Before you spend $500+ on another prop challenge, think about this

Buying the biggest prop firm account you can afford is usually a terrible way to start.

Something clicked for me after blowing evaluations that were completely avoidable.

The account size wasn't really helping me.

It was just making each failed attempt more expensive.

Have $800–$1,000 available?

Buy the biggest challenge you can afford and try to pass it.

The problem is that you're concentrating your entire evaluation budget into one attempt.

One bad week, one rule violation, one stupid trade and you're buying another challenge from scratch.

I started looking at it differently.

Say I have $900 I'm willing to spend on evaluations.

Instead of putting most of it into one large challenge, I'd rather split that budget across 3 smaller accounts.

Something like:

3 × $50K evaluations
Same strategy
Same risk per setup
Same rules for entering and exiting trades

Now I have 3 separate attempts.

If one account fails, I haven't burned through the entire budget.

More importantly, I don't increase risk on the remaining accounts trying to “make the money back.”

That's where this approach can go wrong FAST.

Having 3 accounts doesn't turn an unprofitable strategy into a profitable one.

If you're randomly taking trades with negative expectancy, you've basically found a way to lose 3 accounts instead of 1.

You still need a setup you've tested, predefined risk per trade and enough discipline to leave the account alone when there isn't a trade.

There's another part people overlook too.

Before spreading money across different prop firms, I check:

• Drawdown structure
• Payout requirements
• News trading restrictions
• Copy trading rules
• Consistency rules
• Maximum allocation
• Whether the firm's rules actually fit how I trade

A cheap challenge with rules that constantly interfere with your strategy isn't necessarily a better opportunity.

Once one of the smaller accounts reaches funded stage and starts producing withdrawals, you can decide whether to use some of those profits for another evaluation.

That's when scaling becomes much more controlled.

You're not constantly injecting fresh money every time something goes wrong.

One account works → withdraw → allocate part of it toward another attempt → repeat.

It sounds less exciting than immediately buying a massive challenge.

But after looking at prop accounts this way, putting my entire evaluation budget behind one account stopped making much sense.

Curious if anyone here already does something similar.

reddit.com
u/BusRepresentative259 — 8 days ago

Does anyone have idea on how forex Prop firms can run ads on meta without ads rejection?

I have been running meta ads for a forex prop firm and it comes under financial category (which meta enforce a label on us), we are not able to scale the ads or test creatives fully even if we test ads in a different ad account before launching them in the main ad account. They still gets rejected unpredictably.

Our old ads are also getting rejected by meta.

If anyone has idea on how we can bypass ad rejection please feel free to share help in the comments.

We have also noticed meta work suspiciously for our niche. Even though we take all the precautions and avoid certain words or creative style to avoid getting ads flagged still same issue.

My current meta structure;

For our firm:

\- ABO always outperform CBO strangely

\- Static ads or social proof videoz produce better results compare to educational or demo based videos

\- UGC we haven't explored since we are forex prop trading nice as it is a risky category and ugc may mislead people or meta will reject such video ads

I have also observed our niche takes lots of convincing before someone buys (found this through retargeting campaigns and backend data)

Prospecting campaign isn’t going beyond 1.6x ROAS - tried many different creative strategies.

We take one step forward and ad account restrictions put us two step back.

reddit.com
u/BusRepresentative259 — 9 days ago
▲ 2 r/metaads+1 crossposts

Does anyone have idea on how forex Prop firms can run ads on meta without ads rejection?

I have been running meta ads for a forex prop firm and it comes under financial category (which meta enforce a label on us), we are not able to scale the ads or test creatives fully even if we test ads in a different ad account before launching them in the main ad account. They still gets rejected unpredictably.

Our old ads are also getting rejected by meta.

If anyone has idea on how we can bypass ad rejection please feel free to share help in the comments.

We have also noticed meta work suspiciously for our niche. Even though we take all the precautions and avoid certain words or creative style to avoid getting ads flagged still same issue.

My current meta structure;

For our firm:

- ABO always outperform CBO strangely

- Static ads or social proof videoz produce better results compare to educational or demo based videos

- UGC we haven't explored since we are forex prop trading nice as it is a risky category and ugc may mislead people or meta will reject such video ads

I have also observed our niche takes lots of convincing before someone buys (found this through retargeting campaigns and backend data)

Prospecting campaign isn’t going beyond 1.6x ROAS - tried many different creative strategies.

We take one step forward and ad account restrictions put us two step back.

reddit.com
u/BusRepresentative259 — 10 days ago