TX3 Futures
Three futures models — Type X, SX and GTX — and six saved files behind all three: two captures of one marketing page, and four fetches of its help centre, two addresses tried twice each, that answered 404 every time. No terms, no rules page and no legal notice for this brand is in the archive, and neither capture of the marketing page carries a footer at all. The firm points at its own rulebook with a button reading "Read the full rules" and we never pressed it, so almost everything on this row is unread — our gap rather than their silence. Its sibling FOREX brand does advertise a "Futures FAQ's" link in its footer, but a saved page preserves the text of a link and not its address, so nothing on disk proves the firm ever pointed at the two that answered 404. The one parameter card it does print is tabbed: the header "Rule Specs" is followed by two tab labels flattened onto a single line, "Evaluation Funded", and then by exactly one set of rows — so its six figures, a trailing max drawdown of $3,000 among them, belong to one stage and the page does not say which.
Three things a reader should have beside that. The catalogue lost a product while we were watching: "ONE PHASE Enhanced GTX Pro with Higher Payouts" was on sale on 28 July and gone from the selector on 1 August, while that same August page still carries six testimonials from GTX accounts under the line "Real payout stories across GTX, SX, and Type X models." Between those two captures the futures line also moved to a domain of its own, and not one page of that domain is in the archive. And who you contract with is unread on purpose: the group publishes two companies — a Delaware LLC, and a St. Lucia one whose registration number is a 2025 one — in the footer of its FOREX brand, under a sentence that scopes them itself: "The entities above are duly authorized to operate under the Tx3 Funding Global brand and trademarks." No page we hold ties either company to the futures product.
Not enough published data to simulate this firm’s floor.
We read this firm plan by plan, and its numbers are published — they live in the derived evidence on its card, not in the five-axis sieve the tiers are ranked on. The grade here is the evidence itself: three answers and a payment-promise score, each computed from the firm’s own documents with a citation behind every input. What it does not have is the hand-written scorecard a tier requires.
Graded from the evidence
Can you even pass?
—
Can you keep the money?
—
Is anyone behind it?
—
What they published
“Rule Specs
Evaluation Funded
Profit Target
None
Max Contracts
10/100
Trailing Max Drawdown
$3,000
Drawdown Mode
EOD
Consistency Rule
30%
Daily Drawdown
$0”“No hidden resets. No surprise changes. We publish exactly how drawdown, daily loss, consistency, and payouts work, in plain English.”“ONE PHASE Enhanced GTX Pro with Higher Payouts”Plan by plan
3 of this firm’s challenges were read plan by plan, with a citation behind every answer. See them side by side →
The instant-funding model, and not one figure of it is on disk: the configurator was left on the SX model in both captures, so Type X has no published price, floor, target or contract limit anywhere we could read. The only statement that reaches it is the line-wide "Judged end of day, not on intraday noise."
The only model with figures of its own, and they cannot be used. Its card prints a trailing max drawdown of $3,000, a drawdown mode of EOD, a 30% consistency rule and a daily drawdown of $0 under two tab labels the saved text flattened onto one line, so nothing on it belongs to the evaluation or to the funded account until somebody clicks each tab. The $0 is not read here as "no daily limit": the same card writes "None" five rows up, in the profit-target row, when a rule does not exist. Listed at $259 for the $100,000 account and charged at $168 under the same discount code on both days we looked.
On sale on 28 July as "ONE PHASE Enhanced GTX Pro with Higher Payouts" and off the selector by 1 August, while six testimonials on that same August page still name GTX accounts. Everything about it is unread. The phrase "with Higher Payouts" is the firm saying its split differs from the other two models, and no page says by how much.
Trustpilot
What this firm published
Everything below is quoted from a page we opened, on the date shown. The quotes are in the firm’s own language, exactly as published — never edited, never shortened, never swapped for a translation. On the Spanish edition our own rendering appears underneath each one, unquoted and marked as ours: the quotation marks on this site mean the words are the firm’s, and nothing we wrote ever wears them. Where we have not read enough to put a number on an axis, we say so instead of guessing.
—
Can you even pass?
Almost nobody who pays for an evaluation ever reaches a funded account, so this is the part of the product most customers actually buy. Every firm advertises its profit target; none of them advertises that target next to how much you are allowed to lose while chasing it.
—
Can you keep the money?
The drawdown takes the account away; the payout rules take the money. Answered by whichever of the two we can measure and is worse — they are two ways of losing the same thing, so a good half cannot pay for a bad one.
—
Is anyone behind it?
A named company, a market, and rules you could read before paying. These three do not substitute for one another — a company you can sue does not stop existing because the account is a simulation — so this is the average of the ones we could measure, not the worst.
How hard the test is
we did not read enough to sayNot the profit target on the sales page — that target measured against the room you are given to reach it.
Below 60% read we publish no number at all, because a grade computed from two facts out of six is not a lenient grade — it is a different measurement wearing the same label.
How much you must win to survive · Profit target · Days you have to finish · Trading days you must put in · A second attempt costs
Maximum loss
we did not read enough to sayThe loss limit that closes your account. Does it sit still, or does it climb behind you as you win?
What the limit is measured againstthe day's closing figure2/2
“EOD drawdown.
Judged end of day, not on intraday noise.”Decides whether a trade that dips and recovers can close an account that ended the day green.
Below 60% read we publish no number at all, because a grade computed from two facts out of six is not a lenient grade — it is a different measurement wearing the same label.
What makes the loss limit rise · Where the limit stops rising · What taking a payout does to the limit · Total loss allowed · Daily limit
Withdrawing
we did not read enough to sayHow much can leave the account, how soon, how often — and whether they can say no.
Below 60% read we publish no number at all, because a grade computed from two facts out of six is not a lenient grade — it is a different measurement wearing the same label.
Days before you can ask for money · Most one withdrawal can pay you · Does that cap rise with the account · Withdrawals before the account ends · What else a payout changes · What breaking the consistency rule costs · Can it refuse without giving a reason · Profit required before the first request · Fee charged to pay you
How hard the test is
we did not read enough to sayNot the profit target on the sales page — that target measured against the room you are given to reach it.
Below 60% read we publish no number at all, because a grade computed from two facts out of six is not a lenient grade — it is a different measurement wearing the same label.
How much you must win to survive · Profit target · Days you have to finish · Trading days you must put in · A second attempt costs
Maximum loss
we did not read enough to sayThe loss limit that closes your account. Does it sit still, or does it climb behind you as you win?
What the limit is measured againstthe day's closing figureno change2/2
“EOD drawdown.
Judged end of day, not on intraday noise.”Decides whether a trade that dips and recovers can close an account that ended the day green.
Below 60% read we publish no number at all, because a grade computed from two facts out of six is not a lenient grade — it is a different measurement wearing the same label.
What makes the loss limit rise · Where the limit stops rising · What taking a payout does to the limit · Total loss allowed · Daily limit
Withdrawing
we did not read enough to sayHow much can leave the account, how soon, how often — and whether they can say no.
Below 60% read we publish no number at all, because a grade computed from two facts out of six is not a lenient grade — it is a different measurement wearing the same label.
Days before you can ask for money · Most one withdrawal can pay you · Does that cap rise with the account · Withdrawals before the account ends · What else a payout changes · What breaking the consistency rule costs · Can it refuse without giving a reason · Profit required before the first request · Fee charged to pay you
How you may trade
Can you trade the way you actually trade — around the news, over the weekend, at the size and speed you use?
LeverageNo such thing in this plan.no change—
“Max Contracts
10/100”No score here, on purpose. The six axes above ask whether the firm can take your money or refuse to pay it. These rules ask something else — whether you can trade your way — and the right weight depends on who is reading: a minimum holding time decides the account for a scalper and is invisible to anyone else, while the weekend rule is the reverse. A single number would be wrong for half of you, and would look decided. The firm’s own sentences are here; the judgement is yours.
How hard the test is
we did not read enough to sayNot the profit target on the sales page — that target measured against the room you are given to reach it.
Below 60% read we publish no number at all, because a grade computed from two facts out of six is not a lenient grade — it is a different measurement wearing the same label.
How much you must win to survive · Profit target · Days you have to finish · Trading days you must put in · A second attempt costs
Maximum loss
we did not read enough to sayThe loss limit that closes your account. Does it sit still, or does it climb behind you as you win?
What the limit is measured againstthe day's closing figureno change2/2
“EOD drawdown.
Judged end of day, not on intraday noise.”Decides whether a trade that dips and recovers can close an account that ended the day green.
Below 60% read we publish no number at all, because a grade computed from two facts out of six is not a lenient grade — it is a different measurement wearing the same label.
What makes the loss limit rise · Where the limit stops rising · What taking a payout does to the limit · Total loss allowed · Daily limit
Withdrawing
we did not read enough to sayHow much can leave the account, how soon, how often — and whether they can say no.
Below 60% read we publish no number at all, because a grade computed from two facts out of six is not a lenient grade — it is a different measurement wearing the same label.
Days before you can ask for money · Most one withdrawal can pay you · Does that cap rise with the account · Withdrawals before the account ends · What else a payout changes · What breaking the consistency rule costs · Can it refuse without giving a reason · Profit required before the first request · Fee charged to pay you
The rules in writing
we did not read enough to sayCould you read the rule before paying, and can they change it afterwards?
Below 60% read we publish no number at all, because a grade computed from two facts out of six is not a lenient grade — it is a different measurement wearing the same label.
We have not compared their pages against each other.
Where the rule that binds you is published · Can it change the rules without notice · Is the binding document dated
The company behind it
we did not read enough to sayIf it goes wrong, which company do you claim against, and under whose laws?
Below 60% read we publish no number at all, because a grade computed from two facts out of six is not a lenient grade — it is a different measurement wearing the same label.
Almost no firm here has a financial regulator, because selling simulated evaluations is not a regulated activity anywhere. Of the 114 firms we scored by hand, 96 sat in the bottom two rungs of backing for this reason. So we do not count it against anyone — it only adds when a firm genuinely has one.
The company you contract with · Where it is registered · Its registration number · That company owns the brand · The people behind it are named
The market
we did not read enough to sayDo your orders reach a market, or is all of it a simulation?
Below 60% read we publish no number at all, because a grade computed from two facts out of six is not a lenient grade — it is a different measurement wearing the same label.
Almost none names a broker or a clearing house either, and that follows from the account being a simulation rather than being a second, separate failing. Charging for both would count one fact twice.
What the funded account is · Conditions to reach a real market
We read the rules of every plan it sells and issued a verdict on each one.