{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,8,5]],"date-time":"2026-08-05T13:48:05Z","timestamp":1785937685519,"version":"3.56.0"},"posted":{"date-parts":[[2026]]},"group-title":"SSRN","reference-count":0,"publisher":"Elsevier BV","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2026,1,1]],"date-time":"2026-01-01T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1767225600000},"content-version":"unspecified","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/www.uspto.gov\/ip-policy\/copyright-policy\/copyright-basics"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":[],"abstract":"<jats:p>Retail proprietary-trading firms sell evaluation contracts: a trader pays a fee, must reach a profit target inside drawdown limits on a simulated account, and on passing receives a share of subsequent simulated profits as real payouts. A companion paper develops the valuation framework for a single stylised contract; this paper takes the framework to the market. I hand-collect the complete rule set and fee for 31 contracts across 21 firms from firm-controlled sources with dated screenshot evidence, as displayed between 25 and 26 July 2026, and value every contract on a common benchmark population of trader skill and volatility over a 300-trading-day evaluation cap and a one-year funded horizon. At displayed list prices, 29 of 31 contracts have negative benchmark expected value before several restrictive terms-consistency rules, payout caps and monthly rebilling-are incorporated; estimates for affected contracts are upper bounds, and near-zero estimates are not statistically distinguishable from zero without the Monte Carlo intervals reported in the replication package. Benchmark values span roughly +44 to-748 US dollars on nominally similar products. The fee explains almost none of the variation: identically priced contracts at one firm differ in value by 235 dollars, and cheaper contracts are frequently better. Across one-step contracts, pass probability is negatively associated with value, concentrated among contracts with trailing drawdowns and tighter funded-stage terms-a pattern consistent with competition on salient evaluation terms and low-salience funded-stage restrictions. External validation is mixed: the benchmark pass rate is close to Topstep's disclosed attempt-level rate and exceeds Earn2Trade's differently defined subscription-based rate.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.2139\/ssrn.7184138","type":"posted-content","created":{"date-parts":[[2026,8,5]],"date-time":"2026-08-05T13:18:22Z","timestamp":1785935902000},"source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["Phantom Generosity: Contract Design and Value in the Market for Proprietary-trading Evaluations"],"prefix":"10.2139","author":[{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0009-0005-8477-9393","authenticated-orcid":true,"given":"Boon Chuan","family":"Lim","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"78","container-title":[],"original-title":[],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2026,8,5]],"date-time":"2026-08-05T13:18:23Z","timestamp":1785935903000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/www.ssrn.com\/abstract=7184138"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2026]]},"references-count":0,"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.2139\/ssrn.7184138","relation":{},"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2026]]},"subtype":"preprint"}}