Strategy styles · Mean reversion
Can a mean-reversion strategy pass Audacity Capital?
Often, but the rules decide it. On Audacity Capital Ability Challenge, our sample mean-reversion trader passed 69% of attempts and went on to a first payout in 65%. That ranks Audacity Capital 12th of 46 firms with a challenge for this style; the middle challenge across all firms is 61%. The sample has a real edge built in, so read this as how Audacity Capital's rules treat the style, not as your own odds.
Audacity Capital accounts with a mean-reversion strategy
| Account | Type | Pass chance | Pass and get paid | Best risk a trade | Days | Most common way it failed | Target | Daily loss | Max loss |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ability Challenge | 2-step | 69% | 65% | 0.75% | 116 | Hit the maximum loss | 10% / 5% | 5% | 10% static |
"Pass and get paid" is the share of attempts that passed every phase and then reached a first payout without breaking a rule. Days are trading days. Rules checked 8 Nov 2026; full rules on the Audacity Capital page.
Audacity Capital's rules suit this style better than most. When the sample failed on Audacity Capital Ability Challenge, it was most often because it hit the maximum loss.
The sample mean-reversion trader
Our sample wins 58.3% of its trades, each winner is 0.8 times the risk, each loser is the full risk, and it takes about two trades a day: an average of 0.05R profit per trade, where R is the amount risked. Many small wins and fewer, larger losses. The curve looks smooth until a losing day takes back a week. More on the sample and how it does across all firms.
Audacity Capital rules to watch with a mean-reversion strategy
We have not recorded Audacity Capital's rules on open losses yet, and they are not in the pass figures above. Check Audacity Capital's own rules before you buy.
- It is tested here with a fixed stop
- Every loss in our sample is the planned risk and no more. Mean reversion without a stop, or adding to a losing trade, is a different and far riskier thing: one trend day can end the account.
- Open-loss rules
- Trades that go against you before coming back are where open-loss limits bite. Some firms count the loss while the trade is still open.
- Daily loss limit
- Two or more trades a day means losses can stack up inside one day.
Other styles at Audacity Capital
| Style | Best account | Pass chance | Pass and get paid |
|---|---|---|---|
| Breakout | Ability Challenge | 64% | 59% |
| Trend following | Ability Challenge | 73% | 67% |
| Mean reversion (this one) | Ability Challenge | 69% | 65% |
| Scalping | Ability Challenge | 49% | 42% |
| Swing trading | Ability Challenge | 88% | 85% |
| Opening range breakout | Ability Challenge | 76% | 71% |
| Day trading | Ability Challenge | 50% | 41% |
| High win rate | Ability Challenge | 86% | 83% |
| Low win rate | Ability Challenge | 59% | 52% |
| Position trading | Ability Challenge | 84% | 80% |
| Grid and martingale | Ability Challenge | 33% | 29% |
Firms whose rules suit this style better
- FTUK Flex Challenge: 81% passed
- Bullwaves Prime 1-Step 100K: 74% passed Caution
- Instant Funding One-Phase Pro: 74% passed
Ranked on the rules alone. It says nothing about how reliably a firm pays: see payout reports and each firm's page.
How this was worked out
Each style is a made-up sample trader, not a real track record. We set the figures so that every sample makes the same average profit: 0.1 times its risk per trading day, about 2R a month. They differ only in shape: how often they win, how big the winners are and how many trades they take. That way a difference between two styles comes from how the rules treat the shape, not from one sample simply being better. The exception is the grid and martingale sample, which has no edge at all: adding to losing trades changes the shape of the results but cannot create an edge.
Each sample was run 1,000 times against each account's published rules, at nine trade sizes from 0.13% to 1% of the account, and we show the size that did best. It is the same engine as the test centre. How the simulation works.
What this leaves out. Every sample but that one has a real edge and never breaks its own rules, which is why these figures are far higher than the share of real traders who pass. There are no spreads, commissions, swaps or slippage. Every winner and loser is the same size. And it only tests the rules in the table: profit targets, loss limits, trading days, time limits, consistency and payout terms, not rules on news, weekends or hold times. A strategy with no edge fails everywhere, whatever its style.
Questions
Can a mean-reversion strategy pass Audacity Capital?
Often, but the rules decide it. On Audacity Capital Ability Challenge, our sample mean-reversion trader passed 69% of attempts and went on to a first payout in 65%. That ranks Audacity Capital 12th of 46 firms with a challenge for this style; the middle challenge across all firms is 61%. The sample has a real edge built in; a strategy without one fails at any firm.
Which Audacity Capital account is best for a mean-reversion strategy?
PropPassCheck tracks one Audacity Capital account, Audacity Capital Ability Challenge.
How much should I risk per trade at Audacity Capital with a mean-reversion strategy?
For our sample the best size on Audacity Capital Ability Challenge was 0.75% of the account per trade, and a typical pass took 116 trading days. Your own best size depends on your win rate and losing runs, so test your own trades.
Test your own trades
These are samples. Your strategy has its own win rate, its own losing runs and its own costs. Upload a backtest or trade history and PropPassCheck replays it 2,000 times against each Audacity Capital account and every other firm, and shows your own chance of passing and of a first payout. It runs in your browser; nothing is uploaded.