Atlas Funded reset policy and Free Retry explained for 2026: Access reset fees, 72-hour window, reset consistency rules, evaluation-only Free Retry, adjusted drawdown and first payout cap.
Akash Mane is the Founder and CEO of Prop Firm Bridge, where he leads the company’s vision, platform growth, and long term strategic direction. He oversees operations across research, marketing, content systems, SEO, and product positioning while driving the platform’s mission of becoming a trusted authority in the prop firm industry. At Prop Firm Bridge, Akash plays a direct role in shaping educational frameworks, comparison systems, and trader focused resources designed to help users make informed decisions with transparency and confidence. His work focuses on building scalable organic growth systems, improving platform authority, and strengthening trust through accurate, structured, and search optimized content. In addition to leadership responsibilities, he actively manages growth strategy, social media marketing, search visibility, and brand development to expand the platform’s reach across global trading audiences.
Manoj Gholap is responsible for content accuracy, compliance, and factual integrity at Prop Firm Bridge. He acts as the final verification layer for all published content, ensuring that prop firm reviews, rules, and comparisons are clear, accurate, and aligned with transparency standards. Manoj plays a key role in maintaining trust and credibility across the platform.
Atlas Funded uses two different second-chance systems: Access account resets and the Free Retry evaluation add-on. They should not be treated as the same feature. An eligible Access reset is purchased after an Access account breaches, must currently be purchased within 72 hours, and creates a fresh funded account of the same size. Free Retry is an optional evaluation add-on purchased before a breach and can provide one fresh evaluation after a qualifying evaluation-stage failure.
Current Atlas reset guidance lists specific reset prices and reset-account consistency requirements. Access 1 Step resets currently use a 25% consistency rule, while Access 2 Step resets use 30%. Free Retry has model-specific terms and can use tighter loss parameters than the original evaluation. It is not a funded-account reset and does not provide unlimited second chances.
This article owns the search intent Atlas Funded reset policy and Atlas Funded Free Retry. Broader rule questions belong on the Atlas Funded rules hub, while coupon intent remains on the Atlas Funded “BRIDGE” coupon guide.
| Feature | Access Reset | Free Retry |
|---|---|---|
| When used | After an eligible Access breach | After a qualifying evaluation-stage breach |
| When selected | Purchased after breach | Add-on selected before or with evaluation purchase |
| Time window | 72 hours after breach under current Access reset rules | Model/add-on terms control |
| What trader receives | Fresh funded account of same size | Fresh evaluation account of same size |
| Old trading history | Cleared | Not carried into retry |
| Can rules change? | Yes, reset-specific consistency can apply | Yes, retry drawdown can be tighter |
| Funded breach protected? | Eligible Access reset can follow funded breach | No; Free Retry is evaluation-stage protection |
The distinction is more than terminology. Reset and retry occur at different stages, have different costs and can create different payout conditions.
An Access reset is a paid recovery option available after an eligible Access funded account breaches. Instead of starting the entire Pay-After-Pass journey again, the trader can purchase a reset and receive a fresh funded account of the same nominal size.
The reset clears the old trading history. It should therefore be treated as a new account, not a continuation of the prior equity curve.
This can save time compared with returning to a new evaluation, but the economic value depends on whether the cause of the original breach has been corrected.
A reset does not erase the lesson from the breached account. It does not guarantee a payout, widen drawdown automatically or protect the trader from another breach.
If the strategy naturally violates the funded account’s risk limits, a reset simply creates another account with the same structural problem.
The reset is useful only when the next attempt has a better operating plan.
Atlas’s current Access reset guidance states that the reset must be purchased within 72 hours after the breach.
That creates a decision deadline. Traders should not let the short window cause an emotional purchase immediately after losing an account.
Use the available time to identify why the breach occurred, then decide whether a reset is economically rational.
The first step is to download or record the relevant trading history. Identify the exact position or sequence that caused the breach.
The second step is classification: was the breach caused by normal strategy variance, a position-sizing error, a misunderstood trailing rule, a platform mistake, correlated exposure or emotional behavior?
The third step is to change something measurable before paying for the reset.
| Account size | Current published reset fee |
|---|---|
| $5K | $23.20 |
| $10K | $39.20 |
| $25K | $78.40 |
| $50K | $117.60 |
| $100K | $221.60 |
| $200K | $432.00 |
These reset prices are materially lower than many full funded-account activation fees, but repeated resets can still become expensive.
| Account size | Current published reset fee |
|---|---|
| $5K | $31.20 |
| $10K | $55.20 |
| $25K | $111.20 |
| $50K | $167.20 |
| $100K | $315.20 |
| $200K | $591.20 |
| $300K | $911.20 |
| $400K | $1,099.20 |
Large Access resets are meaningful financial decisions. A $400K reset costing more than $1,000 should never be purchased simply because the option exists.
If a $100K Access account breaches because the trader used 1.5% risk per trade and the strategy’s normal losing streak is six trades, the correct fix may be reducing risk to 0.25%–0.5% rather than buying another account immediately.
If the breach came from a one-time operational mistake and the strategy otherwise fits the model, a reset can have much better expected value.
Reset price is only one side of the decision. Probability of surviving the next account is the more important side.
Atlas’s current reset guidance lists a 25% consistency rule for Access 1 Step reset accounts.
If the best trading day is $1,000, total payout-cycle profit needs to reach at least $4,000 for that day to represent 25% or less.
The reset can therefore change the payout path even though the trader receives the same nominal account size.
Atlas currently lists a 30% consistency rule for Access 2 Step reset accounts.
If the best day is $1,500, total profit needs to reach $5,000 because $1,500 divided by 0.30 equals $5,000.
Write the reset-specific consistency percentage onto the new account rule card.
A best-day consistency percentage generally affects whether a reward is currently eligible rather than immediately breaching the account.
If the percentage is too high, the trader normally needs additional valid profit to reduce the best day’s share of the total.
Do not take poor-quality trades merely to dilute the consistency percentage.
The reset account should be treated as a new operating environment. Even when the nominal balance is identical, consistency or other account conditions can differ.
Do not reuse an old spreadsheet without updating the rules.
Every reset should begin with a fresh rule checklist.
Free Retry is an optional add-on on eligible Atlas evaluation products. The trader pays an additional amount when purchasing the challenge and receives one fresh evaluation after a qualifying evaluation-stage breach.
It is similar to insurance: the trader pays extra before knowing whether the benefit will be needed.
The add-on can reduce the financial cost of a second challenge attempt, but it is not literally free because the protection itself increases the original purchase price.
A retry provides a new evaluation. An Access reset provides a new funded account after an eligible Access breach.
The trader should never assume that buying Free Retry protects a future funded account.
The stage distinction is one of the most important facts in this policy.
Current Atlas model guidance describes Free Retry as applying to qualifying evaluation breaches. Once the trader becomes funded, the retry add-on does not provide indefinite replacement accounts.
This matters when valuing the add-on. Its benefit exists before funding, not forever.
Read the exact purchased terms because model-specific implementation can change.
Current Atlas 1 Step add-on guidance documented in PFB’s verified record lists Free Retry as a +25% purchase add-on.
The retry can use a tighter 5% maximum overall loss compared with the original 7% standard 1 Step maximum, while the daily rule remains based on the retry terms.
A trader who breached the original account near its maximum drawdown should reduce risk before beginning the retry.
A second attempt is not automatically easier. If the retry maximum loss is tighter, the same lot sizes create a larger probability of breach.
The correct response is to recalculate risk from the new retry loss budget.
Do not use the original challenge position-size template without checking the retry rules.
Current Atlas 1 Step Pro guidance documented in PFB’s verified record lists Free Retry as a +25% add-on.
The retry can use a 5% maximum overall loss instead of the original 6%, while the daily limit remains model-specific under the current retry configuration.
This again reinforces that a retry is a new rule state, not a cloned copy of the original challenge.
Suppose a trader used 0.5% risk per trade on the original Pro account. Ten full losses equal 5%.
On a retry with a 5% maximum-loss allowance, that same sequence would consume the entire conceptual loss budget before considering costs.
Reducing risk to 0.25% doubles the number of full-risk units the account can theoretically survive.
Atlas’s current 2 Step guidance documented in PFB’s verified records states that Free Retry can apply after a qualifying breach in Step 1 or Step 2.
The retry can use adjusted daily-loss parameters while preserving other parts of the challenge structure.
Because the trader receives a fresh evaluation, prior progress does not carry over.
A trader who breaches during Step 2 can feel frustrated because Step 1 was already completed. Free Retry does not simply reopen Step 2 from the prior progress point.
The new evaluation should be approached as a fresh process.
Do not increase risk in the retry to “get back” the time spent on the first account.
Current PFB verified Atlas add-on records describe a 2 Step Pro retry with adjusted loss parameters, including a tighter maximum-loss structure than the original 8% Pro account.
The exact current retry rule should be taken from the live checkout and purchased add-on terms because Atlas can update model-specific retry parameters.
Use the retry as a reason to become more conservative, not more aggressive.
It is incorrect to write one universal “Atlas Free Retry has X% drawdown” sentence. 1 Step, 1 Step Pro, 2 Step and 2 Step Pro can use different retry conditions.
Search engines and AI assistants need exact program labels to retrieve the correct rule.
This article therefore keeps each retry configuration in its own section.
Atlas’s current general add-on guidance documented in Prop Firm Bridge’s verified record includes a first-payout limitation after Free Retry is used on eligible configurations.
The recorded rule states that the first payout can be capped at 60% under the Free Retry benefit, subject to the exact purchased account terms.
This condition changes the economics of the add-on and should be considered before purchase.
A retry may save the cost of buying a completely new evaluation, but a later first-payout limitation can reduce early funded cash flow.
Expected-value analysis should therefore include both sides: the value of a second evaluation and the cost of any later payout restriction.
Do not evaluate the add-on using challenge price alone.
A simple framework is: probability of needing a retry × price of a fresh challenge versus the add-on cost, adjusted for any tighter retry rules and payout conditions.
If a trader estimates a 30% chance of failing an evaluation that costs $300, the simple expected fresh-challenge cost is $90. If the Free Retry add-on costs $75, it may have positive expected value before considering the rule differences.
This is only a planning model, not a guarantee.
Free Retry can make more sense for traders with a proven strategy that occasionally experiences a normal losing sequence large enough to threaten one evaluation.
It can also be valuable when the underlying challenge is expensive and the add-on is relatively cheap.
The trader should still ensure the tighter retry rules remain compatible with the strategy.
The add-on may be poor value for a trader with a very low historical breach probability or a strategy that is fundamentally incompatible with the account.
Buying insurance against an almost-certain breach does not solve the structural problem.
Choose the right model before buying protection for the wrong model.
An Access reset can be cheaper and faster than beginning another evaluation, but it can also create reset-specific conditions.
Compare reset fee, current funded rules, consistency and the probability that the revised risk plan survives.
If the account model itself caused the breach, a different Atlas program can be more rational than another reset.
Suppose a trader repeatedly breaches a tight Access funded drawdown but historically performs well under wider static loss limits. Moving to Standard 2 Step may be more logical than repeatedly resetting Access.
Account fit should dominate sunk cost.
The Atlas account types guide can help compare alternatives.
A trader can sometimes choose between one challenge plus a retry add-on or two separate challenge purchases.
The retry often costs less than the full second challenge, but the retry may have adjusted rules or payout conditions.
Compare the complete terms, not only the headline price.
Every breach should produce a written post-mortem before another account is purchased.
Record the exact trade sequence, account equity before the breach, planned risk, actual risk, correlation, market condition and whether the strategy rules were followed.
The goal is to identify whether the failure came from strategy variance or behavior.
If the trader followed the plan perfectly and the account still breached during normal historical variance, the risk level or account model is probably incompatible.
If the strategy was abandoned through revenge trading or oversized positions, the process needs behavioral safeguards.
The solution depends on the cause.
A reset should usually begin at lower risk than the breached account. If the prior account used 0.5% per trade, the new account might begin at 0.25% until stability is re-established.
Use a stricter personal daily stop and smaller correlated-exposure limit.
The purpose of the new account is not to recover the reset fee quickly.
A retry with tighter maximum drawdown requires a new position-sizing plan.
Take the worst historical losing streak and make sure it fits comfortably inside the retry’s loss allowance at the intended risk percentage.
Do not simply restart the original lot sizes.
Many breaches are caused by one extreme session. Introduce a personal daily stop far below the firm boundary on the next account.
For example, a trader on a 5% formal daily account may choose to stop at 1%.
The account should rarely approach the actual breach line during normal trading.
A rule such as “three full-risk losses ends the session” can protect decision quality after a losing sequence.
The exact number should reflect strategy statistics.
The important point is that the decision is made before the losses occur.
Several moderate losing days can create the same damage as one extreme day. A weekly personal stop prevents cumulative emotional trading.
Once hit, pause and review rather than trying to earn back the account fee.
Unlimited evaluation time makes this especially practical on challenge accounts.
Access 1 Step’s current $5K reset price is $23.20, while Access 2 Step’s current $5K reset is $31.20.
The small dollar cost can make resetting attractive, but the same discipline is required as on a larger account.
Do not build a habit of disposable small accounts.
Current reset prices are $39.20 for Access 1 Step and $55.20 for Access 2 Step at $10K.
Before paying, calculate how much normal strategy drawdown caused the breach.
A cheap reset has poor value if the next account uses identical risk.
Current prices are $78.40 for Access 1 Step and $111.20 for Access 2 Step.
At this size, repeated resets can become a noticeable cumulative cost.
Track total reset spending alongside total payouts.
Current prices are $117.60 for Access 1 Step and $167.20 for Access 2 Step.
A 0.25% risk unit on $50K equals $125, meaning one full-risk trade can be similar in dollar size to the reset fee.
This illustrates why trading risk and reset economics should be planned together.
Current reset pricing is $221.60 for Access 1 Step and $315.20 for Access 2 Step.
These are meaningful costs. A trader should be able to explain exactly what will change before paying.
A written revised risk plan should exist before the new account is activated.
Current prices are $432 for Access 1 Step and $591.20 for Access 2 Step.
The larger dollar account can tempt the trader to recover the reset cost quickly, which is exactly the wrong objective.
Keep percentage risk stable or lower.
Current Access 2 Step reset prices are $911.20 on $300K and $1,099.20 on $400K. Current Free/$1 Access reset records also show large reset costs on bigger accounts.
At these sizes, reset decisions should be treated like business-capital decisions.
Do not purchase them impulsively after a breach.
A trader with several previous payouts has stronger evidence that the account model works than a trader who has never reached payout one.
This can influence the reset decision. A single unusual breach after a long profitable history may justify a reset more than repeated early breaches.
Use actual funded history in expected-value calculations.
Reset-specific consistency can change the amount of total profit needed after a large winning day.
Use the formula best day divided by allowed percentage to calculate the minimum total profit required.
Track consistency daily rather than discovering the issue at payout time.
A fresh reset account can have a new reward timeline because it is a new funded account.
Confirm the request schedule on the reset account rather than assuming the old account’s payout date carries over.
Use the Atlas payout guide for broader reward mechanics.
The retry generally requires the trader to complete the evaluation again. Prior profit from the breached challenge does not count toward the new target.
Mentally reset the process. Chasing the old lost progress can lead to aggressive risk.
The retry is a new statistical sample.
The new evaluation is subject to its retry-specific rules, including qualifying-day requirements where applicable.
Do not assume a day completed on the first account transfers to the retry.
Use the new account dashboard as the authoritative progress record.
If an EA caused the original breach, do not attach the same version to the retry without diagnosis.
Check re-entry logic, correlation, maximum open positions, news filters and daily shutdown behavior.
Backtest the revised EA against the tighter retry drawdown.
A funded Access reset should also receive updated automated risk parameters. If the prior bot used limits based on the old account state, reset the configuration.
Confirm account size, drawdown and consistency before automation starts.
A clean account deserves a clean bot configuration.
Any copier should be rechecked after a reset. The new account may have a different account number and risk state.
Ensure the copying arrangement itself complies with Atlas’s current ownership and external-account rules.
Do not let a copier automatically reproduce the same breach-causing trade size.
Gold can create rapid drawdown. If the breach came from XAUUSD volatility, reduce lot size and widen the personal safety buffer on the reset.
Do not interpret the reset as another opportunity to take the same oversized news trade.
Use stop-based risk, not fixed lot size.
A breach can come from several correlated forex positions rather than one visibly large trade.
On the new account, use a combined dollar-theme risk limit.
Three USD positions should not each receive full independent risk if they are likely to move together.
If the original breach occurred during a macro release, separate strategy validity from execution risk.
Reduce size around future events or avoid them if slippage makes the account unsuitable.
Reset money should never be used to repeat an untested news gamble.
A retry challenge should be traded with even more caution around volatile releases because the retry loss parameters can be tighter.
Passing faster through one news trade is not worth increasing breach probability dramatically.
Use the unlimited-time advantage where applicable.
No universal answer exists. The add-on should be evaluated like insurance.
High expected breach probability can make protection valuable, but if the probability is high because the strategy is incompatible, the better decision is choosing a different account.
Use historical data rather than fear.
No. A reset is rational when the model has proven value and the breach cause is correctable.
Repeated breaches with no payouts are evidence that the account or risk plan may be wrong.
Sunk cost should not dictate the next decision.
Define a stop-buying rule before the first account. For example, a trader might cap total reset spending or stop after two repeated breaches until the strategy is reviewed.
This prevents a low-cost reset mechanism from becoming compulsive repurchasing.
Account discipline includes purchase discipline.
If several challenges are passed without using the add-on, the trader can compare the cumulative unused insurance cost with the price of one fresh challenge.
Expected value can change as the trader’s pass rate improves.
Review the decision periodically rather than buying the add-on automatically forever.
Prop Firm Bridge currently tracks “BRIDGE” as providing 45% off eligible Atlas Funded purchases plus a 2× requested-payout benefit on qualifying promotional accounts.
That commercial offer should not be assumed to apply automatically to post-breach reset fees or Free Retry add-on pricing unless the live Atlas checkout explicitly accepts it.
Use the dedicated BRIDGE coupon guide for current promotional terms.
Atlas is currently advertising a separate 50% first-purchase seasonal promotion using NEW.
A first-purchase campaign is conceptually different from a reset after breach. Do not assume the seasonal code applies to a reset.
The exact live checkout controls commercial eligibility.
This page should rank for Atlas reset and Free Retry questions. Coupon searches should rank the dedicated BRIDGE authority.
Repeated exact-match coupon language here would create unnecessary keyword cannibalization.
Contextual linking is enough to connect the commercial relationship.
Before paying, confirm the breach timestamp, 72-hour window, reset price, account size, new consistency percentage, new payout schedule and the exact reason the previous account failed.
Create a revised risk plan in writing.
If nothing changes except the account number, do not expect a different outcome.
Confirm add-on cost, which evaluation stages are protected, retry daily and maximum-loss rules, qualifying-day requirements and any first-payout limitation.
Estimate the probability of needing the retry and compare the insurance cost with the price of a fresh challenge.
Save the purchased add-on terms.
When the retry account is issued, record its exact target, daily loss, maximum loss, minimum days and account number.
Do not rely on memory from the original evaluation.
Reduce risk until the retry configuration is fully understood.
Atlas Funded Access resets and Free Retry are different. An eligible Access reset must currently be purchased within 72 hours after breach and creates a fresh funded account of the same size. Access 1 Step reset accounts currently use a 25% consistency rule and Access 2 Step resets use 30%. Free Retry is an optional evaluation add-on that provides a fresh evaluation after a qualifying evaluation-stage breach and can use model-specific tighter loss rules.
Yes, eligible Access accounts currently have a paid reset option after breach.
Current Atlas reset guidance states 72 hours after the breach.
No. Atlas issues a fresh funded account of the same size and clears prior trading history.
Current Atlas guidance lists 25%.
Current Atlas guidance lists 30%.
It is an optional evaluation add-on that can provide one fresh evaluation after a qualifying evaluation-stage breach.
No. It is primarily evaluation-stage protection and should not be treated as unlimited funded-account insurance.
Not always. Atlas can use adjusted model-specific loss parameters on retry accounts.
No. Any reset or add-on discount must be confirmed at the exact live checkout.
No. The current NEW campaign is a separate first-purchase seasonal offer and should not be assumed to apply to resets.
Atlas Funded resets and Free Retry can reduce the cost or time of recovering from an account failure, but they solve different problems. Access resets operate after eligible funded breaches; Free Retry operates during evaluation.
The strongest use of either feature is after a careful diagnosis of the original failure. A second chance has little value when the trader repeats the same risk process.
Confirm the exact model-specific retry or reset rules, keep coupon eligibility separate, and treat every new account as a fresh risk system rather than an invitation to recover prior losses quickly.
Yes, but resets are primarily a feature of eligible Access accounts. Atlas currently states that an Access reset must be purchased within 72 hours after breach.
Atlas issues a fresh funded account of the same size and clears the previous trading activity; it is not a restoration of the old equity curve.
Free Retry is an optional evaluation add-on that gives an eligible trader one fresh evaluation after a qualifying evaluation-stage breach.
No. Atlas's current model pages state that Free Retry applies to evaluation-stage breaches and not funded-account breaches.
Not always. Atlas publishes adjusted retry parameters by model, so traders should use the exact retry rules attached to the selected challenge.
Atlas's current general add-on guidance states that the first payout is capped at 60% after the Free Retry add-on is used, subject to the applicable account terms.
