Micro futures · reviewed October 2026
Best Micro Futures for Small Accounts
Micro futures exist so that a small account can trade a large market without risking a large dollar amount per point. The contract is one tenth the size of the standard future, the tick value is smaller, and the margin is lower, which makes position sizing possible on an account that could not trade the full contract. This guide compares the main micro contracts, works through the sizing math for $2,000 to $10,000 accounts, and explains which ones are practical for a prop firm evaluation.
Key takeaways
- Micro futures are typically one tenth the size of the standard contract, with proportionally smaller tick values.
- The best micro for a small account is the one whose tick value lets you risk a sensible percentage on a realistic stop.
- MES and MNQ are the most liquid and the easiest to size; MGC and MCL suit specific strategies but have wider effective stops.
- Prop firm evaluations are simulated, so the relevant constraint is the firm's dollar drawdown, not the broker's margin.
Contents
What a micro future is
A micro future is a smaller version of a standard futures contract. The underlying market is the same, the exchange is the same and the price moves are the same, but the contract multiplier is smaller. The Micro E-mini S&P 500 (MES), for example, is one tenth the size of the E-mini S&P 500 (ES): a one-point move is $5 per MES contract instead of $50 per ES contract. The smaller multiplier is what makes the contract accessible to a small account.
The micro contract is not a different market or a different instrument. It is the same index, commodity or currency with a smaller notional value. That matters for two reasons. First, the analysis is identical: the levels, the session behaviour and the news reactions are the same. Second, the execution is usually very close: the micro contracts are liquid, and the spread is often one tick. A trader who learns on a micro can move to the full contract later without relearning the market.
The main micro families cover the major indices, metals, energy and currencies. The CME Group lists Micro E-mini contracts on the S&P 500, Nasdaq-100, Dow and Russell 2000; Micro Gold and Micro Silver; Micro Crude Oil and Micro Natural Gas; and Micro FX contracts on the major pairs. There are also micro crypto contracts. The list grows, so the table below covers the most widely traded ones rather than every product.
Contract specs compared
The table compares the micro contracts most often used by small accounts. The tick values are the standard exchange specifications; confirm them with your broker before trading, because the contract specs and the fee schedule can change.
| Contract | Market | Contract size | Tick size | Tick value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MES | S&P 500 | $5 × index | 0.25 points | $1.25 |
| MNQ | Nasdaq-100 | $2 × index | 0.25 points | $0.50 |
| MYM | Dow Jones | $0.50 × index | 1 point | $0.50 |
| M2K | Russell 2000 | $5 × index | 0.10 points | $0.50 |
| MGC | Gold | 10 troy ounces | $0.10 | $1.00 |
| MCL | Crude oil | 100 barrels | $0.01 | $1.00 |
| M6E | Euro / USD | 12,500 euros | 0.0001 | $1.25 |
The tick value is the number that matters for sizing. A contract with a $0.50 tick moves $0.50 per tick per contract; a 20-tick stop is $10 of risk. A contract with a $1.25 tick moves $1.25 per tick; a 20-tick stop is $25 of risk. The same stop distance in ticks produces different dollar risk depending on the contract. That is why the choice of micro is a sizing decision, not just a market preference.
The notional value also differs. MES at 5,000 index points is $25,000 of notional exposure; MNQ at 20,000 points is $40,000; MGC at $2,000 an ounce is $20,000. The notional is larger than the margin, which is why futures are leveraged. A small account can control a notional value many times its balance, which is both the opportunity and the risk.
Why small accounts struggle with futures
Futures are leveraged instruments, and the standard contracts are too large for most small accounts. A single ES contract has a tick value of $12.50 and a notional value of about $250,000 at 5,000 index points. A 10-point stop is $500 of risk, which is 10% of a $5,000 account. One normal stop would breach most prop firm daily limits, and two would breach the account.
The standard contracts also have minimum margin requirements that can exceed a small account's balance. Even where the margin is available, the position size relative to the account is so large that normal market noise produces outsized losses. The result is that a small account trading standard contracts is forced into either tiny stops, which are unreliable, or oversized risk, which is fatal.
Micro contracts solve the sizing problem by reducing the multiplier. A 10-point stop on MES is $50, which is 1% of a $5,000 account. A 40-point stop on MNQ is $20, which is 0.4% of a $5,000 account. The smaller tick value allows a realistic stop and a sensible risk percentage on an account that could not trade the full contract. The trade-off is that the profit per point is also smaller, so the account needs more points to achieve the same dollar return. For a small account, that is the correct trade-off: survival first, returns second.
Margin and buying power
Futures margin is not the same as the notional value. It is a performance bond, set by the exchange and the broker, that allows the trader to control the contract. The margin requirement varies by contract, by broker and by account type, and it can change with volatility.
Initial and maintenance margin
The initial margin is the amount required to open a position; the maintenance margin is the amount required to keep it open. If the account equity falls below the maintenance margin, the broker may issue a margin call or liquidate the position. The margin is not the maximum loss; it is the collateral required to hold the contract. A trader can lose more than the margin if the market gaps through the stop.
Day-trading margin
Some brokers offer lower day-trading margin for intraday positions, provided the position is closed before the session ends. The lower margin increases the leverage and the risk. For a small account, the day-trading margin can make a micro contract accessible, but it can also encourage oversizing. The margin is a permission, not a recommendation.
The prop firm difference
In a prop firm evaluation, the account is usually simulated, and the firm sets the drawdown in dollars. The broker's margin is less relevant than the firm's maximum loss and daily loss. A micro contract is useful because it allows the trader to stay inside those dollar limits with a realistic stop, not because it satisfies a margin requirement. The relevant calculation is the dollar risk per trade against the firm's daily budget, not the broker's margin.
Position sizing examples
The sizing formula is the same for every contract: divide the dollar risk by the dollar value of the stop distance. The examples below use a per-trade risk of 1% of the account, which is a common starting point. A prop firm trader would use a fraction of the daily budget instead, but the arithmetic is the same.
A $2,000 account
At 1% risk, the per-trade budget is $20. On MES, a 10-point stop is $50 per contract, so one contract is already 2.5% risk. The account cannot trade MES with a 10-point stop at 1% risk; it would need a 4-point stop ($20), which is too tight for most strategies. On MNQ, a 40-point stop is $20 per contract, so one contract fits exactly. The smaller tick value makes MNQ the more practical choice for a $2,000 account, provided the strategy can use a 40-point stop.
A $5,000 account
At 1% risk, the per-trade budget is $50. On MES, a 10-point stop is $50, so one contract fits. On MNQ, a 40-point stop is $20, so two contracts fit ($40), leaving a small buffer. On MGC, a $5 move is $50 per contract, so one contract fits if the strategy uses a $5 gold stop. The account has more flexibility and can choose the market that fits the strategy rather than the contract that fits the budget.
A $10,000 account
At 1% risk, the per-trade budget is $100. On MES, a 20-point stop is $100, so one contract fits. On MNQ, an 80-point stop is $40, so two contracts fit ($80). On MCL, a $1 move is $100 per contract, so one contract fits with a $1 stop. The account can trade most micros with a realistic stop, and the choice becomes a question of which market offers the best setup, not which contract is affordable.
| Account | 1% risk | MES 10-pt stop | MNQ 40-pt stop | MGC $5 stop |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| $2,000 | $20 | Too large ($50) | 1 contract ($20) | Too large ($50) |
| $5,000 | $50 | 1 contract ($50) | 2 contracts ($40) | 1 contract ($50) |
| $10,000 | $100 | 2 contracts ($100) | 5 contracts ($100) | 2 contracts ($100) |
The table is a starting point, not a rule. The stop distance should come from the setup, not from the contract. If the setup needs a wider stop, the size should be smaller or the market should be different. A trader who chooses the contract first and the stop second is sizing by convenience, not by risk.
Micros in a prop firm evaluation
Micro futures are particularly useful in a prop firm evaluation because the firm's drawdown is stated in dollars and the account size may be smaller than the notional value of a standard contract. A $50,000 futures evaluation with a $2,500 maximum loss cannot trade a standard ES contract with a normal stop; the risk per trade would be too large. A micro contract allows the trader to use the same market with a risk that fits the drawdown.
The dollar drawdown is the constraint
In a simulated evaluation, the broker's margin is not the binding constraint; the firm's maximum loss and daily loss are. The trader should calculate the per-trade risk from the daily budget, not from the margin. A micro contract that fits the margin may still be too large for the daily budget. The correct question is: how many contracts can I trade so that a normal stop is a small fraction of the daily budget?
Which firms support micros
Most futures prop firms support micro contracts, including MES, MNQ, MGC and MCL. The exact list varies by firm and platform. A trader should check the instrument list before buying, because a firm that does not support the micro of the market they trade may force them into a standard contract that is too large. The platform also matters: Tradovate and NinjaTrader both support micros, and the firm's data feed must include the exchange.
The scaling advantage
Micros allow granular scaling. A trader with a $50,000 account can trade one MES contract, then two, then three as the buffer grows, without jumping from one standard contract to two. The granularity makes the risk plan easier to follow and reduces the chance of an oversized position at a phase boundary. It also makes the transition to a larger account smoother, because the contract size is already familiar.
The transition from micro to standard
Many traders eventually move from a micro to the standard contract as the account grows. The transition should be gradual and deliberate. A trader who has been trading two MES contracts is not ready for one ES contract automatically, even though the notional exposure is similar: the dollar risk per point is five times larger, and the emotional response to a $250 move is different from a $50 move. The correct sequence is to scale the micro contracts until the risk per trade reaches the equivalent of one standard contract, then move to the standard at a reduced size and rebuild the confidence.
The same logic applies in a prop firm evaluation. A trader who passes with MES may be offered a larger account that requires MNQ or standard contracts. The contract choice at the larger size should be recalculated from the new daily budget, not carried over from the smaller account. A size that was conservative at $50,000 may be aggressive at $200,000 if the contract multiplier changes.
Commissions and fees
Micro futures have lower commissions per contract than standard contracts, but the commission is a larger percentage of the tick value. A round-turn commission of $1.00 on a contract with a $1.25 tick is 80% of one tick, which is significant for a scalper. The cost per trade matters more on micros because the profit per tick is smaller.
Commission per round turn
Commissions vary by broker and by volume. A typical micro commission is under a dollar per side, but the exact figure depends on the broker and the exchange fees. The trader should calculate the commission as a percentage of the average win. If the average win is $20 and the round-turn commission is $1.50, the commission is 7.5% of the win, which is a large drag. A strategy with a smaller average win may not survive the commission.
Data fees
Futures data is licensed per user, and the fee can be monthly. The data fee is separate from the commission and applies even when the trader is not trading. For a small account, the data fee can be a meaningful part of the cost. A trader should include it in the monthly budget, not treat it as a rounding error.
Exchange fees
Exchange fees are usually included in the commission or charged separately. They vary by contract and by exchange. The all-in cost per round turn is the number to compare, not the broker's headline commission. A broker with a low commission but high exchange fees can be more expensive than one with a higher headline.
Working the sizing backwards from the target
Most sizing guides start with the risk and work forward to the position. An equally useful exercise starts with the target and works backwards. Suppose the evaluation requires $5,000 of profit and the trader has twenty sessions. The required pace is $250 per session. On MES, a 10-point win is $50 per contract, so the trader needs five contracts to make $250 on a 10-point move. If the daily budget only supports two contracts, the pace is $100 per session, and the target takes fifty sessions. The arithmetic shows whether the target is achievable at the risk the firm allows, or whether the plan is a mismatch.
The backwards calculation often reveals that a small account with a tight drawdown cannot reach a large target in a short calendar without taking more risk than the rules permit. In that case, the correct response is a smaller target, a longer calendar or a different plan, not a larger position. The arithmetic is the same at every account size; the only variable is the number of contracts and the number of sessions.
Which micro fits which strategy
The best micro is the one whose tick value and liquidity fit the strategy. The table below is a starting point.
| Strategy | Micro | Why | Watch out for |
|---|---|---|---|
| Index scalping | MES or MNQ | Deep liquidity, tight spreads, small tick value | Commission as a share of the small average win |
| Index swing | MES | Lower volatility than MNQ, easier to hold overnight | Overnight margin and gap risk |
| Gold intraday | MGC | Direct exposure to gold with a $1 tick | Wider dollar stops than index micros |
| Crude oil | MCL | Direct exposure with a $1 tick | High volatility around inventory reports |
| FX futures | M6E | Exchange-traded euro exposure | Lower liquidity than spot forex |
The fit is not only about the tick value. Liquidity matters for execution, especially for scalping. MES and MNQ are the most liquid micros and have the tightest spreads. MGC and MCL are liquid but more volatile, which means wider stops and larger dollar risk. M6E is less liquid than spot forex and may not be the best choice for a trader who can trade the spot market instead.
Common micro mistakes
- Treating micros as risk-free. A micro contract is smaller, not safe. The leverage is still high, and a normal stop can be a large percentage of a small account.
- Choosing the contract before the stop. The stop should come from the setup; the contract should be chosen to fit the resulting risk.
- Ignoring commissions. On a small average win, the round-turn commission can be a significant drag. Calculate it as a percentage of the win.
- Oversizing because the margin is low. The margin is a permission, not a recommendation. Size from the daily budget, not the margin.
- Trading a thin micro. A less liquid contract can have a wide spread and poor fills. Stick to the liquid micros unless the strategy requires a specific market.
- Forgetting the data fee. The monthly data fee applies even when you do not trade. Include it in the cost.
- Assuming the micro tracks the standard perfectly. The micro and the standard usually track closely, but the liquidity and the spread can differ. Check the execution.
- Using a micro to avoid learning risk. The contract size does not teach risk management; the process does. A trader who oversizes on a micro will oversize on a standard contract later.
Session choice and volatility
The session matters as much as the contract for a small account. Micro futures trade nearly around the clock, but liquidity and volatility are concentrated in a few windows. A trader who trades a thin session pays wider spreads and takes more slippage, which is a larger percentage drag on a micro than on a standard contract.
The US cash session
The New York cash session is the most liquid window for the index micros. MES and MNQ have their tightest spreads and deepest books during the US morning. That is also when the largest moves happen, which means the stop distances are wider and the position sizes smaller. A trader who wants tight execution should trade this window; a trader who wants smaller dollar stops may prefer a quieter session, at the cost of a wider spread.
The overnight and Asian sessions
The overnight session has thinner liquidity and wider spreads, but smaller absolute moves. For a small account, the thinner volume can be an advantage because the stop distances are shorter, and a disadvantage because the spread is a larger share of the move. A scalper should avoid the thinnest hours; a swing trader holding overnight should account for the gap risk and the lower liquidity at the open.
Volatility and contract choice
A more volatile contract needs a wider stop in points, which means a larger dollar risk per contract. MNQ is more volatile than MES, so the same dollar risk often buys fewer contracts or a wider stop. MCL is more volatile than MGC on a typical day, and the inventory reports add event risk. The contract choice should reflect the volatility the trader can tolerate, not just the market they find interesting.
A practical approach is to compare the average daily range of each micro and the dollar value of that range per contract. A contract whose average range is larger than the per-trade budget at one contract is too large for the account, regardless of the tick value. The trader can reduce the size, but a micro cannot be divided; at that point, a different contract or a different market is the better choice.
How to choose
Four questions narrow the choice quickly.
- What is the dollar risk per trade? Calculate 1% of the account or a third of the daily budget. The contract must fit that risk with a realistic stop.
- What is the stop distance in ticks? Use the setup, not the contract. Then multiply by the tick value to get the dollar risk per contract.
- Is the market liquid enough for the strategy? Scalping needs the tightest spreads; swing trading can tolerate a wider spread.
- What is the all-in cost? Commission, exchange fees and data. A cheap contract with a high commission can be more expensive than a slightly larger one.
For most small accounts, MES and MNQ are the practical starting points because they are liquid, well supported by prop firms and easy to size. MGC and MCL are useful for traders who already trade those markets and can handle the wider dollar stops. M6E is a niche product and usually not the first choice for a small account.
If you use a passing service on a futures evaluation, ask which micro contracts the provider trades and how it sizes them against the firm's daily budget. A provider that can answer in contracts and dollars is running a process; one that answers in percentages of the account is describing an intention. ElitePropX charges a flat $220 for any firm and account size, includes retries on rule breaches, takes no profit share, and hands the funded account over in your name.
Frequently asked questions
What is the best micro future for a small account?
MES and MNQ are the most practical for most small accounts because they are liquid, have small tick values and are widely supported by prop firms. The best choice depends on the stop distance and the strategy.
How much money do I need to trade a micro future?
It depends on the contract and the broker's margin, but a few thousand dollars is enough to trade one micro with a sensible stop. The risk per trade, not the margin, should determine the account size.
What is the tick value of MES?
MES has a tick size of 0.25 index points and a tick value of $1.25 per contract. A 10-point stop is $50 per contract.
What is the tick value of MNQ?
MNQ has a tick size of 0.25 index points and a tick value of $0.50 per contract. A 40-point stop is $20 per contract.
Can I trade micros in a prop firm evaluation?
Most futures prop firms support micros, including MES, MNQ, MGC and MCL. Check the firm's instrument list before buying. The dollar drawdown, not the broker's margin, is the constraint.
Are micros less risky than standard contracts?
They are smaller, not safe. The leverage is still high, and a normal stop can be a large percentage of a small account. The risk depends on the position size and the stop, not on the contract name.
Do micros have higher commissions?
Per contract, commissions are lower; as a percentage of the tick value, they are higher. On a small average win, the commission can be a significant drag. Calculate the all-in cost per round turn.
How much does ElitePropX charge for a futures evaluation?
The service fee is a flat $220 for any firm and account size. Retries after a rule breach are included, there is no profit share, and the firm's challenge fee and data costs are separate.
The micro choice in five sentences
Micro futures are one tenth the size of the standard contract, with proportionally smaller tick values, which makes them practical for small accounts. The best micro is the one whose tick value fits a realistic stop inside the per-trade budget. MES and MNQ are the most liquid and the easiest to size; MGC and MCL suit specific markets but have wider dollar stops. In a prop evaluation, the firm's dollar drawdown is the constraint, not the broker's margin. And the contract should be chosen after the stop, not before it.
Futures evaluation, one flat $220
Any firm, any account size, micros included. We size in contracts against the firm's daily budget.
Related reading
- Micro futures margin requirements
- Best futures prop firms
- Risk management for a challenge
- Recently passed evaluations
- Start an evaluation for a flat $220
- Micro futures capital
Contract specifications and fees can change; verify them with the exchange and your broker before trading. This guide is general information, not financial advice. Trading futures involves substantial risk of loss. ElitePropX is an independent service and is not affiliated with, endorsed by or sponsored by any proprietary trading firm.