What Really Happens When You Apply to a Top Prop Trading Firm: The Unfiltered Journey
Ever wondered how people actually get into the best proprietary trading firms? Maybe you’re tired of vague “application advice” that never tells you what the process is really like. In this article, I’m breaking down the entire journey—from sending that first email to facing (and sometimes failing) the infamous trading challenge. I’ll share actual screenshots from my own application, spill stories from friends who made it (or didn’t), and dig into the nitty gritty: what tests you’ll face, what questions they’ll ask, and what genuinely makes or breaks your shot. Plus, I’ll show you how global standards and regulations, from the US to the EU, quietly shape what prop firms require from you—even if nobody talks about it.
Behind the Scenes: How the Prop Firm Application Really Unfolds
Step 1: Researching and Choosing the Right Firm
The first time I applied to a prop firm, I made the rookie mistake of just googling “best prop firms” and firing off my resume to whoever looked cool. Bad idea! In reality, every firm has its own niche (futures, equities, FX, crypto), and their application processes reflect that. For instance, Jane Street is notorious for their math-heavy interviews, while FTMO puts you through a multi-stage trading challenge.
It helps to dig into forums like Wall Street Oasis or r/propfirmreviews to read real user stories. I remember reading one post from a guy who spent weeks prepping for Jump Trading’s logic puzzles, only to be tripped up by a basic Excel modeling test at XR Trading. Lesson: tailor your prep to the firm.
Step 2: Submitting Your Application—Don’t Just Hit ‘Send’
Most top prop firms (think: Optiver, SIG, DRW, Flow Traders) have slick online portals. Here’s a typical screen you’ll see:
They’ll want your resume, a cover letter, sometimes transcripts, and increasingly, evidence of trading experience—either real or via simulation (think MyFXBook or TraderSync links). I once got dinged because I didn’t include a trading journal; apparently, they love to see your thought process in action.
Tip: If the firm is based in the US or UK, you’ll likely need to tick boxes confirming you understand financial regulations, anti-money laundering policies, and (sometimes) GDPR compliance. This isn’t just legalese: under SEC and FCA rules, firms must vet traders, even if you’re remote.
Step 3: The Screening—Logic, Math, and “Culture” Fit
Let’s be honest: prop firms love to weed people out early. After you apply, you’ll usually get a quick logic or math test (sometimes online, sometimes proctored). I still remember the panic when I got Jane Street’s infamous “mental math” round—30 questions in 10 minutes, no calculator, and the questions started easy but turned into brain-melting probability puzzles.
Here’s a real forum screenshot of someone’s experience at Optiver:
Culture fit is a big deal, too. More than once, I’ve been blindsided by “Tell me about a time you broke the rules for a good reason.” They want to see that you’re both independent and coachable—a hard balance.
Step 4: The Trading Challenge—Where Most Applicants Wash Out
Assuming you pass the initial rounds, most firms now run a “trading challenge.” This isn’t just about making money; it’s about risk management, following rules, and sometimes even submitting daily logs. Here’s how it typically works at leading firms:
- FTMO: Simulated account, specific profit target, max daily loss rule, 30-day window. If you break any rule, you’re out—no excuses.
- Topstep: Similar, but more focused on futures and with periodic evaluations by a human coach.
- Jane Street/Jump: May use game-based platforms, or even live “trading games” in the office, often with real-time feedback.
I failed my first FTMO challenge because I got greedy and busted my daily max loss. The email I got (see below) was blunt but fair:
What’s wild is that these rules are partly shaped by compliance standards in the firm’s home country. For example, under ESMA (EU) guidelines, prop firms must monitor for market abuse, so your logs and trades are carefully reviewed.
Step 5: Final Interviews—Deep Dives and Red Flags
If you make it to the end, you’ll usually face a multi-person interview panel. This is where they grill you on your trades, risk decisions, and sometimes your understanding of market regulations (yes, seriously). I once got asked to explain the difference between “proprietary trading” and “market making” under MiFID II. If you’re not familiar, you can check the official ESMA MiFID II guide.
You may also have to sign disclosures about conflict of interest, non-compete clauses, and data privacy—these are legally binding, so read carefully.
Comparing ‘Verified Trade’ Standards Across Countries
Why do some firms ask for so much documentation, while others seem relaxed? It usually boils down to country-specific rules. Here’s a quick comparison table:
| Country/Region | Standard Name | Legal Basis | Enforcement Agency |
|---|---|---|---|
| USA | SEC Rule 15c3-1, NFA Prop Trading Rules | Securities Exchange Act | SEC, NFA, FINRA |
| EU | MiFID II, ESMA Guidelines | MiFID II Directive | ESMA, National Regulators |
| UK | FCA COBS 7, SMCR | FCA Handbook | FCA |
| Australia | ASIC Market Integrity Rules | ASIC Rules | ASIC |
| Singapore | SFA, MAS Guidelines | Securities and Futures Act | MAS |
So, if a US-based firm asks for W-9 forms and proof of prior trading, that’s because the FINRA and NFA require them to vet all associated persons. In the EU, MiFID II means you’ll often have to sign more disclosures about your trading intent and risk knowledge.
Case Study: How A Prop Firm Navigated US vs EU Standards
Let me share a real-world example. “Alex,” a friend of mine, was accepted by a mid-sized US firm while simultaneously applying to a Dutch (EU) based shop. In the US, he had to submit a background check, fingerprinting, and provide 2 years of trading logs. The Dutch firm was more relaxed on logs but grilled him on MiFID II compliance and made him complete an online test about market abuse.
I once spoke to a hiring manager at a London-based prop shop (let’s call her “Sarah”), who told me: “We’ve had candidates who could ace our trading sim, but failed because they didn’t know the basics of FCA’s SMCR regime. We can’t hire traders who don’t understand the regulations they’ll be working under—no matter how good their P&L is.”
That stuck with me. In practice, your journey can look totally different depending on which country the firm is regulated in—and how strictly they interpret the rules.
Wrapping Up: What I Wish I’d Known Before Applying
Getting into a top prop firm isn’t just about being a trading whiz. It’s a multi-layered process: researching the firm, prepping for brutal logic/math screens, surviving the trading challenge, and showing real regulatory knowledge. My biggest mistake early on? Not tailoring my approach to each firm’s regulatory environment and culture. Looking back, I wish I’d spent more time reading actual SEC and FCA rules—not just trading books.
If you’re starting your own journey, here’s my advice: pick your firms carefully, study their specific requirements, and don’t neglect the boring legal stuff. It’s not just about getting funded—it’s about proving you can thrive (and survive) in a heavily regulated, high-pressure environment. If you want to deep dive into the details, check out the OECD’s Financial Markets guidance for more on global standards.
And hey, if you screw up the first time, you’re in good company. The best prop traders I know failed a few challenges before getting in. Just dust yourself off, learn from each step, and you’ll be way ahead of most applicants who never even get past the first round.