Rolling 30 days vs calendar-month prop firm payouts

Data snapshot: 2026-11-08 01:42:11.131Z. This is a source-data timestamp, separate from the editorial revision.

A rolling 30-day total and a calendar-month total usually cover different dates. On PropPayouts, they can also use different source rules. Subtracting them does not measure a firm's growth, missing payments or reporting accuracy.

Use this worksheet when comparing the leaderboard's 30-day window, a calendar report or a total published elsewhere. It answers a period-comparison question; the separate payout-claim checklist explains how to assess an individual piece of evidence.

First identify what each label means

• Rolling 30 days: a moving interval relative to an observation time. Confirm the source's actual boundaries, time zone and treatment of the current day.
• Calendar month: one named month with a defined start and end. Months contain different numbers of days, and the current month may be incomplete.
• Month to date: part of the current calendar month up to a stated cutoff. It is neither a completed month nor necessarily the last 30 days.

A date-only worked example

This example is hypothetical and contains no firm payout amounts. Suppose a rolling interval ends at 00:00 UTC on 29 October 2026 and covers the preceding 30 complete days. Its boundaries are 29 September 2026 at 00:00 UTC, inclusive, to 29 October 2026 at 00:00 UTC, exclusive.

A completed September report instead covers 1 September at 00:00 UTC, inclusive, to 1 October at 00:00 UTC, exclusive. Both intervals last 30 days, but they overlap for only two days. Equal duration does not make their totals directly comparable. A real board may define its cutoff differently: retain that source's own definition rather than assigning this example to it.

Copy this comparison worksheet

Fill in the same fields for Source A and Source B. Leave an unavailable field marked unknown rather than guessing it.

1. Identity and record: source URL, firm or group, exact displayed label, amount and observation time. Note whether the record is an original statement, a board total or an aggregated figure.
2. Interval: exact start/end, time zone, whether endpoints are inclusive, whether the current day is partial and whether the month is complete.
3. Unit: currency and conversion basis; separately identify transfer count, reward requests or recipients. Do not treat those counts as interchangeable.
4. Coverage: included firms, payment methods, account products if known, and any missing source or period. A brand total need not describe a single account program.
5. Calculation: source as published, or the aggregator's reconciliation rule. Record the rule and avoid combining overlapping figures twice.
6. Freshness: source-data cutoff, observation time and any known update delay. An article revision date is not a data cutoff.
7. Decision: comparable as stated, comparable only after a documented adjustment, or not comparable with the available evidence. State exactly what remains unknown.

Apply it to PropPayouts' maintained views

Rolling views: Rolling figures use PayoutJunction as primary when source totals differ by at most 15%; above that, totals and counts use the arithmetic mean and the largest figure uses the maximum reported. One available source is used alone. Coverage is partial; this is not an independent transaction audit or a lower bound.

Calendar reports: Calendar-period figures use PropFirmMatch alone; matched category arms are summed. They are source-board reports, not independently audited transactions.

The monthly archive labels complete calendar periods and their available source coverage. A maintained firm profile supplies the available rolling figures and source context. Their different source scopes remain relevant even on a date when the displayed periods appear close. Read the full methodology before interpreting a gap.

When a percentage change is justified

A calculation such as (later amount minus earlier amount) divided by earlier amount requires a usable, nonzero earlier amount. It describes the change in those reported figures only after matching the units and explaining period or coverage differences. A zero or unknown baseline does not produce a meaningful ordinary percentage change.

Do not divide a monthly total by days and label the result a measured rolling total. That assumes an even daily distribution and cannot recover activity for omitted dates. Reconstructing an exact interval would require sufficiently complete dated records under consistent counting rules; an aggregate alone is not enough.

What this worksheet can conclude

You can document whether two reported totals answer the same question and which assumptions a comparison needs. You cannot infer a firm's complete volume, solvency, unpaid requests or future reliability from a mismatch. For differences beyond the date window, use the guide to advertised and source-board totals.

Keep reading