Bulenox vs Lucid Trading: Which Prop Firm Wins in 2026?

I've been running accounts at both Bulenox and Lucid Trading for months now. Tested multiple account sizes, requested payouts from both, and honestly? They're both legit—just built for different types of traders.

Here's the thing: comparing prop firms isn't about finding a "winner." It's about matching the right firm to your trading style, risk tolerance, and what you actually need from a funded account. I like both Bulenox and Lucid for different reasons, and by the end of this breakdown, you'll know exactly which one fits your setup.

Let's dive in.

How I compare firms: This comparison is built from actual accounts I've run with each firm—not from reading marketing pages or aggregating reviews. I've passed evals, traded funded, requested withdrawals, and dealt with support at both firms.

Bulenox has been a reliable weekly cash-flow rotation account for me thanks to its flexible drawdown options and 100% profit on the first $10K. For the full breakdown of their account structure, pricing, rules, and what seven months of live trading taught me—including what works, what doesn't, and where they fall short—check out my complete Bulenox review. For the absolute latest, check Bulenox's website or their help center.

Quick Comparison: Bulenox vs Lucid at a Glance

Before we go deep, here's the side-by-side that matters most.

Both firms use Rithmic for execution. Both have clean payout processes. Both cap you at 5 funded accounts.

The differences? Drawdown structure, funded consistency requirements, and how flexible they are once you're live. That's where your decision gets made.

Account Types: What You're Actually Choosing

Bulenox: Three Paths, Clear Differences

Bulenox keeps it simple. Three account tracks.

Option 1 uses trailing max drawdown—meaning your drawdown follows your highest balance. If you hit a new high, your floor moves up. Tighter risk control, more discipline required. I've run this on smaller accounts ($25K-$50K) where I wanted to force myself into conservative sizing.

Option 2 uses EOD trailing drawdown—resets daily at market close, but the max drawdown still trails your balance. More breathing room intraday, but you still need to respect that trailing floor. This is what I prefer on larger Bulenox accounts because it gives me flexibility during volatile sessions without the constant anxiety of intraday breaches.

Instant Funding skips the eval entirely. You pay more upfront, start trading immediately. I tested this once when I wanted a quick account for a specific market event (NFP week, needed extra capital fast). It worked. But you're paying a premium for that speed.

Lucid Trading: Four Flavors of Flexibility

Lucid has more options. Four account types across two main categories—evaluation-based and instant-funded.

LucidFlex is the most trader-friendly eval account. EOD trailing drawdown, zero funded consistency requirement, soft daily loss limits during eval. This is what I run most often at Lucid. The lack of funded consistency is huge—you're not forced into daily grind mode once you're live.

LucidPro adds consistency during evaluation (you need to pass with consistent daily profits), but honestly? I skip it. The LucidFlex path is easier and gets you to the same funded account structure.

LucidBlack is instant funding. Pay more, start immediately, no eval stress. Similar concept to Bulenox Instant Funding, just structured slightly differently.

LucidDirect is another instant route but built for experienced traders who want to scale fast without proving themselves through evals.

Trading Rules: Where the Real Differences Show Up

This is where Bulenox and Lucid actually diverge—and where your trading style matters.

Drawdown: How Tight Are the Reins?

Both firms use trailing drawdown systems. But the way they implement it? Different feel entirely.

Bulenox trailing drawdown (Option 1) follows your balance tick-by-tick during the session. If you're up $800, then drop to +$200, you've given back $600 toward your trailing DD limit. It's tight. Forces discipline. I like it when I want to stay sharp, but it can feel restrictive if you trade larger ranges or hold through volatility.

Bulenox EOD trailing (Option 2) only updates at market close. You get intraday freedom—can swing through drawdowns as long as you recover by session end. This is more forgiving for my style. I've had sessions where I was down $1,100 mid-day, clawed back to +$400 by close. Option 1 would've breached me. Option 2 let it ride.

Lucid EOD trailing resets daily at 5pm EST. Your max drawdown trails your highest balance, but you only get measured once per day. Similar feel to Bulenox Option 2, but Lucid's implementation feels slightly more lenient—I've tested both extensively, and Lucid's system rarely surprised me with unexpected breaches.

Winner for tight discipline? Bulenox Option 1.
Winner for breathing room? Lucid or Bulenox Option 2 (tie).

Funded Consistency: The Silent Killer

Here's where Lucid wins outright—at least for my trading style.

Bulenox requires 5 profitable days per payout cycle once you're funded. That's not insane, but it adds pressure. If you have a choppy week with 3 good days and 2 breakeven days, you're not hitting consistency. Your payout gets delayed. I've experienced this twice on Bulenox accounts—both times I was net profitable for the cycle, but didn't meet the 5-day rule. Annoying.

Lucid has zero funded consistency requirement (on LucidFlex and LucidBlack). You can make $3,200 on Monday and not trade again until the following week. Still qualifies for payout. That freedom is massive if you're a selective trader, swing trader, or someone who clusters activity around specific setups.

I've withdrawn $11,800 from Lucid across 9 payouts—never once stressed about hitting a daily profit count. That alone makes Lucid more attractive for my strategy.

Daily Loss Limits & Risk Controls

Both firms use soft daily loss limits during evaluation. Hard limits only apply to max drawdown.

Bulenox soft daily limits aren't deal-breakers, but you need to be aware—if you blow past them repeatedly, you'll raise flags. I've never had an issue staying within them, but scalpers who take 40+ trades per session might bump against these more often.

Lucid soft daily limits operate similarly. I've tested both, and execution-wise, they feel nearly identical. The real difference isn't the limit itself—it's how the trailing drawdown interacts with your daily P&L swings.

Payout Structure: When and How You Get Paid

Both firms pay bi-weekly (14-day cycles). Both have clean payout processes. No drama.

Bulenox Payout Mechanics

Standard 80% profit split. You can buy a 90% add-on for extra cost.

Payouts process within 1-3 business days in my experience. I've requested 6 payouts from Bulenox—fastest was same-day, slowest was 3 days. All hit my account clean.

The consistency requirement slows things down if you don't hit 5 profitable days, but if you're trading regularly, it's manageable.

Lucid Payout Mechanics

Also 80% profit split standard. Scales to 90% as you move up account tiers or hit specific milestones (this depends on account type and performance).

I've withdrawn $11,800 from Lucid across 9 payouts. Average processing time: 2 days. One payout hit in 6 hours (that was wild). One took 4 days (during a holiday week).

No consistency requirement to qualify. That's the edge here—your payout timing is predictable, not dependent on daily performance distribution.

Winner: Lucid (by a hair)

Lucid's lack of funded consistency gives it the edge for me. Bulenox payouts are equally reliable, but that 5-day rule adds friction I don't want.

Platform & Execution: Does It Actually Matter?

Both firms use Rithmic for execution. That means fills are fast, spreads are tight, and platform performance is solid.

Bulenox Platform Options

Bulenox runs on Rithmic exclusively. You can use:

• NinjaTrader 8 (most common)
• TradingView (if you want charting + execution in one)
• TSTrader (lesser-known but works fine)

I've used NinjaTrader 8 on all my Bulenox accounts. Execution is clean. No weird slippage, no lag spikes during high-volatility sessions. It just works.

Lucid Platform Options

Lucid offers Rithmic and cTrader. That's more flexibility.

I run Rithmic through Lucid for futures (same NinjaTrader 8 setup I use everywhere). But if you're trading forex or want a different platform feel, cTrader is solid—I've tested it briefly, and execution was smooth.

Winner: Lucid (more options)

Same Rithmic quality on both. Lucid wins because they offer cTrader as an alternative. If you're platform-agnostic, it's a tie. If you want flexibility, Lucid edges ahead.

Cost-to-Funded: What You're Actually Spending

Let's talk money. Not just sticker price—real cost-to-funded including realistic pass rates.

Bulenox Pricing (50K Account Example)

• Option 1 (trailing): $207
• Option 2 (EOD trailing): $167
• Instant Funding: ~$500+ (varies by size)

Assume you pass on your second attempt (realistic for most traders). Option 2 cost-to-funded: $334.

If you're running multiple accounts, Bulenox Option 2 is cheaper per eval. But factor in the funded consistency requirement—if you're not trading daily, you might delay payouts and extend your ROI timeline.

Lucid Pricing (50K Account Example)

• LucidFlex: ~$150
• LucidBlack (instant): ~$475

Assume same two-attempt pass rate. LucidFlex cost-to-funded: $300.

Lucid's eval cost is slightly lower, and once you're funded, the lack of consistency requirement means faster payout realization. Over 6 months, that adds up.

Winner: Lucid (marginally cheaper, faster ROI)

Bulenox Option 2 is competitive. But Lucid's lower eval cost + no funded consistency gives it the edge for long-term profitability.

Who Should Choose Which Firm?

Neither firm is "better" universally. It depends on your trading style, risk tolerance, and what you value most in a funded account.

Choose Bulenox If:

✅ You want tight trailing drawdown discipline to force better risk management (Option 1)
✅ You trade daily or near-daily and the 5-day consistency rule isn't a blocker
✅ You prefer Rithmic-only environments and don't need platform flexibility
✅ You value EOD trailing with tighter structure (Option 2) over full EOD resets
✅ You're okay with slightly higher eval costs in exchange for structured risk controls

Bulenox is for traders who want guardrails. If you're early in your prop trading journey or you know you need discipline, Bulenox's Option 1 will keep you honest. If you want more flexibility but still like trailing structure, Option 2 is excellent.

Choose Lucid If:

✅ You want zero funded consistency requirements for maximum freedom
✅ You trade selectively and don't want to grind daily profits just to qualify for payouts
✅ You value platform flexibility (Rithmic + cTrader options)
✅ You prefer EOD trailing that resets daily with no tick-by-tick tracking
✅ You want slightly lower eval costs and faster ROI timelines

Lucid is for experienced traders who know their edge and want freedom to execute without unnecessary friction. If you're profitable but hate busywork requirements, Lucid removes them.

Can You Run Both?

Yes. I do.

I keep Bulenox accounts for disciplined, tighter-risk trading (usually smaller sizes). I keep Lucid accounts for selective, higher-confidence setups where I don't want consistency pressure.

You're allowed 5 funded accounts per firm. If you're scaling across multiple props, running both gives you flexibility and diversifies your payout sources.

FAQ: Bulenox vs Lucid Trading

Which firm has faster payouts?

Tie. Both process within 1-4 days in my experience. Lucid's lack of funded consistency means you qualify faster—that's where the speed difference shows up, not in processing time.

Can I trade news on both firms?

Yes. Both allow news trading. Bulenox and Lucid don't restrict economic calendar events. Just respect your drawdown limits during volatility.

Which firm is better for scalpers?

Lucid. The EOD trailing drawdown gives you more intraday freedom. Bulenox Option 1 trailing can trigger breaches faster if you're in/out with tight stops.

Do either firms have hidden fees?

No. Both are transparent about costs. Bulenox charges for evaluation, platform data fees (standard across all Rithmic firms), and optional add-ons like 90% splits. Lucid operates similarly.

Which firm is better for beginners?

Bulenox Option 2 or Lucid LucidFlex. Both use EOD trailing (more forgiving than tick-by-tick). Lucid's lack of funded consistency makes it slightly more beginner-friendly—you won't stress about hitting daily profit counts.

Can I scale to multiple accounts at both firms?

Yes. Both allow up to 5 active funded accounts. If you're running 3 Bulenox + 3 Lucid accounts simultaneously (like I've done), you're capped at 5 per firm, but that's still 10 total funded accounts across both platforms.

What if I fail evaluations at both? Which should I retry?

Depends on why you failed. If you breached because of intraday drawdown spikes—retry Lucid (EOD is more forgiving). If you breached because of loose risk management—retry Bulenox Option 1 (forces tighter discipline). Use the failure to diagnose your weakness, then pick the firm that addresses it.

Bottom Line: My Take After Months of Real Trading

I've been running both Bulenox and Lucid for months. Requested payouts from both. Breached accounts at both. Scaled up at both.

Here's my honest take: Lucid is better for experienced traders who want freedom. Bulenox is better for traders who want structure.

If you're profitable but hate unnecessary rules—go Lucid. The zero funded consistency requirement alone makes it worth choosing. I've withdrawn $11,800 from Lucid without ever stressing about daily profit distribution. That's freedom.

If you want tight risk controls to keep you disciplined—go Bulenox. Option 1 trailing drawdown will force you into better habits. Option 2 EOD trailing gives you breathing room while maintaining structure.

For me? I run both. Bulenox on smaller accounts where I want discipline. Lucid on larger accounts where I want flexibility. You can do the same—5 accounts per firm gives you plenty of room to diversify.

‍

‍