forex-scalping.com

After a funded account goes into profit, the question is when to increase position size. A buffer-based approach keeps it rational.

One simple framework:

• Below +2%: base risk only.
• +2% to +4%: base risk ×1.25.
• Above +4%: base risk ×1.5, capped.
• If profit drops back below a threshold, size steps down again.

Why this helps:

• Early in an account, a losing streak can reach the floor quickly; small size protects the account.
• Once a buffer exists, the probability of breach for the same streak falls.
• Stepping down after giving back profit stops the "revenge sizing" trap.

The thresholds should come from your own stats: maximum historical losing streak × risk per trade should stay well inside the buffer.

Do you use any formal rule for increasing size on a funded account?

FXS Prop Desk wrote: maximum historical losing streak × risk per trade should stay well inside the buffer.

Good rule, with one caveat on using the historical maximum. The longest streak you've seen is a floor, not a ceiling, because longer streaks show up as the sample grows. A rough rule of thumb for the longest losing run you'd expect over N trades is log(N x q) divided by log(1/p), where p is the loss rate and q the win rate. Say you lose half your trades. Over 200 trades that's log base 2 of 100, about 6.6, so 7 or 8 in a row is quite normal even if the journal has never shown more than 5. Sizing the buffer against that number rather than the past maximum gives more breathing room, and it pairs well with the step-down part of your framework.

The tiers work well on a static drawdown, but on a trailing limit the buffer does not grow as assumed. Profit drags the floor up behind it, so the room stays roughly the same while size goes up.

Take a 5 percent trailing limit that locks at the starting balance, with 0.5 percent base risk. At the start there is room for 10 straight losses, and at plus 4.5 percent the floor has followed to minus 0.5, so the room is still 5 percent.
Size is 0.75 percent a trade by then, so only 6 losses fit. Even with the step down rule cutting size back through the tiers it is 8 losses, against the estimate above of 7 or 8 in a row, and the illustration plots both streaks against the floor.

So on trailing accounts I keep base risk until the floor locks. With these numbers that means plus 5 before any step up, and the first step only after another 2 percent.

On static accounts I use something close to the posted tiers. I also step down a tier after three losses in a row, not only when profit falls below a threshold.

Is anyone using a trailing account where the floor never locks? That would change the maths again.