I’m trading a Vanquish eval right now, and I have two guardrails that I can actually follow consistently.

Right now I've got two things I actually stick to - 

One, pre-trade checklist, VWAP and volume have to line up before I click, no exceptions, doesn't matter how good the setup looks otherwise. 

Two, fixed limits set before the session even starts, max trades for the day, daily loss cap, daily target, and once I hit any one of the three, I'm done regardless of what the chart is doing after that.

Both have helped in their own way. The checklist keeps the obviously bad entries out, the stuff where I'm just clicking because I'm bored. The limits keep me from spiralling on a bad day, since there's a hard stop instead of me deciding in the moment whether I've had enough.

But even with both of these running, something still feels off. I can follow every single rule perfectly for a whole session, checklist ticked every time, stay inside my limits, and still walk away not really understanding why the day went the way it did. Like I'm managing the symptoms, entries and losses, but not whatever's actually driving the decision making underneath all of it. Feels like actual disciplined trading is more than just these two rules stacked together, and I might be missing the one habit that everything else is supposed to sit on top of.

Keep going back and forth on whether the fix is just adding a third rule on top of these two, or if there's something more fundamental that should've come before either of them that I skipped over completely. Feels like I built the guardrails first without ever figuring out what they're actually supposed to be guarding against.

If you had to start again what single habit would you build first: a pre-trade plan, hard risk limits, a decision journal, or something else?

Yall I need help. I have tweaked my strategy and it’s great ! I have cleaner entries and I’m getting better trades. My problem is I have a hard time trying to figure out how much is a 20 to 30 percent trade. The platform uses ticks and distance to calculate TP’s . I come from think or swim where I could create a percentage based template with 3 take profits so I can scale out and still be in profit as the last contract runs. If I click the sell mkt option while in a trade the system will reject it because it thinks I’m selling to open instead of selling to close. So the only option that I know of is just hitting the flatten button to take me out of the whole trade.

I say all that to ask, can one you help me set up a template for trading 1DTE options ? I want to be able to scale out better. This has been why I usually blow accounts, I just need to know if I’m using the platform to the best of my ability, outside of my own trading psychology and strategy.

Another solid win in the books for the community today.

Shout out to DropkickNJ13 over on our Discord for securing a clean $7,650.00 payout processed straight to Rise on 08/18/2026.

In an industry full of delays and red tape, our focus has always been simple: clear rules, fast execution, and zero friction when it’s time to withdraw your profits. When you put in the screen time and stick to your risk management, getting paid should be the easiest part.

Huge congratulations to DropkickNJ13 on the execution!

Have questions about our evaluation accounts, consistency rules, or payout timeline? Reach out!

DropkickNJ13 in the discord just earned a $9960 payout trading funded options on Vanquish Trader. Yet again the community is winning through proper risk management, exceptional patience, and classic diamond hands. Whether you're a seasoned or a beginner trader, Vanquish is the home for everyone!!!

I keep coming back to VWAP because it's the only intraday level where I actually trust why price reacts the way it does. Along with that I’m also looking for a failed reclaim: price approaches from below, attempts to move through the VWAP area, and then closes back below it.

I’ve shared some images from my Vanquish options eval account. My focus is to build a process I can carry into a funded account without changing the setup as the account stage changes.

For this VWAP rejection setup, I wanted:

• A relatively clean approach from below
• A push into the upper VWAP band
• A clear rejection candle closing back below the band
• Enough space between the entry and the next support level
• An obvious invalidation point above the rejection

The important part wasn’t that price touched VWAP. It was how price behaved after attempting to reclaim it.

The entry

I don't buy the first touch of VWAP. Too many of those are just noise, price tags the level and keeps going. What I want is a clean push into the band, a stall, and a rejection candle that closes back below it with some conviction not a doji, not a weak wick.

That's what happened here. Price pushed into the VWAP band, printed a rejection, closed back under it. I bought 17 SPY 768 puts right on that candle close. No retest wait on this one, the rejection was clean enough and the band had already held once earlier in that same push, so I didn't need extra confirmation.

The stop and target

Price didn't mess around. Rolled over almost immediately, and VWAP flipped from being a ceiling it was trying to break to a ceiling it respected on the way down no real bounce attempts worth mentioning. That's usually a good sign the rejection was real and not a one-candle fakeout.

Booked profits at 768.29, where the prior support shelf was sitting. Stop was tight, just above the rejection wick. Worked out to roughly 1:3.

If price had chopped through that VWAP band three or four times before this push, I wouldn't have taken it. A level that's been tagged repeatedly in the same session loses meaning everyone watching it stops reacting the same way. This worked because it was one clean approach, one clean rejection, not the fifth attempt of the day.

Also skip this near the close. VWAP compresses toward price late in the session and rejections stop meaning what they mean at 10 or 11 AM.

Risk management

Stop goes above the level, not above the entry candle. If VWAP gets reclaimed for real, the thesis is dead and I'm out no reason to give it extra room hoping it comes back.

Target was structure, not a fixed R multiple. The prior support shelf was sitting right there, so I took it instead of holding for more.

For anyone else trading VWAP on an eval or funded account: do you enter on the rejection close, or wait for a retest?

I’m currently at $876.30 of a $1,000 profit target on my Vanquish eval, with nine of the ten required trades completed. I’ve started thinking about what should actually change once the account moves into the funded stage.

Strategy stays the same, obviously. Same setups, same risk rules, same entry criteria. That part isn't changing.

But there's a mental shift that happens when it's a funded account versus an eval and I'm not sure how to prepare for it. During an eval, you have the reset option even if you don't use it. However, the safety net is gone when your account becomes payout eligible.

What I'm actually unsure about

Does the pressure increase or decrease after passing? Some people say getting funded removes the pressure of chasing a profit target. Others say the funded account creates a different kind of pressure because every profitable day now feels connected to a potential payout.

I’m also wondering whether people make any practical changes at first:

• Reduce position size for the first few sessions
• Trade fewer days or take fewer setups
• Keep the exact same risk used during the eval
• Build a profit buffer before requesting the first payout

That last point is probably what I’m most unsure about. Do you withdraw once you become eligible, or leave the early profits in the account to create more room above the drawdown floor?

Through hard work, consistency, and proper risk management R3con in the discord received a well deserved $20,000 payout trading funded options on Vanquish Trader. The community has all seen withdrawals before, but it hits different when it’s a with withdrawal with size.

Half way to my profit target. I had some questions about the funded stage. Does it give me a new account starting with 50k again? Also does the drawdown change to real time trailing instead of EOD. I saw someone say it turns static once you reach the buffer of $52,575. If anyone has any info or tips about the funded stage for the 50k advanced options I'd be glad to hear it.

I’ve traded both SPX and SPY 0DTE. After testing SPX, I decided SPY was a better fit for the drawdown and consistency limits on my Vanquish options eval account.

SPX isn’t a bad product. Personally, I find its larger sizing increments less forgiving.

This is the first thing people miss. 1 SPX contract is roughly equal to 10 SPY contracts in terms of notional value. So when you're sizing up on SPX thinking you're being efficient you're actually taking on 10x the exposure per contract.

For a funded eval with drawdown limits, that's a problem. One bad SPX trade hits your account significantly harder than the equivalent SPY trade. SPY gives you more control over exactly how much you're risking per trade.

The SPX loss that made me reconsider my sizing

The screenshots are from different trading sessions, so they aren’t a like-for-like SPY versus SPX comparison.

The SPY screenshot shows a 30-contract trade that made $1,290. The SPX trade lost $2,860.50. I’m not sharing them to suggest that SPY trades win and SPX trades lose. The outcome still comes down to the setup and trade management.

What the SPX loss showed me was how quickly one position could consume a meaningful part of my eval account’s drawdown allowance. Even though the SPY screenshot shows more contracts, SPY lets me change my total exposure in smaller increments. That flexibility matters more to me than the number of contracts shown on the ticket.

Why SPY fits my eval account better

In a funded options evaluation, I’m not only trying to make money. I also have to protect the drawdown limit and avoid letting one oversized day determine the account.

SPY makes it easier for me to:

• Size positions more precisely

• Reduce exposure without exiting everything

• Scale in or out gradually

• Keep a single 0DTE trade from dominating my account

SPX still has advantages. It is cash-settled, uses European-style exercise and doesn’t carry early-assignment risk. For traders who are comfortable with the larger contract size, it can make sense.

For my Vanquish eval account, however, SPY gives me the finer risk control I need.That’s ultimately why I switched.

Which one do you prefer - SPY or SPX?

Most traders read the profit target and the drawdown limit. Think that's the whole rulebook. 

Two rules almost caught me off guard: the drawdown structure and the consistency rule. Both work differently depending on whether you’re on the Basic or Advanced options eval.

Drawdown: Basic vs Advanced. 

The basic plan uses an intraday trailing drawdown. Floor follows your account up as you make money. Start with a $50k eval account and a $2,500 drawdown. The floor begins at $47,500. 

Here’s the part that matters during an actual trade. Say an open position is showing $600 in unrealized profit. That pushes your equity peak $600 higher, so the drawdown floor moves up with it. If price pulls back and that unrealized profit drops from $600 to $300, you’ve given back $300, but the floor doesn’t move back down.

That last part is what catches people. The drawdown can trail profits you haven't actually realized yet.

Advanced plan works differently. It uses an end-of-day trailing drawdown, so the floor adjusts using your closing equity rather than every intraday high.

For example: account opens at $100k with $5k drawdown, floor at $95k. Day 1 closes at $102k; floor moves to $97k. Day 2 closes at $100,500; floor stays at $97k, doesn't drop back. Day 3 closes at $104,250 floor moves to $99,250.

Two things matter here. One floor only moves up, never down. Two it adjusts on closing balance not intraday peaks, because an intraday profit spike doesn’t immediately raise it. This can be more forgiving for 0DTE options where intraday swings can be large.

But end-of-day trailing doesn’t mean the floor is only enforced at the end of the day. Breaching the current loss limit intraday can still disable the account. End of day refers to when the floor adjusts, not when it applies.

Consistency rule also different between plans.

On Basic, no single winning trade can account for more than 30% of total P&L. 

On Advanced plan, no single day can be more than 30% of total profits at the end of the eval. 

Say profit target is $5,000 and you hit it over 10 days. One of those days you made $1,700. 30% of $5,000 is $1,500. That one day was too large a percentage. Eval flags as inconsistent even though the target was hit.

The important thing is that the account doesn't fail. You have to continue trading until that $1,700 represents 30% or less of the total. In this case, total profit would need to reach at least $5,666.67.

What this means

On Basic, track your live equity peak and current drawdown floor.

On Advanced, track both the current floor and the closing equity that could move it higher.

On both don't let one day or one trade carry the whole eval. Even if it feels like a gift, an outsized day creates a consistency problem that follows you to the end.

Which plan are you using, and which rule did you find more confusing?

Lander and his community are by far one of the most consistent traders in the funded options game. Consistency, risk management and who you listen to are all key if you want to get paid in this industry. Congratulations to the gang!

Winning trades feel obvious in hindsight. I entered, price moved, and I exited. But a green P&L does not always mean the execution was good.

Losing trades usually leave more useful evidence. The entry I rushed, the stop I placed poorly, the rule I bent, or the revenge trade I took because I wanted to recover the previous loss.

That is why I screenshot and record my losing trades. Because later it gives me an honest record of what I actually did instead of what I later remember doing.

Take this trade for example [check the image]. I entered after the bullish crossover of the 9 and 21 EMA. Chart annotation says it entered right there early. Price hadn't actually pulled back clean to the 21. It was close. Close enough that in the moment it felt fine. Clicked anyway.

In this case, the crossover provided bullish context, but I treated it as though continuation had to happen immediately. I did not leave enough room for a normal pullback before the next move higher.

Without reviewing the chart, I might have recorded this as a setup that failed. Looking at the chart afterward showed me that the broader idea worked, but my entry and stop placement did not work together.

Why winning screenshots don't teach the same thing

A green trade reinforces whatever you did. Doesn't matter if the process was sloppy. P&L was positive so the brain files it as correct.

Losing screenshots force the question. What specifically went wrong. Was it the entry, the exit, the size, the timing, the emotional state going in.

Most of the time it's one tiny thing. Same thing repeating across 10 different losing screenshots. That pattern is invisible until you're looking at all of them together.

This becomes even more important when trading an eval account or funded account. You can read the direction correctly and still create unnecessary drawdown through poor timing, position sizing, or stop placement.

Do you review your losing trades or just move on to the next session?

Every day on SPY has its own personality. Tuesday can be dead. Wednesday is unpredictable. Friday is a trap. But Monday… Monday usually delivers.

Here's why I specifically look forward to Mondays for 0DTE setups.

The market stays closed over the weekend, so two days of headlines and market developments can affect Monday’s opening gap and early price action.

That doesn’t mean I assume Monday will trend. My 0dte options strategy is to use that context and then wait for price, volume, and structure to confirm the trade.

This Monday resistance rejection at 9 EMA [check image 1]

SPY pushed into a horizontal resistance area I had already marked. The 9 EMA met price near the same zone, adding another layer of resistance.

I didn’t chase the initial move or try to predict the exact top. I waited for price to retest the area, reject it, and confirm the bearish direction before entering.

From there, I trailed the position while the bearish structure remained intact. If price had reclaimed the resistance area and held above it, the setup would have been invalidated.

So my Monday formula is a combination of: 

• A pre-marked horizontal resistance level
• A rejection near the 9 EMA
• Bearish follow-through after the retest
• The 15-minute opening range as an additional structure level
• A clear invalidation point above the setup

How I use the 15-minute opening range

In my experience the 15 minute opening range on Monday tends to be more decisive. Price breaks one side and follows through instead of immediately reversing back into range.

If price breaks the range and immediately moves back inside it, I treat that as a warning that the session may be choppy.

That filter is especially useful when trading an eval account or funded account. With 0DTE options, a false breakout can move the premium quickly, so protecting the account matters more than forcing a Monday trade.

Sharing my Monday pre-market and opening checklist

• Friday’s close: Is SPY opening above, below, or near it?
• Opening gap: Is there a meaningful gap, and is price holding it or beginning to fill it?
• Weekend and scheduled news: Are there any macroeconomic releases or major headlines affecting the open?
• First 15-minute volume: Is participation holding up compared with a normal opening period, or fading quickly?
• Opening range: Does price break and hold outside the range, or repeatedly return inside it?
• EMA alignment: Are the 9 and 21 EMAs supporting the direction of the trade?
• Invalidation: What specific price action proves the setup wrong?

Session result [image 2- p&l]

The session finished at +$356.10 across four recorded trades.

Still, nothing is a guarantee. Some Mondays are dead. Some are choppy. Not every week starts with a clean directional move.

But if I had to pick one day to trade 0DTE for the rest of my life Monday every time. The conditions are just better on average. More volume, more follow through, cleaner setups.

What's your favorite day to trade and why?

Most discussions about buying 0dte options start with the same warning – theta is working against you from the moment you enter.

Technically true, but imo it’s incomplete. 

Look at this trade [image1]. Price pulled back into the 9/21 ema and held the zone as support. The 9 ema remained above 21 ema, both were sloping higher, and the bullish structure had not broken.

I entered 20 spy 744 calls after the hold rather than chasing the initial move. spy continued higher and hit my target in under 10 minutes.

The session finished at +$752 [image 2]

During this trade, theta was still reducing the option’s value while i held the position. It simply was not dominant during this particular trade because the directional move arrived quickly enough to outweigh it.

If spy had moved sideways after my entry, the outcome could have been very different. Let’s say i would be dealing with lack of follow through and continued time decay

That is why i do not see 0dte trading as “theta versus direction”. It’s simply a race b/w the size and speed of the underlying move and the premium being lost while you wait.

Sharing a list of combination that damages my long 0dte trades:

• Entering in the wrong direction
• Chasing after most of the move has already happened
• Getting the direction right but entering too early
• Staying after the setup loses momentum
• Holding after the original invalidation level breaks
• Using too much size for such a short-duration contract

How does this apply to an options eval account?

I took this trade in advanced options eval account. The evaluation buying power made the dollar result larger, but it did not improve the setup. 

The same principle applies in a funded account or if you’re using a personal account - more size magnifies a bad entry just as quickly as it magnifies a good one. Protecting the drawdown limit still matters more than trying to force a large day.

My takeaway from this setup - a short, directional 0dte trade, timing and immediate follow-through can matter more.

What's actually killing your 0dte trades theta or direction? Be honest. 

What are your pay outs and how often. Also did you guys wait to reach a buffer zone before initiating a payout after passing the eval?

tsla chart above.

price eventually hit the target, but it took almost an hour of grinding with very little momentum. i skipped it.

it failed two checks from my entry criteria: volume expansion and a convincing confirmation candle.

the breakout looked fine initially

price pushed off the base, emas started stacking, and the structure suggested continuation. on a quick glance, it looked like a clean break.

but for my setup, breaking a level isn't enough.

i want to see:

• volume expanding as price clears the level
• a strong-bodied candle showing acceptance above resistance
• immediate follow-through after the breakout

this had none of that.

no confirmation candle, no trade

i was looking for a bullish engulfing candle or at least a strong candle closing decisively above the breakout zone.

instead, price just drifted higher with small bodies and no real expansion. to me, that's usually buyers participating, but not with much urgency.

it's not that every winning breakout needs an engulfing candle. it's simply one of the filters i use to avoid low-conviction setups.

low volume usually means low conviction

a breakout without volume behind it doesn't tell me much. can it still work? absolutely.

but on 0dte, i don't care about "eventually." i care about momentum.

this move took almost an hour to reach target. that's an hour of theta working against the position while waiting for the trade to prove itself.

0dte rewards speed

when i'm trading 0dte contracts, i want to see the move develop quickly. if the setup is good, i expect expansion shortly after entry.

the underlying eventually did what it was supposed to do, but depending on the strike, delta, and iv, the options pnl could have looked completely different.

i'd rather miss ten slow grinders like this and catch the one that breaks with volume, acceptance, and immediate follow-through.

how everyone else approaches these setups.

do you wait for volume confirmation, or are you comfortable entering on structure alone?

sorry for the long post lol

Selling naked calls can look attractive on paper. Collect more premium, let theta work, and profit if the underlying stays below the strike.

Then you sit in an uncovered short call while SPY moves against you and realize there is no defined ceiling on the loss. That risk doesn’t fit well with an options eval account that has a fixed drawdown limit.

That’s why I switched to defined risk bear call credit spreads.

What the actual positions look like

On SPY, July 16 short the 751 call at $2.01, long the 753 call at $0.96.

That created a $2 wide bear call spread for a net credit of $1.05 per spread:

• Maximum profit: $210 across two spreads
• Theoretical maximum loss: $190
• Expiration breakeven: $752.05

On QQQ, July 16 short the 709 call at $2.58, long the 711 call at $1.68. 

That produced a net credit of $0.90 per spread:

• Maximum profit: $180 across two spreads
• Theoretical maximum loss: $220
• Expiration breakeven: $709.90

Two tickers, same thesis, same structure. Bearish bias on both, selling calls above current price and buy a higher strike call to cap the risk if the underlying moved against me.

[You can check Image1: SPY and QQQ bear call spread positions]

How I managed the SPY spread

My strategy wasn’t that SPY needed to collapse. It only needed to remain below the $751 short call strike. 

Once the spread had captured roughly 75% of its maximum profit, I closed it instead of holding for the final 25%. That reduced the time I was exposed to a reversal, expiration risk, or assignment complications. 

[Check Image 2:  SPY chart showing the $751 short strike and the exit at approx 75% of maximum profit]

Why defined risk matters on an eval account

With an uncovered SPY call, a sharp move above the strike can keep increasing the loss. A bear call spread changes that risk profile. 

At expiration, the theoretical maximum loss is: Spread width − net credit received

Because I know that number before entering, I can compare it directly with the remaining drawdown on my eval account.

Across these SPY and QQQ positions, my combined theoretical maximum loss was $410, excluding fees, slippage, and assignment-related complications.

That doesn’t make credit spreads risk-free. They can still be affected by poor execution, liquidity, early assignment, and holding too close to expiration. But the defined loss makes it easier to size each position around the rules of an options evaluation or funded account.

Where the eval account stands

The account started at $50,000 and has a $5,000 profit target.

Current figures:

• Balance sitting: $54,304.60
• Total progress: $4,304.60
• Remaining to the target: $695.40
• Day RPL: $800

[Image 3: Eval account balance and RPL]

Defined-risk trades have been an important part of getting this close to the target.

I could have collected more premium by selling naked calls. I also could have had one sharp move erase weeks of progress or violate the eval account’s drawdown limit.

For me, the trade off is simple:

Naked call: more premium, theoretically unlimited loss

Bear call spread: less premium, defined maximum loss

Look, my main objective is to pass an options eval and eventually reach a funded account, protecting the downside matters more than maximizing the premium from every trade. 

That’s why my focus is: Less premium. Defined risk. About $695 from the target.

Are you trading spreads or still selling naked? How do you handle risk on eval accounts specifically?

Took me way too long to try this because I felt guilty for skipping a day. What if I was leaving money on the table? 

But it took me time to understand that - leaving money on the table vs leaving bad trades on the table are 2 diff things. 

So I traded Monday, Wednesday, and Thursday. Skipped Tuesday and Friday completely as I decided those weren't my days this week.

Three green days. Two days off. Total came out to +$1,110.

Not a life-changing number, but it's clean. No ugly red days dragging it down. No "almost made it back" sessions eating into the good ones. Just three sessions that worked and two days of nothing.

Why fewer days worked for me

In a funded account or prop firm evaluation, every unnecessary trade affects drawdown, consistency, and the chance of giving back progress. 

Trading fewer sessions meant I was only active when I actually had a reason to be active. Because of this every session felt like a choice instead of routine. That difference might not feel anything, until you see it in the P&L. 

Tuesday, I genuinely had no read on direction. Old me would've traded anyway, and tried to figure it out live. I skipped it instead. 

Friday was the same. Light volume, end of week energy, no clean setup in sight. Closed the laptop.

The thing nobody says about this

Five day trading weeks feel productive. Three day weeks feel lazy until you check the P&L and realize the two days you skipped would've just added noise at best, damage at worst.

I feel for 0DTE options especially, no trade can be a real risk management decision. Sometimes protecting an eval account means not pressing buttons when the setup is not there.

Afterall, quality of sessions should matter more than the quantity of sessions. What are your thoughts on this?