Prop Firm Software RFP: One Brief That Forces Comparable Vendor Answers
A vague “send pricing” request lets every vendor define the comparison in its own favor. A useful RFP fixes the buyer scenario first, then requires every candidate to answer the same scope, evidence and commercial questions.
Section 1: operating profile
- New launch, live firm or migration.
- Launch, base and growth active trader/account assumptions.
- Monthly challenge/order assumptions where relevant.
- Number of brands/legal entities.
- Target implementation date.
- Operating/support time zones.
- Target markets and critical third-party dependencies.
Section 2: knockout criteria
State the requirements that cause a no-go before weighted scoring: required trading platform, critical rule behavior, API/data export, maximum fixed commitment, commercial-model constraint, migration need or other non-negotiable. Ask the vendor to answer Pass / Gap / Custom / Roadmap with evidence.
Section 3: trading platforms and architecture
List required launch platforms separately from future platforms. Require the vendor to classify each connection as native, partner-mediated, custom or roadmap and disclose platform, bridge, market-data and other pass-through costs.
Section 4: challenge and risk rules
Provide actual examples: phase count, targets, daily loss definition, maximum loss, trailing/static behavior, minimum days, consistency, news/weekend restrictions, funded-stage rules and breach evidence. Ask which can be configured without vendor development.
Section 5: customer lifecycle
Define purchase, provisioning, reset/retry, phase promotion, funded conversion, KYC, payout, breach, refund/chargeback and closure. Require the vendor to identify the system of record and which transitions are automatic versus manual.
Section 6: integrations and responsibility
- Payment processors.
- KYC/identity provider.
- Trading/market data/bridge.
- Email/transactional messaging.
- Affiliate and campaign attribution.
- Analytics/reporting.
- API/webhooks.
- Accounting/exports.
For every critical integration ask: who contracts it, who supports it, what event/state is exchanged, how failure is detected and who owns escalation.
Section 7: migration and exit
For a live firm, attach a data inventory rather than saying “full migration.” Specify customers, active challenges, funded accounts, trading history, KYC state, transactions, payouts, affiliate relationships and configuration. Require parallel validation, cutover and rollback. For every buyer, ask for export format, termination handling and migration assistance before signing.
Section 8: non-functional requirements
- Uptime/SLA and measurement method.
- Incident severity and response targets.
- Roles, permissions and audit logs.
- Backup/recovery expectations.
- Data location where material.
- API limits/versioning.
- Support hours/escalation.
- Security evidence relevant to the buyer's requirements.
Section 9: commercial response matrix
Require the same launch, base and growth scenarios. Separate setup, monthly minimum, usage/account overage, trading platform, market data, KYC, payments, API, extra brands, support, custom development and any revenue/profit-linked component. Percentage models must state the exact calculation base.
Also request a weak-volume/downside scenario so fixed commitments are visible. Use the quote-comparison framework after responses arrive.
Section 10: evidence and demo mapping
Ask vendors to mark each material requirement as demonstrated, documented, contractual, partner-dependent, custom or roadmap. Then run the same 30 live demo tests. This prevents a long RFP response from becoming unverified checkbox marketing.
Section 11: contract and acceptance
Request minimum term, renewal, price-change rights, termination notice, data ownership, export/retention, migration assistance, support/SLA and liability terms. Define implementation acceptance separately so “delivered” does not mean “invoiceable but untested.”
Scoring after the RFP
Apply knockout criteria first. Then use the 100-point scorecard with evidence confidence. PFV keeps provider verification/matcher status separate from this buyer-specific scoring.