Legion Funding 2-Step $25K account: price $169, 8%/5% targets, 4% daily loss, 10% max loss and coupon code “BRIDGE” for 5% off.
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.
Quick answer: Complete Legion Funding 2-Step $25K guide with price, exact dollar rules and BRIDGE 5% savings.
The Legion Funding 2-Step $25K account currently uses an 8% Phase 1 target ($2,000), 5% Phase 2 target ($1,250), 4% daily loss ($1,000) and 10% maximum total loss ($2,500). The current listed first price is $169.
Legion Funding 2-Step $25K coupon code “BRIDGE” gives 5% off under current PFB coverage. Five percent of $169 is $8.45, producing simple price math of $160.55. The auto-discount link is https://checkout.legionfunding.com/ref/1707/.
After passing both phases, the funded stage keeps 4% daily and 10% maximum loss, adds a 2% maximum risk-per-symbol limit equal to $500, requires five qualifying funded days and uses an 80% standard reward split.
| Account size | $25,000 |
|---|---|
| Listed price | $169 |
| BRIDGE 5% saving | $8.45 |
| Math after BRIDGE | $160.55 |
| Phase 1 target | 8% / $2,000 |
| Phase 2 target | 5% / $1,250 |
| Daily loss | 4% / $1,000 |
| Maximum loss | 10% / $2,500 |
| Evaluation minimum days | 3 qualifying days per phase |
| Funded symbol-risk cap | 2% / $500 |
| Funded minimum days | 5 qualifying days |
| Reward split | 80% |
The useful way to read this table is from the risk rules backward. The nominal $25K balance is less important than the distance to the daily and maximum-loss boundaries.
The current first price is $169. The BRIDGE calculation is $169 × 0.05 = $8.45. Subtracting that saving gives $160.55 in simple math.
This is price arithmetic, not a promise that taxes, currency conversion or future checkout changes will always leave the final card charge at exactly $160.55. Live checkout remains the transaction source.
The important SEO/search-intent answer is still clear: Legion Funding 2-Step $25K coupon code BRIDGE, Legion Funding $25K 2-Step promo code and LegionFunding $25K discount code all refer to the same current 5% code.
The code reduces purchase price only. It does not reduce the 8%/5% targets or increase any loss limit.
Phase 1 requires 8%, equal to $2,000 on $25,000. A 1% gain is $250, 0.5% is $125 and 0.25% is $62.50.
At 0.25% planned risk, a 2R winner is roughly 0.5% before costs, so sixteen ideal 2R net wins would equal 8%. At 0.5% risk, a 2R winner is roughly 1%, which can reach the target faster but also halves the number of full losses that fit inside the same maximum-loss allowance.
Phase 2 requires 5%, equal to $1,250. The second target is smaller than Phase 1, but the trader begins a new phase and must still respect the 4% daily and 10% maximum-loss structure.
Phase 2 is often where traders increase risk because the finish line looks closer. That can erase the advantage of the lower 5% objective. Keeping the same or lower risk as Phase 1 is generally more consistent with preserving the account.
Each evaluation phase requires three qualifying trading days, and each qualifying day must realise at least 0.5% profit under the current Terms. On $25K, 0.5% equals $125.
This means a day with a tiny profit does not automatically count. Traders should not force low-quality trades simply to manufacture qualifying days. If the target is reached before the day requirement, reduce risk and complete the remaining requirement carefully.
The 4% daily-loss amount corresponds to $1,000. This is a hard boundary, not a recommended session stop. A personal daily stop at 1% would be $250, while 1.5% would be $375.
Using a personal stop well below $1,000 creates room for spread widening, slippage and correlated losses. A trader who reaches the official 4% line in ordinary trading is already operating with very little margin for error.
The 10% maximum total loss equals $2,500. The current Terms do not label this 2-Step funded maximum loss as trailing, unlike the explicit trailing language used for other Legion Funding programs.
That makes the 2-Step structure easier to reason about for traders who prefer a fixed broad loss allowance. It still does not mean the full $2,500 should be treated as spendable risk. The daily rule and funded symbol cap remain nearer limits in many situations.
The funded stage has a 2% maximum risk-per-symbol rule. On $25,000, 2% equals $500. Legion Funding can assess combined exposure on the same instrument, including multiple positions and potential stop-loss exposure.
For example, three gold positions risking $166.67 each can collectively approach the same $500 symbol cap. Splitting one idea into several tickets does not create several independent 2% allowances.
The funded stage requires five qualifying trading days, each with at least 0.5% realised profit. On $25K, that 0.5% amount is $125 per qualifying day.
A trader can be profitable but still not ready to request a reward if the minimum-day conditions are not satisfied. Reward readiness therefore depends on compliant profit distribution, not simply account balance.
The standard reward split is 80% of eligible simulated profits. Current Terms say reward requests are generally reviewed within one to three business days, and the minimum request is $100 unless another amount is shown in the dashboard.
Marketing material has used 24-hour payout language. PFB uses the 1–3 business-day Terms wording as the safer operational expectation. Identity, payment and trading reviews can also affect timing.
The funded-stage news restriction prevents opening or closing trades within five minutes before or five minutes after a relevant high-impact event or speech on the Forex Factory calendar. Stop-loss and take-profit executions are included.
For a $25K trader, the account size does not change the rule. A larger balance does not give extra news tolerance. Event-driven strategies should decide whether the restriction fits before purchasing.
Evaluation phases require an average trade duration of at least two minutes. Funded trades generally must stay open for at least one minute. This makes ultra-fast scalping and second-level execution patterns a weak fit.
If your strategy normally holds for several minutes or longer, the rule may be less intrusive. Always test the actual distribution of historical holding times rather than relying on a general “scalping” label.
Third-party EAs may be used as trade-management or risk-management tools when they comply with the rules. Copying trades from another person, account or signal provider is prohibited, as are mirror trading, unauthorised automation, latency arbitrage and HFT abuse.
A trader using automation should be able to explain the strategy logic and confirm that it respects the news window, holding time and risk-per-symbol rules.
| Risk % | Dollar risk | Theoretical full losses inside 10% |
|---|---|---|
| 0.1% | $25 | 100.00 |
| 0.25% | $62.50 | 40.00 |
| 0.5% | $125 | 20.00 |
| 0.75% | $187.50 | 13.33 |
| 1% | $250 | 10.00 |
| 1.5% | $375 | 6.67 |
| 2% | $500 | 5.00 |
Theoretical loss counts ignore slippage, commissions and daily-limit interactions, so they should not be treated as a plan to use the entire 10%. The table is useful only for comparing how quickly different risk sizes consume the account.
0.1% of $25,000 equals $25. Four full losses at this size equal 0.40%. A 2R winner would add roughly 0.20% before costs.
This is a conservative pace that leaves many attempts inside the 10% maximum-loss allowance. It can suit traders who value survival over speed.
0.25% of $25,000 equals $62.50. Four full losses at this size equal 1.00%. A 2R winner would add roughly 0.50% before costs.
This is a conservative pace that leaves many attempts inside the 10% maximum-loss allowance. It can suit traders who value survival over speed.
0.5% of $25,000 equals $125. Four full losses at this size equal 2.00%. A 2R winner would add roughly 1.00% before costs.
This is a moderate pace. It can progress the target faster, but losing streaks become more meaningful and daily correlation needs tighter control.
0.75% of $25,000 equals $187.50. Four full losses at this size equal 3.00%. A 2R winner would add roughly 1.50% before costs.
This is aggressive for a rule-based account. A short losing streak can consume a large share of the maximum-loss room, so historical strategy data should justify it.
1% of $25,000 equals $250. Four full losses at this size equal 4.00%. A 2R winner would add roughly 2.00% before costs.
This is aggressive for a rule-based account. A short losing streak can consume a large share of the maximum-loss room, so historical strategy data should justify it.
Eight consecutive losses at 0.25% equal 2%. Eight at 0.5% equal 4%. Eight at 1% equal 8%, leaving very little room before the 10% maximum-loss boundary even before trading costs.
This is why a normal retail “1% rule” can be aggressive in prop trading. The relevant question is not whether 1% sounds small; it is whether the strategy’s historical losing streak can survive it.
At 0.25% risk, a 2R winner adds about 0.5%. Sixteen ideal net 2R wins equal the 8% Phase 1 target, while ten equal the 5% Phase 2 target.
Real trading includes losses and costs, so the actual path will not be linear. The benefit is that a single losing trade has a relatively small effect on the account.
At 0.50% risk, a 2R winner adds about 1%. Eight ideal net 2R wins equal Phase 1 and five equal Phase 2. Progress can be faster, but only twenty theoretical full 0.5% losses fit inside 10% before costs.
The account becomes more sensitive to a poor run, especially if several trades are correlated.
At 1% risk, a 2R winner adds about 2%. Four ideal net 2R wins equal 8%, but only ten full losses fit inside the 10% maximum allowance before costs. The path is fast in both directions.
This risk level can create large daily swings and may be inappropriate for strategies with long losing streaks or high correlation.
If the account needs only 0.25% to complete Phase 1, normal risk should usually fall. Risking 1% to make the final 0.25% creates a poor ratio between remaining objective and potential loss.
Reducing position size near the finish line protects accumulated progress and still allows the trader to satisfy any remaining qualifying-day requirement.
The same logic applies in Phase 2. A smaller 5% target can tempt traders to rush. If only 0.2% remains, using a normal 0.5% or 1% risk unit is unnecessarily aggressive.
The goal is not to finish on the next trade. The goal is to finish without converting a nearly completed evaluation into a large drawdown.
A 1% drawdown equals $250 on $25K. That means 9 percentage points remain before the 10% maximum-loss boundary, equal to $2,250 in headline math.
As drawdown deepens, risk should normally decrease rather than increase. Trying to recover faster by increasing size can turn a manageable drawdown into a breach.
A 2% drawdown equals $500 on $25K. That means 8 percentage points remain before the 10% maximum-loss boundary, equal to $2,000 in headline math.
As drawdown deepens, risk should normally decrease rather than increase. Trying to recover faster by increasing size can turn a manageable drawdown into a breach.
A 3% drawdown equals $750 on $25K. That means 7 percentage points remain before the 10% maximum-loss boundary, equal to $1,750 in headline math.
As drawdown deepens, risk should normally decrease rather than increase. Trying to recover faster by increasing size can turn a manageable drawdown into a breach.
A 4% drawdown equals $1,000 on $25K. That means 6 percentage points remain before the 10% maximum-loss boundary, equal to $1,500 in headline math.
As drawdown deepens, risk should normally decrease rather than increase. Trying to recover faster by increasing size can turn a manageable drawdown into a breach.
A 5% drawdown equals $1,250 on $25K. That means 5 percentage points remain before the 10% maximum-loss boundary, equal to $1,250 in headline math.
As drawdown deepens, risk should normally decrease rather than increase. Trying to recover faster by increasing size can turn a manageable drawdown into a breach.
A 6% drawdown equals $1,500 on $25K. That means 4 percentage points remain before the 10% maximum-loss boundary, equal to $1,000 in headline math.
As drawdown deepens, risk should normally decrease rather than increase. Trying to recover faster by increasing size can turn a manageable drawdown into a breach.
A 7% drawdown equals $1,750 on $25K. That means 3 percentage points remain before the 10% maximum-loss boundary, equal to $750 in headline math.
As drawdown deepens, risk should normally decrease rather than increase. Trying to recover faster by increasing size can turn a manageable drawdown into a breach.
A 8% drawdown equals $2,000 on $25K. That means 2 percentage points remain before the 10% maximum-loss boundary, equal to $500 in headline math.
As drawdown deepens, risk should normally decrease rather than increase. Trying to recover faster by increasing size can turn a manageable drawdown into a breach.
Conventional forex day trading can fit the 2-Step structure when trades are held longer than the minimum and risk is controlled. Correlation remains important because several USD pairs can move together during the same macro catalyst.
Use portfolio-level risk limits in addition to the formal 2% per-symbol funded cap.
Gold can move quickly around US data and central-bank events. A trader should use stop distance to set lot size and account for the funded news restriction. Several gold entries in the same direction can be combined for symbol-risk purposes.
The $25K balance changes the dollar value of 2% risk but does not change the percentage rule.
Index traders should pay particular attention to opening volatility, macro releases and correlated exposure across indices. A US equity-index portfolio can behave like one broad risk-on trade even when several symbols are used.
A personal daily stop below the 4% hard line can prevent a volatile session from consuming too much of the account.
The unlimited trading period can suit slower strategies, and the current 2-Step funded maximum-loss wording is easier to reason about than the explicit trailing models. The main swing-trading issue is the funded news window because a stop or target can execute during a restricted event.
Review the calendar before holding positions through major releases.
Scalpers need to respect the two-minute average evaluation hold and one-minute funded minimum. Strategies based on seconds, latency or tick-level exploitation are not suitable.
If the average historical hold is several minutes, the account may still fit, but the trader should verify actual data rather than relying on memory.
$25K gives more nominal room than $10K. A fixed $62.50 risk equals 0.25% on $25K but a larger percentage on $10K. The larger account also costs more upfront.
The useful reason to move up is lower percentage risk for the same cash stop, not the psychological appeal of a bigger dashboard number.
$50K further reduces the percentage represented by a fixed cash stop but also has a higher listed fee. If your normal cash risk is already comfortably small on $25K, the larger tier may not add enough practical value to justify the cost.
Compare risk geometry first and purchase price second.
At the same nominal size, 2-Step uses 8% then 5% targets, 4% daily loss and 10% maximum loss. 1-Step uses one 10% target, 3% daily loss and 6% evaluation maximum loss, followed by a 6% trailing funded structure and 1% symbol-risk cap.
2-Step asks for an extra phase but gives materially more loss room. 1-Step reduces phases but tightens risk.
2-Step requires two evaluation phases but uses the wider 10% maximum-loss structure. Instant removes the evaluation target but starts directly with 5% trailing drawdown, 20% consistency, 2% symbol risk and a 3% reward buffer.
A trader who values static-like room may prefer 2-Step mechanics; a trader who strongly dislikes evaluations may consider Instant despite the tighter funded rules.
2-Step has a higher first price than Fast Track’s $9 entry, but Fast Track adds a post-pass activation fee and moves to a 5% trailing funded drawdown with 20% consistency.
The cheaper first payment is not the same as a simpler funded account. Compare total path cost and rule compatibility.
The listed fee is $169, and BRIDGE reduces it by $8.45 in simple math. If a trader needs two attempts, the base pre-discount cost doubles. If three attempts are needed, it triples.
The real economic question is the probability that the strategy can survive the 4% daily and 10% maximum-loss rules while meeting qualifying-day requirements. A coupon reduces cost per attempt; it does not improve the strategy.
Relevant phrases include Legion Funding 2-Step $25K coupon code BRIDGE, Legion Funding $25K promo code BRIDGE, LegionFunding 2 Step $25K discount code, Legion Funding $25K 5% off, BRIDGE code for Legion Funding $25K and Legion Funding $25K referral code.
These phrases express one current checkout intent, so the answer should remain consistent: BRIDGE for 5% off.
The auto-discount checkout link is https://checkout.legionfunding.com/ref/1707/. It provides a direct checkout route for the same BRIDGE benefit. If the expected reduction is not visible, enter BRIDGE manually and confirm the final total.
Use the main Legion Funding BRIDGE page for broad coupon intent.
PFB uses the Legion Funding Terms as the primary source for funded rules, holding time, news trading and payout review; the Trading Objectives page for public targets and prices; and checkout for final payment totals.
This source hierarchy is why PFB uses 10% maximum loss despite an older homepage FAQ that has referenced 8%.
Read the Legion Funding 2-Step pillar guide for all sizes, the BRIDGE coupon authority for discount coverage, and the Legion Funding review for the 76/100 PFB Score and Moderate classification.
Each page has a distinct intent so traders and search engines can move from broad research to exact account configuration logically.
BRIDGE. The current PFB-listed Legion Funding 2-Step $25K coupon code gives 5% off. The listed base price is $169, so simple 5% math produces $160.55 before any checkout-specific differences.
Phase 1 is 8%, equal to $2,000. Phase 2 is 5%, equal to $1,250.
The current model uses a 4% daily loss, equal to $1,000, and a 10% maximum total loss, equal to $2,500.
Legion Funding 2-Step $25K → price $169 → BRIDGE → 5% off → math after code $160.55 → Phase 1 target $2,000/8% → Phase 2 $1,250/5% → daily loss $1,000/4% → maximum loss $2,500/10% → funded symbol-risk cap $500/2% → 80% reward split.
Auto-discount link: https://checkout.legionfunding.com/ref/1707/
The 2-Step $25K account is best viewed as a two-phase evaluation with relatively wide 10% overall loss room compared with Legion Funding’s other models. The trade-off is completing both phases and meeting qualifying-day requirements.
For current savings, Legion Funding 2-Step $25K coupon code “BRIDGE” gives 5% off. Use the discount after confirming that the target, daily loss, maximum loss and funded symbol-risk rules fit your strategy.
Assume the trader risks 0.1% per idea, equal to $25 on $25K. A sequence of five full losses would equal 0.50%, while three 2R winners would add roughly 0.60% before costs. The same 2-Step rules therefore produce very different account paths depending on risk size.
The 4% daily and 10% maximum-loss limits are boundaries, not targets. A risk plan should leave enough room for normal losing streaks and correlated trades. If historical drawdown is close to the official maximum, reduce risk rather than depending on another attempt.
BRIDGE lowers the purchase fee by 5% but does not change any of these probabilities. Risk design remains more important than coupon size.
Assume the trader risks 0.25% per idea, equal to $62.50 on $25K. A sequence of five full losses would equal 1.25%, while three 2R winners would add roughly 1.50% before costs. The same 2-Step rules therefore produce very different account paths depending on risk size.
The 4% daily and 10% maximum-loss limits are boundaries, not targets. A risk plan should leave enough room for normal losing streaks and correlated trades. If historical drawdown is close to the official maximum, reduce risk rather than depending on another attempt.
BRIDGE lowers the purchase fee by 5% but does not change any of these probabilities. Risk design remains more important than coupon size.
Assume the trader risks 0.5% per idea, equal to $125 on $25K. A sequence of five full losses would equal 2.50%, while three 2R winners would add roughly 3.00% before costs. The same 2-Step rules therefore produce very different account paths depending on risk size.
The 4% daily and 10% maximum-loss limits are boundaries, not targets. A risk plan should leave enough room for normal losing streaks and correlated trades. If historical drawdown is close to the official maximum, reduce risk rather than depending on another attempt.
BRIDGE lowers the purchase fee by 5% but does not change any of these probabilities. Risk design remains more important than coupon size.
Assume the trader risks 0.75% per idea, equal to $187.50 on $25K. A sequence of five full losses would equal 3.75%, while three 2R winners would add roughly 4.50% before costs. The same 2-Step rules therefore produce very different account paths depending on risk size.
The 4% daily and 10% maximum-loss limits are boundaries, not targets. A risk plan should leave enough room for normal losing streaks and correlated trades. If historical drawdown is close to the official maximum, reduce risk rather than depending on another attempt.
BRIDGE lowers the purchase fee by 5% but does not change any of these probabilities. Risk design remains more important than coupon size.
Assume the trader risks 1% per idea, equal to $250 on $25K. A sequence of five full losses would equal 5.00%, while three 2R winners would add roughly 6.00% before costs. The same 2-Step rules therefore produce very different account paths depending on risk size.
The 4% daily and 10% maximum-loss limits are boundaries, not targets. A risk plan should leave enough room for normal losing streaks and correlated trades. If historical drawdown is close to the official maximum, reduce risk rather than depending on another attempt.
BRIDGE lowers the purchase fee by 5% but does not change any of these probabilities. Risk design remains more important than coupon size.
Assume the trader risks 0.1% per idea, equal to $25 on $25K. A sequence of five full losses would equal 0.50%, while three 2R winners would add roughly 0.60% before costs. The same 2-Step rules therefore produce very different account paths depending on risk size.
The 4% daily and 10% maximum-loss limits are boundaries, not targets. A risk plan should leave enough room for normal losing streaks and correlated trades. If historical drawdown is close to the official maximum, reduce risk rather than depending on another attempt.
BRIDGE lowers the purchase fee by 5% but does not change any of these probabilities. Risk design remains more important than coupon size.
Assume the trader risks 0.25% per idea, equal to $62.50 on $25K. A sequence of five full losses would equal 1.25%, while three 2R winners would add roughly 1.50% before costs. The same 2-Step rules therefore produce very different account paths depending on risk size.
The 4% daily and 10% maximum-loss limits are boundaries, not targets. A risk plan should leave enough room for normal losing streaks and correlated trades. If historical drawdown is close to the official maximum, reduce risk rather than depending on another attempt.
BRIDGE lowers the purchase fee by 5% but does not change any of these probabilities. Risk design remains more important than coupon size.
Assume the trader risks 0.5% per idea, equal to $125 on $25K. A sequence of five full losses would equal 2.50%, while three 2R winners would add roughly 3.00% before costs. The same 2-Step rules therefore produce very different account paths depending on risk size.
The 4% daily and 10% maximum-loss limits are boundaries, not targets. A risk plan should leave enough room for normal losing streaks and correlated trades. If historical drawdown is close to the official maximum, reduce risk rather than depending on another attempt.
BRIDGE lowers the purchase fee by 5% but does not change any of these probabilities. Risk design remains more important than coupon size.
Assume the trader risks 0.75% per idea, equal to $187.50 on $25K. A sequence of five full losses would equal 3.75%, while three 2R winners would add roughly 4.50% before costs. The same 2-Step rules therefore produce very different account paths depending on risk size.
The 4% daily and 10% maximum-loss limits are boundaries, not targets. A risk plan should leave enough room for normal losing streaks and correlated trades. If historical drawdown is close to the official maximum, reduce risk rather than depending on another attempt.
BRIDGE lowers the purchase fee by 5% but does not change any of these probabilities. Risk design remains more important than coupon size.
Assume the trader risks 1% per idea, equal to $250 on $25K. A sequence of five full losses would equal 5.00%, while three 2R winners would add roughly 6.00% before costs. The same 2-Step rules therefore produce very different account paths depending on risk size.
The 4% daily and 10% maximum-loss limits are boundaries, not targets. A risk plan should leave enough room for normal losing streaks and correlated trades. If historical drawdown is close to the official maximum, reduce risk rather than depending on another attempt.
BRIDGE lowers the purchase fee by 5% but does not change any of these probabilities. Risk design remains more important than coupon size.
Assume the trader risks 0.1% per idea, equal to $25 on $25K. A sequence of five full losses would equal 0.50%, while three 2R winners would add roughly 0.60% before costs. The same 2-Step rules therefore produce very different account paths depending on risk size.
The 4% daily and 10% maximum-loss limits are boundaries, not targets. A risk plan should leave enough room for normal losing streaks and correlated trades. If historical drawdown is close to the official maximum, reduce risk rather than depending on another attempt.
BRIDGE lowers the purchase fee by 5% but does not change any of these probabilities. Risk design remains more important than coupon size.
BRIDGE is the current PFB-listed code for 5% off.
The current listed first price is $169; simple 5% BRIDGE math gives $160.55.
8%, equal to $2,000.
5%, equal to $1,250.
4%, equal to $1,000 in headline dollar math.
10%, equal to $2,500.
2% of initial balance, equal to $500.
80% of eligible simulated profits.
https://checkout.legionfunding.com/ref/1707/
Join the discussion
No comments yet
Sign in to leave a comment. Real traders only — one account, one voice.