Video summary

My 95.7% "Fullport" Funded To Payout Strategy (2026 Prop Firm System)

Main summary

Key takeaways

Finance

Core Concept: “Full Port” Prop-Firm Method to Reach Payouts Fast

The creator proposes moving from fresh funded accounts to payouts using a “full port” approach—meaning:

  • Risk the entire max drawdown on a funded account on the first trade.
  • Then aim to farm minimum profit days to generate repeat gains.

They claim this method has a high expected probability of at least one payout, supported by:

  • A stated “95.71% chance” of getting at least one payout (derived from win-rate / losing streak math).
  • “thousands of Monte Carlo simulations” suggesting higher expected value (EV).

Key caution presented: Traditional “good risk management” (small risk per trade) is framed as making prop-firm payouts too slow, and the method argues prop firms can be “gamed” via variance and account rotation.

Execution Framework (Step-by-Step)

Preconditions / Prop Firm Requirement

  • The method is described as working only on a prop firm with “0% consistency in the funded” (as stated by the creator).
  • While the creator claims this requirement, they also suggest evals may still show around 40–50% consistency in many cases—yet the funded rules/structure must still allow the strategy to exploit variance.

Recommended Prop Firm & Cost

  • Lucid Trading is recommended.
  • One-time eval cost: $105 per eval account
  • Promo code: easy
  • No market tickers are provided, since this is a prop-firm payout strategy rather than a market call.

ROI Calculation Before Starting

Average Cost per Live Funded Account

Framework:

  • Expected average cost per live funded account = (cost per evaluation) / (evaluation pass rate)

Example:

  • Eval cost = $105
  • Pass rate = 30%
  • Average cost per live funded account ≈ $350

Target Pass Rate Guidance

  • The creator suggests targeting a 25–35% pass rate range “if you use the system.”

Funded-to-Payout Mechanics

Account Rotation + First-Trade Full Drawdown Risk

  • Start with multiple fresh funded accounts (example uses five “50K” funded accounts).
  • On the first trade of each funded account, risk the entire drawdown.
    • Example: On a 50K flex account, first-trade risk is stated as $2,000.

Important: Don’t Copy During Buffer Building

  • The creator cautions not to copy trade during the buffer-building step, because a loss on the first trade could wipe out multiple accounts at once.

Rotation Procedure (Example Logic)

  • Account 1: risk $2,000 (full drawdown)
    • If loss: the account is gone; move to the next.
  • Account 2: risk $2,000
    • Target RR 1:1 to 1:1.5
    • Profit goal: $2,000–$3,000
  • Account 3: risk $2,000
    • Aim ~1:1 to build buffer
  • Accounts that lose are replaced/rotated through until some accounts successfully build a profit buffer.

Example Outcome (Hypothetical)

  • The creator says you shouldn’t be “blowing three out of five.”
  • Typical run suggested: blow ~2 out of 5 and buffer on 3 out of 5
  • This is framed under an assumption of ~60% win rate at 1:1 RR (per the creator).

After Buffer Is Built: “Farm the Next Minimum Profit Days”

Once buffer exists:

  • Reduce risk to $150 per trade
  • Target 1:1 RR
  • They mention using a trade copier to copy buffered accounts for minimum-profit farming.

Withdrawal Timing (Lucid Claim)

  • The creator claims Lucid allows withdrawal of 50% of profits after reaching the buffer stage.
  • Example provided:
    • If profit on account 2 is $1,250
    • After Lucid’s extra handling cost (approx. -$100)
    • Withdraw roughly $1,000 from that account

Optional Aggressiveness: Martingale During Minimum-Profit Farming

If a $150 risk trade loses, next trade doubles risk:

  • $150 → $300 → $600 → $1,200

They claim:

  • With 1:1 RR, losing five consecutive trades is < 2%
  • Stated as “about 2.something%”

Reset rule:

  • After a win and another minimum-profit day, risk resets back to $150.

Key Probability / Performance Math Claims

95.71% Payout Chance (Stated Derivation)

Using a 65% win rate assumption and a losing-streak framing:

  • They state odds of losing three trades in a row ≈ 4.29%
  • Therefore probability of winning at least one of those three ≈ 95.71%

Why Multiple Accounts Are Required (Variance / Risk of Ruin)

  • With only 1–2 funded accounts, full-porting is described as dangerous because streaks of:
    • 2–4 losing trades can occur.
  • Recommendation:
    • Start with 3–5 live funded accounts
    • They claim 3 accounts provides a “nearly statistically guarantee”-type effect for at least one buffer-building success.

Psychological Framing: “What’s Actually at Risk?”

Although the plan risks $2,000 on a 50K funded account (first trade), the creator argues the “true” economic risk is the average acquisition cost of the funded account:

  • Approx $300–$350, based on ROI math and pass rate.

Message: don’t think of it as risking $2,000 of real capital; think of it as risking the cost to acquire the funded account.

Strategy They Trade: “DTE Method” (Criteria Only)

The creator claims this strategy supports approximately:

  • ~65% win rate at 1:1 RR for “A+ setups”
  • Performance may drop due to:
    • human error
    • non-A+ setups

DTE Setup Description (As Used for Buffer-Building Trades)

The system requires:

  • “obvious draw on liquidity”
  • “higher time frame delivery”
  • “V-shaped inversion fair value gap”
  • target an “inversion fair value gap” and an “obvious DOL”

Examples mentioned for targeting include:

  • “London low” for take-profit
  • “8:00 a.m. highs” (referenced in an example)

They state it is coded into an indicator to reduce guesswork.

Risk/Reward Targets for Buffer Building

  • Not “crazy high RR”
  • Use roughly:
    • ~1:1 to 1:1.3 to ~1:1.5 RR

Key Numbers Explicitly Mentioned

  • 95.71%: chance of at least one payout (stated)
  • $105: Lucid eval cost (promo easy)
  • 30% pass rate → ~$350 average cost per live funded account (example)
  • Target pass-rate range: 25–35%
  • Example funded accounts: five 50K funded accounts
  • First-trade full drawdown risk on 50K: $2,000
  • Buffer farming risk: $150 per trade
  • Buffer stage profit targets:
    • $2,000–$3,000 for 1:1 to 1:1.5 RR
  • Example winning buffers mentioned (hypothetical):
    • ~$2,500 profit on one account
    • $2,000 and $2,500 buffers on other accounts
    • total profits in example: ~$3,250
  • Withdrawal claim: 50% of profits
    • example withdraw: ~$1,000 (after handling cost)
  • Martingale cap levels:
    • $150 → $300 → $600 → $1,200
  • Losing streak probability claim:
    • losing five consecutive 1:1 trades: “about 2.something%”
  • Win-rate assumptions:
    • base claim 65% win rate
    • DTE targets 70–75% win rate at 1:1 RR for true A+ setups
    • illustrative rotation scenario includes ~60% win rate

Assets / Tickers / Instruments

  • No specific tickers, ETFs, commodities, bonds, or crypto are named.
  • References are instead to prop-firm mechanics (e.g., 50K flex accounts) and concepts like:
    • liquidity draws
    • fair value gaps
    • inversion
    • DOL (draw on liquidity)

Disclosures / Disclaimers

  • No explicit “not financial advice” disclaimer appears in the provided subtitles.
  • The creator frames claims as supported by math and Monte Carlo simulations, and repeatedly emphasizes assumptions (including the prop-firm rule framed as “0% consistency in the funded”).

Presenter / Sources

  • Presenter/source: video narrator/creator (name not provided in the subtitles)
  • Prop firm referenced: Lucid Trading
    • promo code: easy
    • eval cost: $105
    • 50% profit withdrawal claim
  • Software referenced: Trade Copier (for copy trading)

Original video