Rules compared
| Rule | Bulenox | FundedNext Futures |
|---|---|---|
| Market | Futures | Futures |
| Phases | One-phase | One-phase |
| Eval cost (mid tier) | $105 | $175 |
| Profit target | 6% | 8% |
| Max drawdown | Trailing (EOD) · 5% | Static · 4% |
| Daily loss limit | None | 3% |
| Consistency rule | 30% | None |
| Min trading days | 1 | 3 |
| Max days | Unlimited | Unlimited |
| Profit split | 90% | 90% |
| Payout buffer | 5% | 3% |
| Trailing on funded | No | No |
| Payout frequency | Every 14 days | Every 14 days |
Simulated outcomes, same trader
Identical balanced archetype (50% win rate, 1.2R average winner, 3 trades a day), 10,000 simulated evaluations against each firm's exact ruleset.
| Metric | Bulenox | FundedNext Futures |
|---|---|---|
| Pass rate | 58.6% | 0.5% |
| Payout rate (if passed) | 32.0% | 39.9% |
| Joint withdrawal probability | 18.7% | 0.5% |
| Expected P&L over 50 challenges | $40k | -$8k |
| Failures from drawdown breach | 53% | 9% |
| Failures from daily loss | 0% | 77% |
Which should you pick?
Bulenox: Bulenox runs Apex-like rules at aggressive promo prices — the reason many high-volume traders test strategies here first. Trailing drawdown is the killer; passing is one thing, but stacking payouts on the funded side is where most traders leak edge.
FundedNext Futures: FundedNext's futures arm is newer than its forex flagship. One-phase static drawdown option makes it attractive for cautious traders. Split is competitive; the main tradeoff is a smaller track record of consistent payouts vs. Apex or Topstep.
On the numbers above, Bulenox is the better expected-value choice for a balanced profile — but archetypes are not you. A scalper and a swing trader can flip this ranking entirely, because drawdown type punishes lumpy P&L far more than frequent small P&L. Run your own drawdown numbers first, then simulate your real stats.
Frequently asked
Is Bulenox or FundedNext Futures easier to pass?+
In our simulation of a balanced 50%-win-rate trader, Bulenox passes 58.6% of the time and FundedNext Futures passes 0.5% — so Bulenox is the easier evaluation for that profile. The gap is driven mostly by drawdown type (Trailing (EOD) vs Static) and the number of phases.
Which is cheaper, Bulenox or FundedNext Futures?+
The mid-tier evaluation costs $105 at Bulenox and $175 at FundedNext Futures. Sticker price is the wrong comparison though: over 50 attempted challenges our simulation nets $40k at Bulenox versus -$8k at FundedNext Futures, because a cheaper eval you fail more often is not cheaper.
Which pays out more reliably, Bulenox or FundedNext Futures?+
Conditional on passing, our model gives Bulenox a 32.0% chance of reaching a first payout versus 39.9% at FundedNext Futures. End to end — pass and withdraw — that is 18.7% vs 0.5%. Profit splits are 90% and 90%.
What is the biggest rule difference between Bulenox and FundedNext Futures?+
Bulenox uses a trailing (eod) drawdown of 5% with no daily loss limit; FundedNext Futures uses a static drawdown of 4% with a 3% daily loss limit. FundedNext Futures is the stricter ruleset for most trading styles.
Compare both firms using YOUR trading stats
Log your trades in the journal, push your real win rate and R-multiple into the simulator, and see which of these two rulesets you actually clear.
Run my simulationMore Bulenox comparisons
Based on publicly listed rules as of 2026-07-15. Independent — not affiliated with Bulenox or FundedNext Futures. Rules change; verify before paying. Simulations are estimates, not guarantees.