Blue Guardian 1 Step Standard vs 1 Step Nano 2026: Rules, Prices and Best Choice

Featured answer: Blue Guardian 1 Step Standard is the stronger fit for traders who prefer a lower 9% evaluation target, no consistency rule and a conventional 14-day funded payout schedule. Blue Guardian 1 Step Nano costs less at every shared account size and pays every 7 days, but it uses a 10% target, a 50% consistency condition and five profitable funded days before a withdrawal. Both use a 4% daily loss limit and 6% trailing overall drawdown. For a new purchase, compare the full rule burden—not only the fee—and enter BRIDGE at checkout to test the current eligible discount before paying.

Published: August 26, 2026. Last checked: August 26, 2026 against Blue Guardian's official 1 Step Standard and 1 Step Nano rule pages. Prop Firm Bridge pricing records were last verified August 23, 2026. Prices and promotions can change, so confirm the live checkout total and the terms attached to the selected account.

Table of contents

• Quick comparison
• Current rules and the August 20 cutoff
• Prices by account size
• Evaluation difficulty
• Daily and trailing drawdown
• Consistency rules
• Trading-day requirements
• Profit split and payouts
• Account-size decision guide
• Strategy fit
• Platforms, leverage and markets
• News, EAs, copying and holding
• Cost versus rule burden
• How to use BRIDGE intelligently
• Who should choose Standard
• Who should choose Nano
• Common selection mistakes
• Verdict
• Sources and methodology
• Frequently asked questions

Blue Guardian 1 Step Standard vs 1 Step Nano: quick comparison

Rule	1 Step Standard	1 Step Nano	Practical consequence
Evaluation phases	One	One	Neither requires a second evaluation phase.
Current target for new buyers	9%	10%	Standard needs one percentage point less profit.
Daily loss	4% of initial balance	4% of initial balance	Daily risk capacity is equal at the same account size.
Overall drawdown	6% trailing from highest closed balance	6% trailing from highest closed balance	The core trailing-loss geometry is essentially the same.
Evaluation consistency	None	50%	Nano requires profits to be distributed rather than dominated by one day.
Evaluation trading days	3 profitable days for post-August-20 purchases; each day at least 0.5%	No evaluation minimum	Nano can finish as soon as target and consistency are satisfied; Standard must log qualifying days.
Base profit split	85%	85%	Base split is tied.
Optional split	90% paid add-on	100% paid add-on	Nano offers the higher ceiling, but compare the add-on cost.
Funded payout schedule	Every 14 days; optional 7-day add-on	Every 7 days	Nano includes the shorter cycle without the Standard payout-frequency add-on.
Funded qualifying days	Applicable minimum-day rules must be completed	Five profitable days, each at least 0.5%	Nano's fast schedule does not mean every profitable week is automatically withdrawable.
Minimum withdrawal	$100 Crypto; $500 Rise	$100 Crypto; $500 Rise	Method choice can determine whether a small reward is requestable.
Payout processing fee	2%	2%	Apply the fee after the trader split when estimating net proceeds.
Guardian Shield in current record	2% funded floating-loss soft close	Not recorded for this model	Do not assume Standard's Shield treatment applies to Nano.

The shortest answer is not “Nano is cheaper” or “Standard has easier rules.” Both statements are incomplete. The decision depends on which constraint is most likely to stop the trader from reaching a payout. A trader with uneven returns can pay less for Nano and then remain ineligible because the best day is too large relative to total profit. Another trader can choose Standard, pay more, and still lose time because three 0.5% profitable days are required. A useful comparison therefore translates each rule into a workflow rather than ranking plans from a single headline.

For broader firm-level information, read the Blue Guardian review. This page is deliberately narrower: it answers the search intent “1 Step Standard vs 1 Step Nano” and does not attempt to replace the main review or the dedicated Blue Guardian coupon guide.

Current rules and the August 20 cutoff

Blue Guardian's official 1 Step Standard page separates accounts by purchase date. Accounts purchased from August 20, 2026 onward use a 9% Phase 1 target. Older accounts retain the previous 10% target. The current page also describes three profitable evaluation days for post-cutoff purchases, with at least 0.5% profit required for a day to qualify. That date distinction matters because an older dashboard can legitimately show different requirements from a new checkout.

This comparison is written for a trader choosing an account on August 26, 2026, so the headline Standard values are 9% and three profitable days. It would be misleading to compare a new Nano purchase against legacy Standard rules without identifying the cutoff. If you already own Standard, your dashboard and contract are the controlling references for that account; do not infer that a later public-page update automatically changes a previously purchased plan.

1 Step Nano currently shows a 10% target. Its evaluation has no minimum trading-day requirement, but the official model page and PFB record apply a 50% consistency condition and funded payout-day conditions. “No minimum evaluation days” means the calendar itself does not delay a completed evaluation. It does not remove the profit target, risk limits, consistency calculation, account review or funded-stage requirements.

Blue Guardian 1 Step Standard vs Nano prices by size

The following amounts are the displayed prices stored by Prop Firm Bridge and verified on August 23, 2026. The original/base values are included because live promotional displays may change. Do not assume that two promotions stack. If using BRIDGE, enter it in the official checkout and judge the final payable amount shown there.

Account size	Standard displayed	Nano displayed	Nano difference	Standard recorded base	Nano recorded base
$5,000	$30	$20	$10 lower	$40	$26.66
$10,000	$49	$29	$20 lower	$66	$38.66
$25,000	$100	$59	$41 lower	$134	$78.66
$50,000	$150	$120	$30 lower	$200	$160
$100,000	$298	$240	$58 lower	$398	$320
$200,000	$552	$438	$114 lower	$736	$585

Nano is cheaper across all six shared sizes in the recorded price set. The biggest absolute displayed gap is $114 on $200K, while the biggest percentage gap is not automatically the most important comparison. Evaluation fees are sunk if an account fails. A plan that costs $40 less but is poorly matched to the trader's return distribution can be more expensive over repeated attempts than the plan with the higher first fee.

Use three price lenses. First is entry price: what leaves the card today. Second is rule-adjusted cost: how likely your normal execution is to satisfy the target, drawdown and consistency rules. Third is payout-adjusted cost: how quickly a compliant strategy can reach an eligible withdrawal after funding. The cheapest entry and lowest expected cost are not always the same product.

Which one-step evaluation is easier?

Standard has the easier target: 9% versus Nano's 10%. The difference is $50 on $5K, $100 on $10K, $250 on $25K, $500 on $50K, $1,000 on $100K and $2,000 on $200K. Because the daily and overall drawdown percentages are equal, Standard offers a modestly better target-to-drawdown ratio.

Size	Standard 9% target	Nano 10% target	Extra Nano profit required	4% daily limit	6% starting overall buffer
$5K	$450	$500	$50	$200	$300
$10K	$900	$1,000	$100	$400	$600
$25K	$2,250	$2,500	$250	$1,000	$1,500
$50K	$4,500	$5,000	$500	$2,000	$3,000
$100K	$9,000	$10,000	$1,000	$4,000	$6,000
$200K	$18,000	$20,000	$2,000	$8,000	$12,000

Nano can nevertheless be faster for a trader who produces smooth returns and dislikes mandatory evaluation days. Consider a strategy averaging 0.8% on active profitable days with controlled losing days. Nano could finish after accumulating the target and keeping the best day below half of total profit. Standard still needs three profitable days, but that requirement will usually be satisfied naturally long before a 9% target. In practice, the calendar advantage of Nano matters most to an unusually high-return strategy; for slower strategies, the target itself dominates elapsed time.

A one-step evaluation should not be planned around the maximum loss. A sensible personal risk budget is lower than the firm's breach limit. For example, a trader risking 0.25% per setup with a two-loss stop can limit planned daily damage to 0.5%, leaving room for slippage, correlated positions and execution error. At that pace, Standard's extra one-point target advantage is meaningful, while the fee difference remains fixed.

Daily loss and trailing drawdown comparison

Both models use a 4% daily loss limit based on the initial balance. Blue Guardian's official explanation says the daily threshold resets at 5:00 p.m. EST and uses the higher of balance or equity at reset, then subtracts the fixed percentage of initial balance. A floating profit at reset can therefore lift the next session's daily reference. If that floating profit later disappears, the retracement consumes the new day's allowance even though the trade was never closed in profit.

Both models also use a 6% trailing overall drawdown tied to the highest closed balance. The trailing floor rises as profitable trades are closed. When the account reaches 6% profit, the floor locks at the starting balance. A 1% withdrawal buffer then applies, meaning the trader cannot withdraw down to the locked floor and leave no breathing room.

On a $100K account, the initial overall threshold is $94,000. If the highest closed balance becomes $104,000, the trailing threshold becomes $98,000. At $106,000 closed balance, it locks at $100,000. After lock, keeping only $100,200 after a payout would be inconsistent with the 1% buffer concept; the account needs the required cushion. This is why gross profit is not identical to withdrawable profit.

Trailing drawdown rewards smooth equity growth and discourages giving back closed gains. It is especially important for traders who scale position size immediately after a winning streak. A static stop stays where it began; a trailing stop makes yesterday's success part of today's risk constraint. Since Standard and Nano share this mechanism, drawdown type does not decide between them. It does, however, decide whether either model suits the trader.

For a dedicated explanation across all models, see the Blue Guardian drawdown rules guide after it is published in this cluster.

The consistency rule is the central Nano trade-off

Standard's current record says no consistency rule. Nano uses a 50% condition in evaluation and funded stages. The practical formula is:

Best profitable day ÷ total profit × 100.

To be below 50%, total profit must be more than twice the best day's profit. If the best day is $1,000, exactly $2,000 total produces 50%, so the trader needs more than $2,000 under a strict “below 50%” reading. If the best day is $2,500, total profit must exceed $5,000.

Best day	Total required to be below 50%	What this means
$250	More than $500	A small best day is easy to dilute through normal trading.
$500	More than $1,000	Two equally sized $500 days equal 50%; another gain is needed.
$1,000	More than $2,000	A single breakout day can delay eligibility.
$2,500	More than $5,000	Relevant to a $50K Nano target.
$5,000	More than $10,000	A one-day $5K gain can force further trading even after a $100K target is reached.

The consistency rule is restrictive, not necessarily a breach. The official Nano language indicates the trader continues until total profit makes the best day's share acceptable. That distinction matters: a large winning day may create additional exposure because the trader must keep trading, but it does not automatically mean the account is terminated.

This is a poor fit for strategies with rare, oversized outcomes—such as a news breakout system that produces most monthly expectancy in one event. It is easier for a strategy with repeatable daily opportunities and stable risk. Standard is usually the cleaner choice when the trader wants profit concentration to be unconstrained.

Trading-day requirements are different from payout frequency

For a current 1 Step Standard purchase, three profitable evaluation days are required. Each qualifying day must produce at least 0.5% profit, and the days do not need to be consecutive. The old five-day rule remains relevant to accounts purchased before August 20. This requirement prevents a trader from passing solely through one explosive session, even though Standard has no formal consistency percentage.

Nano has no evaluation minimum days. After funding, however, its payout eligibility includes five qualifying profitable days, each at least 0.5%, according to the official and recorded rules. A 7-day payout cycle should therefore be read as the frequency at which a compliant trader may request—not a promise that every funded trader receives money seven calendar days after the first trade.

On $100K, 0.5% equals $500. Five qualifying days therefore involve five sessions meeting that threshold. The total can overlap with the profit being requested, but the distribution matters. A trader who makes $3,000 on one day and $100 on four other days has five green days but not five 0.5% days. A trader with five $500 days has $2,500 total and satisfies the day threshold, subject to consistency and all other payout conditions.

Profit split, payout cycle and net-reward math

Both plans record an 85% base profit split and a 2% payout processing fee. Standard's normal cycle is 14 days, with an optional paid 7-day payout add-on. Nano's normal cycle is 7 days. Standard can offer a 90% split add-on; Nano can offer a 100% split add-on. Add-on availability and price should be confirmed for the exact checkout configuration.

Gross eligible profit	85% trader share	2% fee on trader share	Estimated net
$500	$425	$8.50	$416.50
$1,000	$850	$17	$833
$2,500	$2,125	$42.50	$2,082.50
$5,000	$4,250	$85	$4,165
$10,000	$8,500	$170	$8,330

This table assumes the 2% fee is applied to the trader's share. Actual dashboard calculations and any account-specific deductions control. It also excludes the effect of a Shield event, add-on, buffer, consistency delay or removed news-window profit.

Minimum withdrawal thresholds are $100 through Crypto and $500 through Rise. The method therefore matters for small account sizes. A gross profit that leaves an estimated trader share below $500 may be eligible through Crypto but not Rise. Payout processing is described as within 24 business hours, subject to compliance review and method-related steps. The dedicated Blue Guardian payout rules guide handles these mechanics across all models.

Which account size makes sense?

$5K

The $5K comparison is best treated as a low-cost rule test. Standard's recorded displayed price is $30 and Nano's is $20. The 4% daily amount is $200; the initial 6% trailing room is $300. Standard's target is $450 and Nano's is $500. These dollar limits are tight enough that minimum commissions, normal spread variation and accidental over-sizing matter. Nano saves $10, but the $50 extra target and consistency rule can outweigh that saving if the trader's edge is irregular.

$10K

At $10K, Standard costs $49 and Nano $29 in the recorded display. Daily loss is $400 and starting trailing room $600. Standard needs $900; Nano needs $1,000. The $20 fee gap is meaningful for a first test, yet the trader should ask whether they can produce multiple controlled days. If yes, Nano's lower fee and weekly schedule are attractive. If not, Standard removes the percentage-consistency obstacle.

$25K

The recorded prices are $100 Standard and $59 Nano. Daily loss is $1,000 and initial overall room $1,500. Targets are $2,250 and $2,500. This size makes the Nano saving visibly larger—$41—without changing the percentage rules. It is a reasonable middle ground for traders who have already simulated the trailing floor and can keep daily profit distribution stable.

$50K

Standard is displayed at $150 and Nano at $120. The daily limit is $2,000 and initial trailing space $3,000. The evaluation-target difference is $500. At this point the most important question is not whether $30 can be saved; it is whether a strategy can reach $5,000 under Nano consistency without creating a dominant best day. A trader risking 0.25% per setup is risking $125, making the plan manageable without approaching the firm's hard limits.

$100K

Standard is displayed at $298 and Nano at $240. Both have a $4,000 daily loss amount and $6,000 initial trailing room, but sensible operational risk should be far smaller. Standard requires $9,000; Nano requires $10,000. Nano's weekly payout cycle can improve cash-flow cadence, but five funded profitable days and consistency can control eligibility. Standard is usually more forgiving for discretionary swing or event-driven systems.

$200K

Standard is displayed at $552 and Nano at $438, the largest absolute fee gap in this comparison. Targets are $18,000 and $20,000; daily loss is $8,000; starting overall room is $12,000. A larger nominal account does not justify larger percentage risk. If anything, the higher fee and dollar swings favor more conservative sizing. The Nano saving is attractive only when the trader's record already demonstrates consistency-rule compatibility.

Strategy fit: what your historical returns should show

Before choosing, take at least 20 to 40 trading days from a verified journal and calculate four numbers: best day's share of total profit, average number of 0.5% days per week, maximum closed-balance giveback and largest intraday equity decline. These reveal more than a generic label like scalper or swing trader.

Standard is favored when the best day routinely exceeds half of total profit, profitable opportunities cluster around a few events, or the trader values one fewer percentage point of target. Nano is favored when returns are distributed, five 0.5% funded days are realistic, and a built-in weekly payout schedule matters. Either plan is unsuitable when the journal repeatedly approaches 4% daily loss or gives back more than 6% from a closed-balance high.

For algorithmic trading, test the strategy using the actual 5 p.m. EST reset and equity-based daily threshold. For discretionary trading, add a rule that prevents size escalation after a large win. For swing trading, model floating profit at reset; the higher equity can lift the next day's daily reference, so a reversal may consume risk faster than expected.

Platforms, leverage and markets

Both records support MetaTrader 5, Match-Trader and TradeLocker, with forex, indices, metals, commodities and cryptocurrencies. The official platform page lists instrument-specific leverage rather than one universal number. Current official guidance shows 1:50 on FX for one-step evaluation structures, lower leverage on indices and commodities, and 1:2 on crypto. The exact platform and jurisdiction can affect availability; US clients are restricted to Match-Trader and TradeLocker on the current platform page.

Leverage is capacity, not a target. A trader can breach a 4% daily rule long before reaching maximum margin. Position size should be calculated from stop distance and intended account risk. If a setup lacks a defined exit, the plan's nominal leverage becomes a liability rather than a benefit.

News, EAs, copy trading and position holding

Both model pages allow news trading in evaluation. Funded accounts cannot open or close positions within five minutes before or after affected high-impact news and FOMC events; profits influenced by restricted activity may be removed. Overnight and weekend holding are allowed. EAs are allowed, and copying is limited to accounts legally owned by the same trader. The minimum trade duration is two minutes, and at least one trade is required every 30 days to avoid inactivity.

These permissions do not remove the need to check the funded contract. An EA should include the news filter, duration logic and drawdown controls itself rather than relying on the trader to intervene. A copier should map risk by equity and stop distance, not copy identical lot sizes across different account sizes.

A rule-adjusted cost framework

Suppose Nano is $58 cheaper at $100K. If the trader's normal best day is 65% of monthly profit, Nano requires strategy modification or extra trading. If that modification reduces expectancy or causes one additional failed attempt, the $58 saving disappears. Conversely, a trader whose best day is usually 20% of total profit gains little from Standard's absence of consistency and may rationally prefer Nano's lower price and weekly cycle.

A practical scorecard assigns five points each to target fit, drawdown fit, consistency fit, payout-day fit and fee comfort. Weight the constraint that caused prior failures twice. Do not give checkout price more weight than the risk rule most likely to fail the account.

How to use BRIDGE intelligently

The current Prop Firm Bridge record lists Blue Guardian coupon code BRIDGE for 40% off eligible purchases. Because the site may simultaneously display model pricing or another promotion, use the code as a checkout test rather than subtracting percentages from a screenshot. Open the Blue Guardian checkout through Prop Firm Bridge, select Standard or Nano and the exact size, enter BRIDGE, and confirm the final payable total before placing the order.

1. Choose the model from rules first.
2. Select the account size you can trade conservatively.
3. Review add-ons separately; faster payouts or higher splits can change total cost.
4. Enter BRIDGE in the coupon field.
5. Confirm that the live total changed as expected.
6. Save the order confirmation and rules tied to the purchase date.

This placement keeps BRIDGE relevant to the purchase decision without turning a comparison page into a duplicate coupon article. For discount-focused searches, the dedicated coupon guide remains the primary resource.

Who should choose 1 Step Standard?

• Traders who want the lower 9% current target.
• Strategies whose best day often dominates the profit period.
• Traders who prefer no percentage consistency rule.
• Buyers comfortable with three profitable evaluation days.
• Traders who prefer the Standard model's recorded Guardian Shield framework.
• Those who do not need a 7-day payout schedule unless purchasing an add-on.

Standard is not automatically safer merely because its target is lower. It uses the same 6% trailing drawdown and 4% daily limit. Its advantage is reduced path dependence: profits do not need to satisfy a 50% distribution formula. That makes it easier to understand for many discretionary traders.

Who should choose 1 Step Nano?

• Cost-sensitive buyers whose strategies already produce distributed returns.
• Traders who value no evaluation minimum days.
• Funded traders who can complete five 0.5% profitable days.
• Those who value a standard 7-day payout frequency.
• Buyers interested in the optional 100% split configuration and willing to compare its cost.

Nano is strongest when its rules describe the trader's existing behavior. It is weakest when the trader buys it solely because the checkout fee is lower and plans to “solve” consistency later.

Common mistakes when choosing between them

• Comparing legacy and current rules: use the August 20 cutoff for Standard.
• Calling Nano faster without testing consistency: no evaluation minimum does not guarantee immediate completion.
• Ignoring the funded stage: evaluate the route to a payout, not only the route to funded status.
• Treating 4% as a daily risk target: it is a breach boundary.
• Forgetting the trailing high-watermark: closed profits raise the floor.
• Assuming a displayed discount stacks: enter BRIDGE and confirm the live total.
• Buying an oversized account: larger nominal size magnifies dollar errors without changing percentage rules.
• Copying lots instead of risk: identical lots across account sizes create inconsistent percentage exposure.
• Planning a funded news trade from evaluation permissions: the funded window is more restrictive.

Final verdict

For most discretionary traders, 1 Step Standard is the cleaner rule set: a 9% current target, no consistency percentage and an 85% base split. The trade-off is a higher recorded entry price, three qualifying evaluation days and a standard 14-day payout cycle unless an add-on changes it.

1 Step Nano is the better value for a specific trader: someone whose journal proves the 50% consistency rule is easy, who can produce five funded days of at least 0.5%, and who values weekly payout eligibility. Its lower price should confirm the decision, not create it.

Once the model and size are chosen, use BRIDGE at checkout and confirm the final total. The code can lower acquisition cost on an eligible purchase; it cannot make a mismatched rule set suitable. The best choice is the one whose requirements already match how the trader produces and protects profit.

Sources and methodology

• Official Blue Guardian 1 Step Standard rules
• Official Blue Guardian 1 Step Nano rules
• Official Blue Guardian platform rules
• Prop Firm Bridge structured pricing and account records, verified August 23, 2026.

Rules were checked on August 26, 2026. Calculations in this guide are explanatory examples derived from the stated percentages. The purchase contract, selected add-ons and dashboard attached to an account remain the operational reference.

Frequently asked questions

The structured questions below answer common decision, rule and checkout issues without repeating the dedicated coupon page.