NQ London Session LIVE | Prop Farming (Day 1)

Finance-Focused Summary

Magnus demonstrates a prop-firm strategy based on repeatedly flipping a coin to choose long or short trades in Nasdaq futures (NQ), rather than using charts or market analysis. He argues that certain simulated-account (SIM) rules and payout structures can make this approach profitable in expectation. These are his claims and calculations; the stream does not independently verify them.

Strategy and Setup

• Instrument and session: NQ futures during the London session. Magnus says the approach could also be used in New York, while he avoids Asia because spreads are wider.
• Direction: Google’s coin-flip simulator determines the trade: heads means long; tails means short.
• Entry: He uses NinjaTrader’s “join bid” and “join ask” buttons to seek better fills than market orders. He notes that market buys execute at the ask and market sells at the bid, so spreads and commissions affect results.
• Orders and risk: He uses bracket orders with a take-profit target but, in the main example, no separate stop-loss. The account’s maximum drawdown acts as the loss limit. He describes accounts as separate “trades” and generally trades one account at a time to avoid correlated losses or hedging.
• Account selection: For the Tradeify example, he chose a 50K Select plan, citing the absence of a daily loss limit. He used four E-mini contracts in the initial example and discussed using fewer contracts for smaller winning-day targets.
• Tracking: He says he plans to record account purchases, resets, expenses, and income in a public spreadsheet.

Rules, Figures, and Calculations

• Starting bankroll: He said the project began with $5,000.
• Tradeify example: He described a $3,000 profit target, a 40% consistency rule, and a requirement to make profits over three days. He aimed for about $1,000 per day to meet the consistency requirement.
• With four minis, he calculated that $1,000 required 12.5 NQ points. At four ticks per point, that is 50 ticks; he added two ticks for commissions, targeting 52 ticks. He cited a Tradeify NQ round-trip cost of $5.76 and a typical London spread of about 1.25 points.
• Using a $2,000 maximum drawdown as the loss boundary and a $1,000 target, he calculated a 66.7% chance of hitting the target first, then about 29.6% of hitting three such targets consecutively. He conservatively used 25% for the account-passing estimate.
• He estimated an account purchase at $107.25 after discounts and resets at $99, then calculated an expected pass cost of $404.25. The pricing and arithmetic are not fully consistent throughout the stream.
• After passing, he modeled risking a $2,000 buffer on a 50/50 outcome: either gain $2,000 or lose $2,000. For subsequent $150 winning days, he estimated roughly a 75% chance of reaching four more winning days, then a balance of $2,600. Assuming a 50% withdrawal limit and 90% payout split, he calculated a $1,170 payout.
• He further claimed the model produced positive expected value—about $34.50 per attempt—and an ROI above 100% by a later payout. These results rely on his assumptions about account rules, fees, payout eligibility, independence of outcomes, and probabilities. The stream’s calculations contain apparent inconsistencies and should not be treated as verified performance.
• He said a normal account might cost around $100 and suggested—only as his personal rule of thumb—having a bankroll equal to about 10 times the account cost. He also said he once started with a few hundred dollars.
• Reported stream activity: He described the session as costing nearly $1,000 by the end, including purchases and resets. Some accounts hit targets and others were lost or reset; no payout or completed account pass was confirmed during the stream.
• Other self-reported results: Magnus said he had made over $100,000 from prop-firm trading in roughly a year and estimated total payouts above $200,000, while noting that expenses and taxes were not fully calculated. For his separate, non-experiment trading, he cited roughly 150 trades over about 1.5 years and a 47–48% win rate at 2R, trading about twice a week, mainly in New York. These are self-reported figures.

Risks, Cautions, and Prop-Firm Context

• Magnus explicitly said, “This is not financial advice.”
• The experiment uses simulated prop-firm accounts, not ordinary personal brokerage accounts. Account fees, drawdown rules, payout limits, consistency requirements, and firm discretion are central to his thesis.
• He acknowledges that full-drawdown trading can lose an account, that several accounts can be lost in succession, and that the approach can be mentally difficult. He says he prefers it for speed and volume, not because it is low risk.
• He warns that firms may change plans or prices, restrict accounts, or move traders to live accounts. He said he had been banned or restricted by several firms after SIM profits; he also described rules and payout practices that he considers unfavorable.
• He argues that traders who use a genuine, tested edge may improve their odds, but the stream’s coin-flip experiment deliberately does not use one. He cautions that many traders overestimate their edge and may increase risk after losses.
• The claimed profitability depends on the specific plan and its terms; Magnus says consistency rules and pricing can change the calculation. His descriptions of firms’ rules and payouts are not independently verified.

Assets, Instruments, Firms, and Platforms Mentioned

• Instrument: Nasdaq futures (NQ); E-mini and micro contracts are discussed. ES is mentioned in a platform demonstration, not as the instrument traded in the experiment.
• Payment asset and network: USDC on Arbitrum; MetaMask is used for wallet and payment tracking.
• Prop firms and plans: Tradeify, Lucid/Lucid Max, Alpha, My Funded Futures (also called MFU/MFF in the subtitles), Topstep, TPT, and Funded Seat.
• Platforms and tools: NinjaTrader, TradingView, Google’s coin-flip simulator, and a Google Sheet.

Presenter and sources mentioned: Magnus, from MAGNUS_FUTURES, is the presenter. The video refers to the prop firms and trading platforms listed above; no independent research source is cited.