What the review is

A human check of your account history before money is released. It is standard at almost every firm on the first payout and common on every payout.

It is not an accusation. It is the point at which the rules that were never enforced automatically get enforced.

What it looks at

  • Profit distribution. Whether one day or one trade accounts for too much of the total — the consistency rule.
  • Timestamps against the news calendar. Entries or exits inside a restricted window, including resting orders that filled there. See news trading restrictions.
  • Cross-account similarity. Whether your accounts, or accounts sharing your details, traded the same instruments at the same times.
  • Hold times. Whether the average sits below any minimum the firm imposes.
  • Size consistency. Whether position sizes are broadly stable or spike on individual trades.

Check yourself first

Before requesting, do the arithmetic the reviewer will do. Take your best day, divide by total profit, and compare it to the published threshold. If your best day is 45% of the total against a 30% cap, do not request yet — keep trading normally until the distribution fits.

This is entirely within your control and it is the difference between a routine payout and a held one.

The timing insight

A large winning day is never a problem in itself. It becomes one when you request a payout while it still dominates the total. The instinct to lock in profit immediately after an exceptional session is precisely what trips the rule.

Trade on normally for a while. The same profit is worth more once the distribution around it has filled in.

If the review asks questions

Answer factually and attach evidence. If you have kept a journal with your reasoning and sizing rules, this is where it pays for itself — you can show that a large day was your normal process meeting a favourable session rather than a change in behaviour.

If you run several accounts, be ready to explain why they look similar. See managing several funded accounts.

If a rule is unquantified

Ask for the specific number being applied. A firm that reviews against an undisclosed threshold is exercising discretion, which is worth knowing about a firm you are trusting with future profit — and is why we record unquantified consistency requirements as a risk on the firm profile rather than as a neutral field.