PPTFPayback of the challenge fee
The payback of a fee is counted not from the price of a challenge but from the cost of passing: it usually takes more than one attempt, and resets are part of the price. The calculation shows how many payouts return that sum.
Calculation
Spend on attempts before any refund — —. The number of attempts is fractional on purpose: it is a mathematical expectation, not a plan. At a probability of 10%, “10.0 attempts on average” means that for one person the first will do, while another will not pass in twenty. The value the calculation leaves out is time: every attempt takes weeks.
The price of a challenge and the cost of passing are different things
The shop window shows the price of one attempt. What you should count is the cost of passing: if the probability is 10%, it takes about nine attempts on average, and eight of them are paid at the reset price. With a $500 fee and a $250 reset the expected spend comes to $2,750 — five and a half times the shop-window figure.
| Value | Formula | In the example |
|---|---|---|
| Expected number of attempts | 1 ÷ probability | 10.0 |
| Spend on attempts | fee + (attempts − 1) × reset | $2,750 |
| Allowing for the refunded fee | spend − fee, if a refund is promised | $2,750 |
| Payouts to break even | spend ÷ payout per cycle | 0.9 |
In the example the probability is 10%, the fee $500, the reset $250, the payout per cycle $3,000, and no refund is promised. Put in your own probability from the pass calculation — taking it from someone else's average is pointless.
Two things the calculation does not see
The first is time. Every attempt takes weeks: minimum trading days, the stage deadline, the payout cycle. Nine attempts is not nine weeks but more like a year, and in that year the firm's terms can change.
The second is how many cycles a funded account will live. It is a slider here because there is no honest estimate: the drawdown limits on a funded account are the same as on the stages, and the account is lost by the same rules. Putting a big number in to make the arithmetic “work” is a way of fooling yourself, not of calculating.
An honesty check. If it only pays back at a probability above 30% and an account life of more than ten cycles, that is not a calculation but a wish. Put in the aggregators' estimate (5–10% passing) and four cycles: that is what a cautious scenario looks like.
What else goes into the price of an attempt
The fee and the resets are only the money part. The other three items usually stay off the bill, though they are spent just the same.
Minimum trading days, the stage deadline and the payout cycle add up to weeks per attempt. Nine attempts is more like a year than a month.
weeks per attemptCommission and spread reduce the split base, and so the payout itself. In this calculation they already sit inside the “expected payout per cycle” — if you worked it out.
they reduce the payoutLimits, splits and the price of a reset change without notice. A calculation made at the start may, by the fifth attempt, describe a different programme.
recheck itThe probability of passing comes from your own trade history. If you have none, that is what you gather first — and it costs time rather than money.
before buyingHow to read the result
The key figure here is not the total over all cycles but the expected spend on attempts: the total depends on an assumption about payouts that you set yourself, while the spend follows only from the price and the probability.
Note the fractional number of attempts: 10.0 is an expectation, not a plan. Half the people with that probability will pass sooner, half later, and for an individual trader an attempt either passes or it does not. A budget should be planned on the expectation, not on the best case.
Frequently asked questions
Why is the number of attempts fractional?
Because it is a mathematical expectation, not a plan. At a probability of 10%, “10.0 attempts” means that for one person the first will do, while another will not pass in twenty. The fraction is needed precisely for the spend calculation: rounding to a whole number would distort the sum.
Should the refunded fee be counted?
Only if it is written into the rules with its conditions, rather than promised in marketing. The wording “the fee is returned with the first payout” with no timing and no grounds for refusal is not an obligation. The switch in the calculation shows both variants.
What if the arithmetic says it does not pay back?
There are two levers, both before the purchase: raise the probability of passing (a smaller size, another firm with softer limits) or choose a programme with a cheap reset. The third option is not to buy — that is a result of the calculation too.
Where do I get the probability of passing for this calculation?
From the pass calculation on your own statistics, not from someone else's average. Aggregators' estimates (5–10%) include everyone who bought, including those with no edge at all: putting them into your own calculation means counting someone else's situation.
How many cycles does a funded account live?
There is no honest estimate, which is why it is a slider. The drawdown limits on a funded account are the same as on the stages, and the account is lost by the same rules. Putting in a big number to make the arithmetic “work” is a way of fooling yourself.
Which is cheaper, a reset or a new challenge?
Almost always the reset, and that is exactly why its price decides the cost of passing. But read what it resets: at some programmes the progress and the minimum trading days are wiped along with the breach.
Should your own time be counted?
It should, although the calculation leaves it out. Every attempt means minimum trading days, the stage deadline and the payout cycle — that is, weeks. Nine attempts by expectation add up to a year rather than a month, and in that year the firm's terms can change.
How do I count it if the firm promises to refund the fee?
With the switch in the calculation — it subtracts the fee once, after the first payout. But turn it on only if the condition is written into the rules with a threshold and timing: “the fee is returned with the first payout” with no detail is not an obligation.
Why does the calculation not show the probability of breaking even?
Because that would be a probability of a probability: on top of the uncertainty of passing you would add the uncertainty of the account's life and the size of the payouts. Instead the calculation shows the expectation for the inputs named, and you set the spread yourself by moving the sliders.
What if I want to buy a larger challenge?
Run the calculation at two account sizes. The price of an attempt grows with the size, while the probability of passing does not depend on it — it depends on the limits in per cent and on your statistics. So a large account raises the expected spend and the expected payout proportionally, but does not change the ratio between them.
Read next
