Both lock the trailing drawdown at Starting Balance + $100. Both use a 40% consistency rule somewhere. After that the two firms diverge on every axis — platforms, program rigidity, phase structure, payouts. Here's the honest side-by-side.
| Rule | Bulenox | Tradeify |
|---|---|---|
| Phase structure | Qualification → Master → Funded (3-step) | 1-step eval (Growth, Select) or instant (Lightning) |
| Trail type | Option 1 = intraday HWM Option 2 = EOD only | EOD across all programs |
| Trail choice rigidity | Permanent at signup — cannot switch later | Switch programs freely (up to 5 accounts) |
| Lock point | Starting Balance + $100 | Starting Balance + $100 |
| Daily loss limit | Option 1: None Option 2: yes ($400–$4,500 per size) | Growth (eval): yes ($600–$3,750) Select (eval): None Lightning: yes on 50K+ |
| Consistency rule | 40% on Master + Funded (not Qualification) | Growth: none eval, 35% funded Select: 40% eval, none funded Lightning: progressive 20→25→30% |
| Profit split | First $10K paid 100%, then 90/10 | 90/10 after first $15K (Simulated Funded) |
| Payout cadence | Weekly — every Wednesday | 5-day default (Select can buy daily-payout for $1,500) |
| Platforms | NinjaTrader 8, Rithmic, ATAS, Quantower, Sierra Chart, TradingView (via bridge) | Tradesea (Rithmic), Tradovate, WealthCharts |
| Platforms NOT supported | Tradovate (not on official list) | NinjaTrader, TradingView (native), MetaTrader |
| Max active accounts | 3 starting, scales to 11 Master ($2.75M cap) | 5 funded ($1M cap) |
| News trading | Permitted | Permitted |
| Microscalping rule | None | >50% of trades AND profit from holds >10s |
| Funded-transition risk | Yes — declining transition after 3 Master payouts closes Master with no payout | Funded balance resets to base size on eval pass |
The single biggest difference between these two firms is what you commit to at signup.
When you sign up at Bulenox you pick Option 1 or Option 2, and that choice is permanent for the life of the account. You cannot switch later.
Wrong pick locks you into a mismatch with your style for the rest of the account's life. No other prop firm in this dataset (Apex, Topstep, MFFU, TPT, Tradeify) forces this kind of binary commitment.
Tradeify offers three distinct programs and you can run up to 5 funded accounts simultaneously, mixing programs as you like.
Deep dive → The 4 archetypes of daily loss limit handling — this pair shows two of them inside one comparison. Bulenox is fork-locked-at-signup (Option 1 strips DLL, Option 2 keeps it, permanent choice) — same archetype as Apex 4.0 EOD vs Intraday. Tradeify is per-program-configured (Growth eval has DLL, Select eval doesn't, Lightning has it on 50K+, switchable across accounts) — an archetype only Tradeify uses. The other two archetypes — firmwide-deleted (TPT, MFFU) and platform-toggled (Topstep TopstepX-only) — round out the cluster.
The platform difference is sharper here than between most prop-firm pairs.
For NinjaTrader-first traders — Bulenox. For Tradovate or WealthCharts traders — Tradeify. If you trade primarily on the Rithmic interface itself, either firm works.
Both firms lock the trailing drawdown at Starting Balance + $100. This is the same lock archetype as Apex 4.0 and MyFundedFutures — and a different family from Topstep and TPT (both of which lock exactly at the starting balance).
On a 100K account, the lock fires at $103,100 of equity (100,000 + 3,000 drawdown + 100), and the trail floor freezes at $100,100 forever. From that point on, the drawdown stops moving up with profit — the only stop-out is the locked floor.
EOD is more forgiving for traders who take heat intraday but exit flat or in profit by the close. Intraday is more forgiving for traders who scale out and want their open profit to immediately raise the floor.
Our free trailing-drawdown calculator models both mechanics with Bulenox-family and Apex-family presets. No login.
Open the calculatorBoth firms use 40% as the headline consistency threshold (Bulenox at one scope, Tradeify Select at another). The number is the same; the scope is the trap.
The cleanest formula: max safe single-day P&L ≈ total × 0.40 ÷ (1 − 0.40) = total × 0.667. If you have $1,000 in total profits, no single day can be more than ~$667.
Deep dive → How the consistency rule actually works across all 7 firms — the same 40% threshold sits at THREE different scopes inside this pair alone (Bulenox Master+Funded, Tradeify Select eval, Tradeify Lightning at payout #3+). Across the wider cluster the threshold spans 30% (Apex 4.0 funded-only, Earn2Trade GAU eval-only), 35% (Tradeify Growth funded), 40% (here + MFFU Core both-scope), and 50% (Topstep eval-only). The load-bearing axis is scope, not the percentage.
The consistency calculator does the math for both 40% (Bulenox / Tradeify Select eval) and 35% (Tradeify Growth funded) plus custom thresholds.
Open consistency calculator| Aspect | Bulenox | Tradeify |
|---|---|---|
| Cadence | Weekly — every Wednesday, 8–12hr processing | 5-day default. Select can buy daily for $1,500 |
| Split | First $10K paid 100% to trader, then 90/10 | 90/10 after first $15K (Simulated Funded), 80/20 on Elite Live |
| Minimum withdrawal | $1,000 (per third-party tracker) | Not strictly stated |
| Methods | ACH, Wire, PayPal, Wise | Standard ACH/Wire |
| Funded balance caps | $2,500 / $5,000 / $10,000 / $15,000 / $25,000 per size | Funded balance resets to base size each eval pass |
Bulenox's first-$10K-at-100% is unique among comparable firms (most start at 80–90% from dollar one). The catch: the funded balance caps per account size mean your equity above the cap effectively belongs to the firm until the next payout window.
Trader hits $3,000 profit target on a 50K account, gets funded, then has a single $1,200 winning day. Total funded profit: $1,200.
Trader on a 100K account spikes to +$2,800 intraday, then closes the day at +$1,400.
Yes — the two firms are independent. Cross-firm hedging is not enforceable by either firm's rulebook (they can't see your other firm's positions), but cross-account hedging within the same firm is banned at both. If you run both, do not coordinate equal-and-opposite positions between them.
No — the Option 1 vs Option 2 choice is permanent for the life of that account. You'd need to start a new account under Option 2 (paying a new activation fee). This is Bulenox's defining structural quirk and the single biggest decision at signup.
We're not going to make up a stat. Anecdotal patterns from public forums suggest the 3-phase structure at Bulenox (Qualification, Master, Funded) acts as a longer filter, while Tradeify's 1-step eval is faster to fail or pass. The honest answer is: failure rate depends on your style fit, not the firm's logo.
Both restrict pure HFT and copy-trading-across-your-own-accounts. Personal EAs that don't constitute HFT are tolerated case-by-case — the rulebook language is similar at both. Read each firm's current TOS before deploying a bot.
Public reports document a 2025 pattern where declining the Funded transition after 3 successful Master payouts closes the Master account with no further payout. If you intend to keep your Master earnings, accept the Funded transition when offered. This is documented in the Bulenox community and we cover it in our Bulenox landing page.
The rule states more than 50% of your trades AND more than 50% of your profit must come from positions held longer than 10 seconds. Sub-second-scalpers and tick-arb strategies are the target. Standard intraday scalping (~30 sec holds and up) is fine.
Aurafy tracks your trail floor, consistency ratio, and daily loss against either firm's preset in real time as you upload Tradovate / NinjaTrader / Sierra Chart fills. The same journal works across all your accounts and all your firms.
Aurafy is a futures journal built for prop traders. Multi-firm, multi-account, native screen recording, free tier with no card required.
Try Aurafy free Browse all prop-firm guides