone who already bought finishes under the rules they bought.
Publishing is where the builder hands off to the rest of the stack: a purchase flows through automation — KYC, account creation, branded certificates, payout validation against the very rules you configured here — while the risk engine enforces those rules against live trading and the results land in analytics. One rule definition, consumed everywhere — which is the only arrangement where the rules a trader sees, the rules that are enforced, and the rules payouts are checked against cannot drift apart.
Verticals
One builder, every vertical.
The same evaluation engine parameterizes differently per market — tick-level drawdown for futures, session rules for crypto, staking discipline for sports. You design the product; the vertical supplies the physics.
FAQ
Frequently asked questions
PropXO · Demo
Bring your rule sheet to the demo.
We'll build one of your challenges live — structure, targets, drawdown, splits, and retakes — then show the same rules enforced by the risk engine. Commercial terms are scoped privately for the deployment.