ProjectX told its partners in 2026 that it is winding down its third-party service for most of them, with support ending 28 February 2026, and pointing users to Topstep's own TopstepX platform instead. That announcement, sourced to projectx.com, is not a reason to avoid the futures prop space. It is a reason to understand exactly what layer of the stack you depend on before you build a firm around it. ProjectX is not a platform available to license today, and this article does not treat it as one. It belongs here as the clearest recent example of what happens when a firm builds on a vendor it does not control.
eTrader does not appear in this list. Its own instrument set covers forex, metals, indices, energy, crypto, US stocks and ETFs, bonds and 24/7 products, not exchange futures contracts, so it is not a fit for a futures-focused prop firm and we are not going to force it into one.
What a futures prop firm actually runs on
| Vendor | What it provides | Note |
|---|---|---|
| NinjaTrader | A futures-focused trading platform with NinjaScript, its own scripting language in C# | Traders write and backtest strategies directly in NinjaScript |
| Tradovate | A futures trading platform in the NinjaTrader group | Web, desktop and mobile access to futures markets |
| Rithmic | Futures market data and order routing infrastructure | Used by many futures prop firms as the connection between the platform and the exchange |
1. NinjaTrader
NinjaTrader is built specifically for futures trading, with NinjaScript giving traders a C#-based way to write, test and automate their own strategies inside the platform. That combination of a futures-native interface and a real programming language underneath it is why it shows up repeatedly across futures prop firm technology stacks. A firm evaluating NinjaTrader is evaluating a platform, not a bundle: data, routing and prop firm business logic (challenges, payouts, rule enforcement) are separate decisions layered on top.
2. Tradovate
Tradovate sits in the NinjaTrader group as a futures platform of its own, reachable from a browser, desktop or phone. For a prop firm, the appeal is a modern, lighter-weight futures interface without giving up the NinjaTrader group's futures focus. As with NinjaTrader itself, a firm still needs to decide separately how market data and order routing reach the platform, and how its own evaluation and payout rules get enforced around it.
3. Rithmic
Rithmic supplies the futures data feed and order routing that many futures prop firms actually trade through, sitting between the trading platform a trader sees and the exchange where the order fills. It is infrastructure rather than a trader-facing interface, and firms typically pair it with a platform such as NinjaTrader or Tradovate rather than choosing between them. Because Rithmic sits in the middle of the execution path, an outage or a routing change there affects every platform connected to it at once, which is worth weighing alongside platform choice, not after it.
Vendor concentration risk beyond ProjectX
The ProjectX wind-down is a useful case study precisely because it was not a small, obscure provider. It offered TradingView charting and a real technology stack that partners built businesses on, and it still made the decision to end support for most of them on a fixed date. Firms that had built their entire evaluation and funded-account experience on top of that one layer had a hard deadline to move, not a gradual transition to plan around on their own schedule.
The lesson generalizes past futures and past ProjectX specifically. Any firm that depends on a single technology vendor for platform, data or routing is exposed to that vendor's business decisions, licensing terms or wind-down timeline, whatever the asset class. The 2024 wave of MetaQuotes licensing changes that pushed a number of prop firms toward DXtrade, Match-Trader, TradeLocker or cTrader on short notice is the same pattern outside futures, and we cover more of that history in platform vendor risk: lessons from 2024. Diversifying which vendor sits at each layer, platform, data feed, order routing, is not a hedge against any one company being untrustworthy. It is a hedge against depending on any single company for a business you plan to run for years. For a closer look at how NinjaTrader and Tradovate compare for a futures prop firm specifically, or at Rithmic against Tradovate on the data and routing side, see Tradovate vs NinjaTrader for prop firms and Rithmic vs Tradovate.
None of that is a reason to avoid NinjaTrader, Tradovate or Rithmic specifically. All three publish what they offer, and all three are established, widely used pieces of the futures prop technology stack. It is a reason to ask each vendor, before you sign anything, what your exit path looks like if a service ends the way ProjectX's did: how much notice would you get, what data would you keep, and how much of your own product logic sits outside the vendor's control versus locked inside it. If your firm is weighing its own platform and vendor stack, whether futures or otherwise, book a call and we will walk through where the concentration risk actually sits in what you are planning.
"The firms that handled the ProjectX wind-down calmly were the ones that already knew what they would do without it. Know your exit plan before you need one, for every vendor in your stack, including the ones that have not made news yet."
— The SGHK Team
Key Takeaways
- ProjectX announced its third-party service is winding down for most partners, with support ending 28 February 2026, pointing users to Topstep's TopstepX instead.
- NinjaTrader, Tradovate and Rithmic are the three vendors most futures prop firms actually assemble their stack from: platform, a futures-focused sibling platform, and data and order routing.
- eTrader does not cover exchange futures contracts, so it is not part of this comparison.
- Vendor concentration risk is not unique to futures or to ProjectX; the 2024 MetaQuotes licensing changes pushed a similar shift across FX and CFD prop firms.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is ProjectX still available for a new futures prop firm to license?
No. ProjectX announced it is winding down its third-party service for most partners, with support ending 28 February 2026, and is directing users to Topstep's own TopstepX platform. Do not evaluate it as a platform available to license today.
What platforms do futures prop firms actually run on?
NinjaTrader and Tradovate, both in the NinjaTrader group, are the platforms most commonly named, with Rithmic supplying the futures data feed and order routing many of them connect through.
Why doesn't eTrader appear in a futures prop firm comparison?
eTrader's own instrument list covers forex, metals, indices, energy, crypto, US stocks and ETFs, bonds and 24/7 products. It does not include exchange futures contracts, so it is not the right fit for a firm built specifically around futures trading. Rithmic, by contrast, provides the futures data feed and order routing that connects a trading platform to the exchange, sitting alongside a platform like NinjaTrader or Tradovate rather than replacing one.
What should a futures prop firm ask a technology vendor before signing?
How much notice you would get if the service ended, what data and client history you would keep, and how much of your own evaluation, payout and rules logic lives outside that vendor's control. The ProjectX wind-down is a concrete example of why those answers matter before you need them.
About SGHK
SGHK is a FinTech company that designs and builds its own software for the trading industry: the eTrader trading platform, Launch your Broker and Launch your Prop Firm. Every product is written, hosted and supported in-house and licensed to trading firms, with the CRMs branded to them, all hosted by us in the cloud, managed by each firm and built to scale across clustered servers as our clients grow. Everything is encrypted, and each firm is the only one with access to its data and its clients' data.