FundedNext Margin & Leverage Changes 2026: What the Removed 70% Rule Really Means for Traders

Blown accounts rarely come from bad trade ideas alone. More often, a trader gets the direction right, sizes the position wrong, and gets stopped out by a rule they didn't fully understand—not by the market. Margin usage limits have been one of the quieter causes of that problem at prop firms, and in mid-2026 FundedNext removed one of the best-known versions of it: the 70% Margin Rule.

This article breaks down what the rule was, what changed, who it affects, and how FundedNext's new approach compares to the fixed-leverage model used by other firms in the industry.

What Was the FundedNext 70% Margin Rule?

How did the original 70% margin usage rule work on FundedNext accounts?

The 70% margin rule capped how much of a trader's available margin could be in use at any one time on a FundedNext CFD account. If cumulative margin usage across open positions crossed the 70% threshold, the account recorded a violation.

Depending on the account's risk tier, breaching this limit could trigger a warning, a reduction in profit share on the trades involved, or, on repeat violations, account termination.

A related, stricter version applied to accounts using the 1% risk setting: those accounts carried a lower 30% margin usage ceiling. The rule was designed as a risk-management backstop, separate from the firm's per-trade risk limits, intended to stop traders from stacking too many large positions at once even if each individual trade technically complied with other rules.

Which account types were subject to the rule before removal?

Based on public information, the 70% margin rule applied across FundedNext's CFD account lineup, including Stellar 2-Step, Stellar 1-Step, and related evaluation and funded accounts.

FundedNext Futures accounts operate under a separate rule set and were not governed by this particular margin cap.

The July 2026 Policy Change Explained

What exactly did FundedNext announce, and when did it take effect?

According to FundedNext's own announcement, the 70% Margin Rule was removed effective immediately in early July 2026, applying to both existing and new accounts.

The firm also removed the Margin Usage Card from the trader dashboard, the interface element that had previously tracked usage against the 70% threshold in real time.

Does the removal apply to existing accounts with prior violations, or only new signups?

Per FundedNext's announcement, the change applied retroactively within the current trading cycle.

All margin-rule violations and warnings logged during the active cycle were cleared from trader accounts. FundedNext also stated that no profit deductions tied to those violations would be applied—traders keep profits that had previously been at risk of a haircut under the old rule.

The same retroactive clearing applied to the 30% margin threshold on 1%-risk accounts.

Impact on Existing Margin Violations and Profits

What happens to traders who had active 70% or 30% margin warnings before the change?

Traders who were sitting on a current-cycle warning or violation under either the 70% or 30% thresholds had those flags cleared automatically, based on FundedNext's published update.

There is no indication that traders need to take any action themselves—the firm describes the clearing as automatic and system-wide.

Are previously withheld or deducted profits affected by the reversal?

FundedNext stated that profits are not subject to deduction because of margin-rule violations going forward, and that this protection extends to violations already recorded in the current cycle.

Traders with questions about a specific historical payout should confirm directly with FundedNext support, since public statements describe the general policy rather than individual account outcomes.

What Replaces the 70% Rule - Leverage and Risk Framework in 2026

Is there a new margin or leverage ceiling, or is usage now unrestricted?

There is no formal margin usage percentage cap replacing the removed rule, based on currently available information.

FundedNext has framed this as removing a rigid enforcement mechanism rather than removing the underlying risk-management principle. The firm continues to recommend traders operate within a 20%–30% margin usage range as a matter of discipline, even though breaching that range no longer triggers an automatic penalty.

How does the 3% per-trade risk limit interact with the removed margin cap?

FundedNext's separate 3% open-risk limit on funded CFD accounts remains active and unaffected by this change.

The two rules addressed different things: the risk limit constrains how much of the account can be lost on a given trade or basket of trades, while the margin rule constrained how much buying power was committed at once.

With the margin cap gone, the 3% risk limit is now, according to available public commentary, the primary formal constraint on position sizing, which places more weight on traders managing margin usage voluntarily rather than by rule.

How FundedNext's Margin Approach Compares to Other Prop Firms

How do FundedNext's post-2026 margin rules compare to fixed leverage caps at firms like The5ers?

Prop firms generally manage this risk through one of two approaches: a hard leverage ceiling built into the trading conditions, or a margin-usage rule layered on top of otherwise flexible leverage.

FundedNext's 2026 change moves it further toward the second model without the enforcement layer, while other firms rely more heavily on the first.

The5ers, for example, sets leverage at up to 1:30 on major forex pairs across its programs, with lower ratios on other asset classes as of 2026. Publicly listed figures show roughly 1:25 on metals and indices, and single-digit or sub-1:1 ratios on commodities and crypto.

Because the leverage ceiling itself is fixed, a The5ers trader's maximum position size is constrained structurally, whereas a FundedNext trader now has more flexibility in how much margin to use, bounded mainly by the 3% risk rule and their own discipline.

Both approaches aim at the same underlying goal—controlling drawdown risk through different mechanics—and each carries trade-offs. Fixed leverage caps are simpler to plan around but can restrict traders on capital-heavy instruments like gold, while margin-based flexibility gives more room to size positions but places more responsibility on the trader to self-regulate.

What should traders weigh when comparing margin flexibility across firms?

A few practical questions are worth asking before choosing an account type or firm on this basis alone:

• ●How does the firm's leverage or margin structure affect the specific instruments you trade most? A trader focused on gold or indices will feel a low leverage cap far more than a EUR/USD-only trader will.
• ●Is the constraint enforced automatically, or does it rely on trader discipline? Rule-based caps are predictable; discipline-based limits require more self-monitoring but allow more flexibility when conditions call for it.
• ●How does the margin or leverage rule interact with the firm's other risk limits? Daily loss caps, per-trade risk limits, and consistency rules rarely operate in isolation.
• ●Has the rule changed recently, and is the firm's public documentation up to date? As this article shows, margin and leverage policies at prop firms can change with little notice, so current published rules pages are always the most reliable source before funding an account.

As of 2026, both FundedNext and The5ers are active, operating firms; neither change described here reflects a closure, suspension, or regulatory action against either company.

Practical Risk Management After the Rule Change

What margin usage range do risk-management practitioners still recommend even without a hard cap?

Even where no rule enforces it, keeping margin usage in a conservative band—generally cited around 20% to 30% in trading-education and risk-management commentary—helps preserve room to add to or adjust positions without approaching a margin call.

It can also help prevent drawdown from compounding quickly if several trades move against the account at once.

How should traders adjust position sizing on high-margin instruments like gold post-change?

Instruments like gold (XAUUSD) require significantly more margin per lot than major forex pairs, so removing a formal usage cap doesn't reduce the underlying capital requirement. It just removes the rule that used to flag it automatically.

Traders holding gold or other high-margin instruments should size positions based on the account's actual margin requirement for that instrument and their own risk tolerance, rather than assuming that "no rule" means "no limit."

Reducing position size, spacing out entries, and monitoring margin usage manually are reasonable adjustments in the absence of a dashboard tool doing it automatically.

Summary

FundedNext's removal of the 70% Margin Rule in July 2026 simplifies its risk framework but doesn't eliminate the underlying need for careful margin management—it shifts that responsibility more directly onto the trader.

The firm's 3% risk limit remains the primary formal constraint, and public guidance still points traders toward conservative margin usage as best practice.

Firms that rely on fixed leverage caps, like The5ers, achieve a similar risk-control outcome through a different structural mechanism, and the right fit depends on the instruments and trading style involved rather than one approach being universally better.

For more prop firm rule breakdowns, comparisons, and trader education, explore Prop Firm Insider.