1-step vs 2-step challenges

The question that matters is how big the target is next to the max loss.

Take a $10,000 account with an 8% max loss ($800 of room):

In the 1-step, you need to make $1,000 before you lose $800. In the 2-step, the first step asks for $800 against the same $800 of room, and the second for only $500. Each step is a shorter run, but you need two of them.

On Runtiler, each step starts again at the full size, with a fresh max loss. Passing step 1 at $10,800 doesn't carry $800 of cushion into step 2: step 2 starts at $10,000, and its target counts from there. See Profit targets and steps.

1-step

• One test. One target, one set of minimum days, one time limit if there is one.
• Faster when it works. A trader who reaches the target in a week is funded in a week.
• A bigger target for the same room. Usually the target is larger than any single step of a 2-step, so one bad stretch late in the run costs more.

2-step

• Smaller targets. Each step asks less, so a normal drawdown is easier to recover from inside a step.
• More time. You trade two stages. If each step needs 3 trading days, you need at least 6 before you're funded.
• Two chances to fail. Passing step 1 and then losing in step 2 ends the account, and the price is spent.

3-step and instant

A 3-step challenge takes the same idea further: three smaller targets, for example 5%, 5% and 5%, each from the full size. It takes the longest and asks the least of any single stage.

Instant funding has no steps at all. The account is funded from day one, so every claim rule and loss limit applies from your first trade. See Instant funding explained.

At a typical firm, the 2-step is often the cheaper version of the same account size, because more traders fail along the way.

On Runtiler, the price comes from the rules themselves. Runtiler works out how often a set of rules pays a reward, and rules that pay more often cost more. So there's no fixed answer to "which is cheaper": a 1-step with a 6% target may cost more than a 2-step with 8% and 5%. Compare the actual prices of the challenges you're looking at, with their limits side by side.

Some honest questions to ask yourself:

• How much do you usually make in a good week, and lose in a bad one? If your bad weeks are close to the max loss, smaller targets give you more chances to recover.
• How patient are you? A 2-step asks you to repeat the same careful trading twice. If you tend to take more risk once you're close to the end, one stage may be safer for you.
• Is there a time limit? On Runtiler, each step has its own limit, counted from the step's start (the first from the moment you buy). With two steps, check that both limits leave you room. See Time limits.
• What are the other rules? A minimum of trading days, a best-day rule or a trailing max loss can matter more than the number of steps.

Two examples

Ana trades a few times a week and keeps losses small. Her good months make about 6% and her worst drawdown is about 4%. On a $25,000 account with an 8% max loss, a 1-step at 10% would usually take her more than a month. A 2-step at 6% and 4% fits her pace better: each step is about one good month, and her usual drawdown stays far from the line.

Ben trades actively and his results swing. He makes or loses 3% in a week fairly often. A 2-step makes him go through two stretches where a swing could end the account. A 1-step at 8%, with a daily limit set to pause rather than end, may suit him better: one run, and a bad day stops him for the rest of the day instead of ending the account.

These are examples, not advice. The right shape is the one whose numbers fit your own record.

Size every trade from the max loss, not from the target. If you risk 0.5% of the size per trade, it takes 16 losing trades in a row to reach an 8% max loss. That's true in a 1-step and in each step of a 2-step. Risk per trade has the details.