Alpha Futures: When the Zero Plan Makes Sense (And When It Absolutely Doesn’t)

Alpha Futures' Zero Plan markets itself on two compelling features: $0 activation fee (saving $149 versus Standard/Advanced) and 0% evaluation consistency allowing single-day passes. But the 2% Daily Loss Limit during evaluation, 40% funded consistency, limited account sizes ($50K-$100K only), and monthly subscription costs create specific scenarios where Zero either saves significant money or becomes an expensive trap.

After testing Zero alongside Standard and Advanced plans, I've identified the exact trader profiles where Zero Plan delivers superior economics versus situations where the "savings" evaporate into hidden costs and structural limitations.

Quick heads-up: This article is based on my real experience with Alpha Futures and the info available when I published/updated this. Things change in prop trading — rules, payouts, promos, all of it.

For the absolute latest, check Alpha Futures's website or their help center.

The Zero Plan Value Proposition: What You're Actually Getting

Zero Plan costs $99/month for $50K or $199/month for $100K with these core features:

The Advantages:

• $0 activation fee vs. $149 for Standard/Advanced (immediate $149 savings)
• 0% evaluation consistency — pass in one day if you hit 6% target
• Flat 90% profit split from first payout (not progressive like Standard's 70→80→90%)
• Up to 4 monthly payouts after 5 trading days with $200+ profit each (vs. Standard's bi-weekly)
• 6% profit target same as Standard ($3,000 on $50K, $6,000 on $100K)

The Constraints:

• 2% Daily Loss Limit during evaluation — lose $1,000 on $50K in one day and you're locked until next session (Standard/Advanced have no DLL during eval)
• 40% funded consistency — same restriction as Standard, your largest day can't exceed 40% of total profits
• Limited to $50K-$100K — no $150K option like Standard/Advanced
• Monthly subscription continues until you pass ($99-$199 monthly adds up if you take 3+ months)

When Zero Plan Makes Perfect Sense

1. Quick Passers Confident in 1-5 Day Evaluation Completion

If you can consistently hit 6% profit targets ($3,000 on $50K, $6,000 on $100K) in 1-5 trading days, Zero Plan delivers unbeatable economics.

The math on quick passing:

Pass $50K Zero in 3 days: $99 subscription + $0 activation = $99 total cost to funded status.

Pass $50K Standard in 3 days: $79 subscription + $149 activation = $228 total cost.

You save $129 choosing Zero.

Pass $100K Zero in 5 days: $199 subscription + $0 activation = $199 total.

Pass $100K Standard in 5 days: $159 subscription + $149 activation = $308 total.

You save $109 choosing Zero.

The 0% evaluation consistency enables aggressive single-day or concentrated multi-day approaches. Generate $3,500 profit on day one from one massive FOMC trade? That passes the $3,000 target immediately with zero consistency concerns.

Who this fits: Experienced traders with proven track records passing other prop firm evaluations in 1-2 weeks consistently. Traders whose strategies produce concentrated profits quickly (breakout traders, news traders, momentum specialists).

Example strategy: Wait for high-conviction FOMC or NFP setup. Enter with 4-5 contracts on $50K account. Capture $800-$1,000 per contract = $3,200-$5,000 profit in single trade. Pass evaluation in one day. Total cost: $99.

2. Traders Running Multiple Simultaneous Evaluations

Zero's $0 activation creates compelling economics when scaling to multiple accounts. The activation fee becomes multiplier working against you with Standard/Advanced.

Cost comparison running 3 accounts:

3× $50K Zero passed in one month each: 3 × $99 subscription = $297 total.

3× $50K Standard passed in one month each: 3 × ($79 subscription + $149 activation) = 3 × $228 = $684 total.

You save $387 with Zero across three accounts.

This advantage compounds further if you're buying multiple evaluations simultaneously attempting parallel passes. Zero eliminates the $149 × account quantity activation burden.

Who this fits: Traders with $300-$600 capital wanting to scale to 3 funded accounts quickly. Those comfortable managing multiple evaluations simultaneously. Experienced prop traders diversifying across firms.

Strategic approach: Purchase 3× $50K Zero evaluations ($297 total), trade identical strategy across all three, pass 2-3 within first month, achieve 2-3 funded accounts for $297-$396 total vs. $456-$684 with Standard.

3. Traders Testing Alpha Before Committing Larger Amounts

Zero's lower total upfront cost ($99-$199) makes it ideal for testing Alpha's platform, execution, and rules without large financial commitment.

Risk-adjusted testing:

Test Alpha with $50K Zero: $99 investment discovers platform fit/misfit.

Test Alpha with $100K Advanced: $279 subscription + $149 activation = $428 investment before knowing compatibility.

If Alpha doesn't suit your style (execution issues, rule conflicts, platform problems), you've risked $99 vs. $228-$428.

Who this fits: Traders new to Alpha trying it alongside 2-3 other prop firms. Budget-conscious traders wanting lowest-risk entry point. Those uncertain about Alpha's 4:59 PM close or other restrictions.

Testing protocol: Purchase $50K Zero ($99), trade 10-15 days testing execution quality, platform stability, and rule enforcement. If satisfied, complete evaluation passing quickly. If dissatisfied, cancel subscription having invested only $99 discovering incompatibility.

4. Budget-Conscious Traders Avoiding Activation Fees Entirely

Some traders philosophically oppose activation fees viewing them as extractive costs providing zero value. Zero Plan aligns with this perspective.

The activation fee argument:

Standard/Advanced charge $149 to "activate" funded account after you've proven profitability. This doesn't provide additional platform access, better execution, or enhanced features—it's pure cost extraction.

Zero's $0 activation means every dollar spent goes toward evaluation access, not arbitrary activation gates.

Who this fits: Traders on tight budgets ($200-$400 total capital) where $149 represents significant percentage. Those running multiple evaluations where activation fees multiply (3 accounts = $447 in activation fees alone). Traders preferring all costs concentrated in monthly subscriptions.

When Zero Plan Absolutely Doesn't Make Sense

1. Traders Taking 3+ Months to Pass Evaluations

Zero's subscription costs accumulate quickly, eroding the $149 activation fee savings if evaluation extends beyond 2-3 months.

The break-even calculation:

Zero $50K passed in 3 months: $99 × 3 = $297 total.

Standard $50K passed in 3 months: ($79 × 3) + $149 = $237 + $149 = $386.

Zero still saves $89.

But at 4 months:

Zero $50K: $99 × 4 = $396.

Standard $50K: ($79 × 4) + $149 = $316 + $149 = $465.

Zero saves $69 (diminishing returns).

At 5 months:

Zero $50K: $99 × 5 = $495.

Standard $50K: ($79 × 5) + $149 = $395 + $149 = $544.

Zero saves only $49.

At 6+ months, the savings become negligible, and Standard's lack of 2% DLL during evaluation becomes more valuable than Zero's $0 activation.

Who this hurts: Beginners taking 4-6 months developing consistency before passing. Part-time traders unable to trade daily. Those learning Alpha's platform while simultaneously building trading skills.

Alternative: If you realistically expect 3+ months to pass, choose Standard $50K ($79/month, $149 activation). The 2% DLL during Zero evaluation will frustrate your learning process, and the monthly costs compound while you develop.

2. Aggressive Scalpers and Volatile Day Traders

Zero's 2% Daily Loss Limit during evaluation ($1,000 on $50K, $2,000 on $100K) locks your account for the day when hit, blocking recovery attempts.

Standard and Advanced have no DLL during evaluation—you can lose $1,500 intraday on $50K, recover to -$500 by close, and your MLL only sees the -$500 end-of-day result. Zero locks you at -$1,000, preventing that recovery.

Real scenario:

You're trading NQ on $50K Zero account, 3 contracts. Market opens volatile, you take two losing trades: -$450, then -$650 = -$1,100 total. You've hit the $1,000 DLL. Account locks. You're done for the day.

On Standard/Advanced with no DLL during eval, you keep trading, take three wins of +$400 each = +$1,200, closing the day at +$100 overall. Zero doesn't allow this recovery.

Who this hurts: Scalpers taking 15-25 trades daily with inevitable losing streaks. Momentum traders entering 4-5 positions simultaneously risking $1,000+ combined exposure. News traders handling FOMC/NFP volatility where $1,000 intraday drawdowns happen.

Alternative: Advanced plan ($139/month for $50K, $149 activation) costs $188 more upfront than Zero but eliminates DLL during evaluation entirely, allows unrestricted news trading, and removes funded consistency (vs. Zero's 40%). For aggressive traders, that's worth the premium.

3. Traders Whose Edge Produces Concentrated Profits When Funded

Zero's 40% funded consistency blocks payout requests when your largest day exceeds 40% of total profits. This mirrors Standard's restriction.

If your edge naturally produces lumpy returns (80% of profits from 1-2 large days, 20% from other days), you'll constantly fight consistency violations blocking withdrawals.

Funded profit scenario:

You've generated $5,000 profit since last payout. Your largest day was $2,200 (44% of $5,000). You cannot request payout until you trade more diluting that $2,200 to under 40%.

You must generate at least $5,500 total profit (making $2,200 = 40% of $5,500) before withdrawal eligibility. This forces additional trading when you might prefer extracting profits.

Who this hurts: News traders capturing 60-80% of monthly profits from major events. Breakout traders with occasional massive wins. Anyone whose strategy produces 2-3 large days monthly and 15-20 small days.

Alternative: Advanced plan has 0% funded consistency—generate 100% of your payout cycle profit in one day without blocking withdrawal eligibility. The $40-$220/month premium ($139 vs. $99 for $50K, $419 vs. $199 for $100K... wait, $100K Advanced is $279 not $419, let me recalculate) actually for $50K: Advanced $139 vs. Zero $99 = $40/month premium. For $100K: Advanced $279 vs. Zero $199 = $80/month premium. This premium buys you total funded flexibility.

4. Traders Needing $150K Account Sizes

Zero only offers $50K and $100K—no $150K option exists. If your strategy requires larger position limits, greater profit targets, or bigger capital allocation, Zero structurally can't serve you.

Standard and Advanced both offer $150K accounts ($239/month Standard, $419/month Advanced).

Who this hurts: Traders whose position sizing requires 10-15 contracts (Standard/Advanced $150K allows 15 contracts during eval, Zero $100K maxes at 10). Those wanting $9,000 profit targets ($150K × 6%). Experienced traders scaling beyond $100K accounts.

Alternative: Standard $150K ($239/month + $149 activation = $388 total if passed in one month) or Advanced $150K ($419/month + $149 activation = $568 total) provide the larger infrastructure Zero can't match.

5. Traders Who Consistently Fail Evaluations Requiring Resets

Zero's advantage is upfront ($0 activation), but Standard's advantage appears over time (lower monthly cost).

If you fail evaluations 2-4 times before passing, Standard's $79/month (vs. Zero's $99/month) saves $20/month × months attempting = $40-$100+ savings offsetting the $149 activation fee.

Failure scenario comparison:

Fail $50K eval 3 times over 4 months, pass on month 5:

Zero: $99 × 5 months = $495 total.

Standard: ($79 × 5) + $149 = $395 + $149 = $544.

Zero saves $49.

But if you fail 5 times over 7 months:

Zero: $99 × 7 = $693.

Standard: ($79 × 7) + $149 = $553 + $149 = $702.

Zero saves only $9.

At 8+ months, Standard becomes cheaper despite the $149 activation.

Who this hurts: Beginners expecting 5-8 evaluation attempts before success. Traders learning prop firm trading while simultaneously attempting passes.

Alternative: Standard's lower monthly cost ($79 vs. $99) becomes more economical over extended timelines despite activation fee. The lack of DLL during Standard evaluation also makes learning easier.

Decision Framework: Choosing Between Zero, Standard, and Advanced

Choose Zero Plan If You:

• Can pass evaluations in 1-3 months consistently (quick passer profile)
• Want to run 3+ simultaneous evaluations (activation fee savings multiply)
• Are testing Alpha with minimal financial commitment ($99-$199 total risk)
• Philosophically oppose activation fees
• Need immediate 90% split (vs. Standard's 70% start)
• Trade strategies producing concentrated evaluation profits in 1-5 days

Choose Standard Plan If You:

• Expect 3+ months reaching evaluation targets (monthly cost advantage)
• Need larger $150K accounts
• Trade volatile strategies that might trigger 2% DLL frequently
• Prefer no DLL during evaluation for recovery flexibility
• Want lowest monthly cost willing to pay activation fee

Choose Advanced Plan If You:

• Generate concentrated profits when funded (need 0% consistency)
• Trade news events aggressively (unrestricted news trading)
• Want weekly payouts vs. bi-weekly (Standard) or 4/month (Zero)
• Have proven track record justifying $139-$419 monthly premium
• Need maximum funded flexibility despite higher costs

Real Cost Comparison: One Year Trading Each Plan

Assume you pass first month, generate 12 payouts across year at $2,000 each:

Zero $50K:

• Evaluation: $99
• Activation: $0
• 12 payouts × $2,000 × 90% = $21,600 net income
• Total: $21,501 profit ($21,600 income - $99 cost)

Standard $50K:

• Evaluation: $79
• Activation: $149
• Payouts 1-2: 2 × $2,000 × 70% = $2,800
• Payouts 3-4: 2 × $2,000 × 80% = $3,200
• Payouts 5-12: 8 × $2,000 × 90% = $14,400
• Total income: $20,400
• Total: $20,172 profit ($20,400 - $228 cost)

Zero generates $1,329 more income over one year ($21,501 vs. $20,172) primarily due to immediate 90% split.

But if evaluation takes 3 months:

Zero: $99 × 3 = $297 cost → $21,303 profit

Standard: $79 × 3 + $149 = $386 cost → $20,014 profit

Zero still wins by $1,289 but margin narrows.

Bottom Line: Zero Plan Is Situational, Not Universal

Zero Plan delivers superior economics for quick passers (1-3 months), traders running multiple simultaneous evaluations, and those wanting immediate 90% splits while avoiding activation fees. The $0 activation creates real savings when passed quickly.

But Zero becomes expensive trap for slow learners (4+ months), aggressive traders triggering 2% DLL repeatedly, those needing $150K accounts, and anyone whose funded edge produces concentrated profits fighting 40% consistency.

Calculate your realistic evaluation timeline, assess your strategy's DLL sensitivity, evaluate funded consistency compatibility, and compare total costs across 3-6 month scenarios before choosing Zero over Standard/Advanced.

Zero isn't "better" or "worse" than other plans—it's optimized for specific trader profiles. Match the plan to your actual situation, not marketing promises.

If you pass evaluations quickly, Zero saves money. If you need time developing skills, Standard's lower monthly cost and no-DLL evaluation environment serves you better. If you trade aggressively when funded, Advanced's zero consistency justifies premium pricing.

Choose strategically based on your trading profile, not emotional reactions to activation fees.

Next Steps

👉 Start Trading at Alpha Futures Today

👉 Read My Full Alpha Futures Review

👉 Alpha Futures Payout Rules