Six days after v1.0.4 gave traders a floor on their daily allowance, v1.0.5 took it back. That is the third rewrite of the same mechanic since April. I have been trading a Propr account through all three, and I want to be precise about what actually changed, because the obvious reading — losing days now punish you twice — turns out to be wrong when you run the numbers.
The short version. Your daily loss limit is now a plain percentage of your start-of-day balance, recalculated at 00:00 UTC. It shrinks when you are down and grows when you are up. The v1.0.4 floor is gone. But the max drawdown is still the constraint that actually ends accounts, so the shrinking costs you almost nothing. The real change is hiding in the word balance.
What v1.0.5 actually says
The changelog entry is dated 27 July 2026, titled “Daily Loss Limit Based on Start-of-Day Balance”. Two formulas, and they are the whole rule:
Daily Loss Limit = Daily Loss % × Start-of-day Balance
Equity Floor = Start-of-day Balance − Daily Loss Limit
The percentages did not move: 3% on both Classic and Turbo 1-Step, 5% on 2-Step. The reset is still 00:00 UTC. What moved is the reference point, and its history is worth holding in your head, because the number in your old notes is probably from a rulebook that no longer exists:
- v1.0.2 (23 April): limit fixed at a percentage of the challenge starting balance. A constant. Never moved.
- v1.0.4 (21 July): limit = percentage of the greater of starting balance and day-start balance. A floor that only ratchets up.
- v1.0.5 (27 July): limit = percentage of day-start balance, full stop. It moves both ways.
If you read my breakdown of the v1.0.4 balance-vs-equity change last week, the “your allowance can never shrink” conclusion in it survived exactly six days. That is on the firm, not on the reader, but it is a useful reminder that on a young on-chain prop firm the rulebook is a moving object.
Does the shrinking limit actually make it harder? Mostly no
This is the part everyone got wrong on X, including people I respect. The instinct is that a percentage-of-current-balance rule creates a death spiral: you lose, your rope gets shorter, you lose again, it gets shorter still. Intuitively brutal. Arithmetically, it is close to irrelevant — because the daily loss limit is not what kills 1-Step accounts. The max drawdown is.
Take a $10,000 Classic 1-Step. Static drawdown is 6%, so there is a permanent floor at $9,400 and a total budget of $600. Now burn maximum-loss days:
- Day 1: balance $10,000 → limit $300 → daily floor $9,700. You hit it. Balance $9,700.
- Day 2: balance $9,700 → limit $291 → daily floor $9,409. Static floor is $9,400. The daily line still binds, barely. You hit it. Balance $9,409.
- Day 3: balance $9,409 → limit $282 → daily floor $9,127, but the static floor at $9,400 is now well above it. You have $9 of room. It is over.
Total consumed across two full red days: $591 of a $600 budget. Under v1.0.4’s floored version it would have been exactly $600 — the account would have died on day two instead of gasping into day three. The shrinking allowance is a brake. It spends your drawdown slightly more slowly. Nobody is going to build a career on that $9, but the direction is the opposite of what the panic said.
The 2-Step tells the same story louder. On a $100,000 2-Step, the trailing drawdown sits 8% below the high-water mark, so from a fresh account the floor is $92,000 — an $8,000 budget. Day one at full loss costs $5,000. Day two’s limit is 5% of $95,000 = $4,750, but you only have $3,000 left before the trailing floor. The drawdown binds on day two regardless of which rulebook version you are under. If the difference between trailing and static is still fuzzy, that is worth twenty minutes: trailing vs static drawdown is the single most misread pair of words in this industry.
Where v1.0.5 does bite: the word “balance”
Here is the mechanic worth paying for. The snapshot at 00:00 UTC is taken on balance — realised, closed P&L only. The breach check runs on equity — floating P&L included. Those are different numbers whenever you hold a position across the reset.
Concretely, on a $10,000 1-Step: it is 23:55 UTC, your balance is $10,000, and you are holding a long that is floating −$400. Your equity is $9,600. Midnight passes. The system snapshots your balance at $10,000, sets today’s limit at $300, and puts your equity floor at $9,700.
You are already below it. Not “at risk of” — below. The position does not need to move another tick against you; you are sitting under today’s floor from the first second of the day, and the risk engine checks equity on every tick with no grace period. The dashboard will show you a fresh $300 of allowance that you do not have.
The rule I now trade by. Never carry an unrealised loss larger than your next day’s allowance through 00:00 UTC. On a 1-Step that is 3% of balance; on a 2-Step, 5%. If a position is floating past that at 23:50 UTC, I close it or cut it down. The reset does not forgive open positions — it simply cannot see them.
The symmetric version is less dangerous but worth knowing: floating profit at midnight gives you nothing. Balance ignores it. If you were planning to hold a winner through the reset to buy yourself a bigger allowance tomorrow, that does not work. You have to close it to bank it.
Turbo 1-Step: the format with zero rope
Turbo is where these numbers collide in a way people do not expect. Turbo runs a 3% static drawdown and a 3% daily loss limit. On a $10,000 Turbo, the daily equity floor on day one is $9,700 — and the permanent max drawdown floor is also $9,700. The same line.
One maximum-loss day is not a bad day on Turbo. It is the account. Every day after day one, the static floor sits above the daily floor, so the daily loss limit becomes decorative and the only number that matters is $9,700. That is the trade Turbo offers: a $25 fee on the $5K instead of $60, a 9% target instead of 10%, and precisely one unit of tolerance. I went through whether it is worth it in the Turbo 1-Step breakdown — short version, it suits a tight mechanical system and destroys discretionary traders.
Fee table, current as of this rulebook, so you can size the decision:
- Turbo 1-Step: $25 / $50 / $125 / $245 / $450 for $5K → $100K. Target 9%, daily 3%, drawdown 3% static.
- Classic 1-Step: $60 / $110 / $275 / $495 / $999. Target 10%, daily 3%, drawdown 6% static.
- Classic 2-Step: $50 / $100 / $250 / $450 / $749. Targets 5% then 10%, daily 5%, drawdown 8% trailing.
What to change in your risk model this week
Three things, and only the first is urgent.
1. Stop storing the number. Derive it. If your journal, spreadsheet or bot holds a dollar figure for the daily limit, it is wrong on any day your balance is not exactly the starting balance. Read the day-start balance, multiply by 3% or 5%, subtract. Three rulebook versions in four months should have cured everyone of hard-coding by now.
2. Move your risk-per-trade to a percentage of the live allowance, not of the account. I run a third of the day’s allowance as my maximum single-trade risk, which on a $10K 1-Step at full balance is $100. When balance drops to $9,700 the allowance drops to $291 and my per-trade risk drops to $97 automatically. That is the mechanism doing the de-risking for me, and it is the whole argument of position sizing on a prop account.
3. Re-audit your overnight policy. See the 00:00 UTC section above. Most people’s “I hold through the reset” habit was formed under a rulebook where the snapshot took equity. It does not anymore.
The mechanics with worked examples for both formats live in the full Propr rules guide, and the evergreen version of this topic — how the limit interacts with correlation, circuit breakers and revenge trading — is in the daily loss limit guide. The drawdown calculator gives you today’s floor in one input.
How I handle this semi-automatically
The honest problem with a limit that moves every day is not the maths, it is that you have to do the maths at 00:00 UTC while asleep or at work. That is exactly the gap Bubbles fills for me. I choose the trade — direction, pair, conviction. The bot handles the execution: the DCA ladder, the take profit, the stop, and the position size derived from the current allowance rather than from a number I wrote down in June.
It is semi-automatic on purpose. I do not want a machine picking my direction on a funded account, and I do not trust myself to recompute a shrinking budget at three in the morning after two red days. Splitting the job along that line is the only reason I have never breached on a daily-loss rule change. Propr explicitly permits bots, copy trading and API access — section 14 of the rulebook lists all three as unrestricted — which is not something you can assume elsewhere. Hypernova’s §14.2 bans third-party signals and copy trading outright, so a setup like this simply cannot run there.
Is Propr getting harder or softer?
Neither, and that is my actual concern. Across v1.0.2 → v1.0.4 → v1.0.5 the daily loss rule went constant, then floored, then floating, and the net effect on a trader in drawdown is a rounding error. What did change materially in that window came from v1.0.3: the Turbo format, and the aggregate funded cap going from $200K to $300K. Those are real. The daily-loss trilogy is mostly the firm tuning a knob in public.
The thing I would flag to anyone about to buy an evaluation is not the current rule, it is the rule-change velocity. Five rulebook versions in six months on a firm that is barely a year old means the rules you pass under may not be the rules you get funded under. Propr states it never changes rules retroactively and that active accounts are governed by the rules in effect at activation, which is the right policy and it has held so far. Take it seriously anyway: screenshot your dashboard limits the day you activate.
For what it is worth, the fundamentals I judge the firm on have not moved: 80% split, USDC payouts on-chain with a $20 minimum processed inside 24 hours, no time limit, no minimum trading days, no consistency rule. The full comparison against every other on-chain firm is in the decentralized prop firm comparator, which I keep updated against the actual rulebooks rather than the landing pages.
If you are starting an evaluation under v1.0.5, going through Propr.xyz with my link gets you 5% cashback in USDC on the evaluation fee. On a $999 $100K Classic that is $50 back — roughly a Turbo $10K on the house.
And if you want the execution side handled while you keep the decisions: open Bubbles on Telegram — semi-auto DCA, TP and SL, sized off your live allowance.
FAQ
What changed in Propr rulebook v1.0.5?+
As of 27 July 2026, the maximum daily loss is a straight percentage of your start-of-day balance, recalculated every day at 00:00 UTC. It shrinks as you draw down and grows as you bank realised profit. This removes the floor introduced by v1.0.4 on 21 July, which had guaranteed the allowance could never fall below the starting-balance amount. The percentages are unchanged: 3% for both Classic and Turbo 1-Step, 5% for 2-Step.
Does a shrinking daily loss limit make the challenge harder?+
Barely, and not for the reason people assume. On a Classic 1-Step the maximum drawdown of 6% static is the binding constraint from day two onward, so a smaller daily allowance actually spends your total drawdown budget slightly more slowly. On a $10K 1-Step, two maximum-loss days under v1.0.5 cost $591 against a $600 total budget, versus exactly $600 under v1.0.4. The shrinking is a brake, not a spiral.
Does the 00:00 UTC snapshot include my open positions?+
No, and this is the trap. The snapshot is taken on balance, which is realised P&L only. If you carry a position floating -$400 through the reset, your new limit is computed from a balance that does not yet know about that loss, while the breach check runs on equity, which does. You start the day with less real room than the dashboard number implies. Floating profit is treated the same way in reverse: it gives you nothing extra.
Which format is most affected by v1.0.5?+
Turbo 1-Step, because its 3% static drawdown and its 3% daily loss limit are the same number on day one. On a $10,000 Turbo the daily equity floor and the permanent drawdown floor both sit at $9,700, so a single maximum-loss day is simultaneously your first breach. Turbo has never had room for one bad day, and v1.0.5 does not change that.
Do I need to update my bot or spreadsheet?+
Yes, if it hard-codes a dollar figure. Under v1.0.2 the limit was a constant, under v1.0.4 it was a floor, and under v1.0.5 it is a live variable recomputed from your balance every day at 00:00 UTC. Any risk engine should read the day-start balance and derive the number, not store it. Propr does not change rules retroactively, but it has rewritten this specific mechanic three times in four months.
⚠️ Source: the official Propr rulebook, changelog entry v1.0.5 dated 27 July 2026, read on 1 August 2026. Fee and limit tables transcribed from sections 2, 6, 7 and 11 the same day. Trading leveraged products carries a high risk of loss and most crypto prop firms are unregulated offshore entities. This page contains affiliate links to Propr.xyz — we earn a commission on sign-ups, at no cost to you. Nothing here is investment advice.