Prop firm slippage and the evaluation that was too real

[Amanhasnoname]

Evaluations tend to feel like demo accounts, but some firms apply real market conditions, including slippage and spread widening. Others use idealized fills during the challenge and tighter or looser conditions on funded accounts.

The difference affects scalpers more than anyone. A strategy that passes with clean fills might fail when slippage appears after the funded stage begins.

Asking the firm directly about execution during evaluation versus funded phases is reasonable. Reading community reports on fill quality is another source, though they vary in reliability.

When a funded account starts, tracking slippage from the first trade shows whether the model matches. If the numbers differ from the evaluation phase, the strategy may need recalibrating.

Also look at how the firm handles news and rollover spreads, since those are the moments where trouble tends to appear.

Fees, profit splits, and drawdown rules all interact with execution costs, so the full economics need to be considered, not just the price of the challenge.

How did the funded account's execution compare with the evaluation phase?