Cruveno vs TradesViz: compliance tracking vs rule enforcement (2026)

The short version

This is the fairest comparison in the set and, I think, the most convincing one — because it does not rest on TradesViz missing something. They have built more prop-firm-specific machinery than anyone else here. The difference is a single design decision about where enforcement is allowed to reach.

Cruveno vs TradesViz, feature by feature

← scroll →

One column has a single blue circle in it. The amber one below belongs to a local EA, which stops when your computer does.

Read down the first column rather than across the rows. Every tool here can tell you about a drawdown rule. One of them can do something about it while the trade is open, and the only other candidate is a script running on your own machine.

What "compliance tracking" means, and what it does not

This is the section the page exists for, so it is worth quoting rather than paraphrasing.

On a live or imported account, TradesViz describes its compliance engine like this:

"If the compliance engine detects that you have breached any rule, a prominent red alert appears at the top of the dashboard with the specific failure reason and the exact date it occurred."

Read that sentence slowly, because every word in it is doing honest work. Detects that you have breached. Past tense. The exact date it occurred. The alert is a record of something finished. And the compliance dashboard, by their own description, "updates with every sync" — so its resolution is however often your trades arrive, not tick by tick.

Now compare that to what happens inside their simulator, where Challenge Mode applies the correct drawdown type for the firm you picked:

"If you breach a drawdown limit or daily loss limit during your simulated session, the simulator automatically pauses."

So the enforcement logic exists, it is accurate, and it is well built. It simply runs against a simulated account. That is not an oversight on their part — a journal that connects read-only to your broker has no mechanism to act, and building one is a different product with different risks and different permissions.

Challenge Mode vs live auto-close: the same morning, twice

Take a trader eight days into a $100K evaluation with a 5 % daily loss limit. At 09:31 they lose 1.4 % of the day's budget. At 09:33 they re-enter at double size.

In Challenge Mode, on a simulated account, this is handled beautifully. The drawdown buffer updates on every tick, and when the limit goes, the session pauses and a modal explains which rule broke. You learn the lesson at zero cost. That is genuinely valuable and Cruveno has no equivalent.

On the live account, the same sequence produces a red banner on the dashboard the next time the trades sync — naming the rule, and the date it happened.

Put numbers on it. A 5 % daily limit on $100K is $5,000. The 09:31 loss took $1,400 of that. The doubled re-entry at 09:33 is now risking the remaining $3,600 at twice the usual rate, so the distance from "recoverable bad morning" to "evaluation over" is a few minutes of adverse movement, not hours. Any control that operates at the resolution of a sync cycle is measuring in the wrong unit for that window — not because the measurement is inaccurate, but because it arrives after the interval it was supposed to govern.

This is why the distinction is architectural rather than a matter of polish. You cannot close the gap by syncing more often. Something has to be authorised to act on the account, and a read-only integration never is.

← scroll →

The simulator would have paused this session. The live account got a very accurate description of a challenge that had already ended.

A red banner naming the rule you broke is accurate. It is also the most expensive kind of accurate.

What each one costs

TradesViz has a real free tier, which almost nobody else in this category does: 3,000 executions a month, one account, stocks only. Forex and CFDs begin on Pro at $19.99 a month, or $14.99 billed annually. The prop firm compliance dashboard, the simulator and the 600+ statistics are Platinum features at $29.99 a month, or $22.49 annually.

Cruveno is €19 a month at the founding price, or €149 a year. Different currencies, deliberately not converted — compare each in the currency the company bills you in.

Note the shape of that table. If you trade forex on MT5 and want prop firm compliance tracking, the free tier does not cover you — you are on Platinum at $29.99, which is more than Cruveno's founding price. That is a fair comparison to make. It is also not the comparison that matters.

The subscription you are comparing against is not the other subscription. It is the evaluation fee you pay again.

600+ statistics against one number that moves

TradesViz's Platinum tier carries over 600 statistics. That is not marketing padding — the analytics genuinely go deep, and for a trader trying to isolate an edge, that depth is the product.

Cruveno's answer to the same problem is almost aggressively narrow: one number, recomputed continuously while you trade.

A statistic tells you what you did last quarter. This one is finished before your next entry.

A BRS of 58 is a sum you can audit: four consecutive losses contribute 20 points, a shortening gap between trades another 12, position size drifting up after a loss 11, and raw trade frequency 10. Drawdown velocity and time in the session add the last 5. The bands are fixed — 0–39 calm, 40–64 elevated, 65–79 emotional patterns, 80–100 end the session.

These two approaches are not really rivals. Six hundred statistics answer why did last quarter go the way it did. One live number answers should I take this trade. Only the second one has a deadline.

If you trade futures, this page ends here

Worth saying plainly rather than burying in a table row, because it decides the question for a large share of the people reading a prop firm comparison.

Cruveno enforces through MetaAPI, which speaks MetaTrader 4 and MetaTrader 5. That is the whole of its reach. If your funded account sits on Tradovate, Rithmic, NinjaTrader, Sierra Chart or CQG — which covers most Apex and Topstep traders — Cruveno cannot connect to it, cannot read it, and certainly cannot close a position on it. There is no plan, no workaround, and no partial support.

TradesViz auto-syncs from all of them. So for a futures-funded trader the comparison on this page is not close: TradesViz is the tool, and the fact that its enforcement is simulated is beside the point, because the alternative is nothing at all.

This matters for how you read the rest of the page. The argument that a live limit beats an accurate alert only applies where a live limit is technically possible. On MT4 and MT5 it is. Everywhere else, tracking is the ceiling, and TradesViz has built the best version of it.

Should you use both?

Honestly, yes — and this is the one page in the set where I would say that without hedging.

They barely overlap. TradesViz is a read-only analytics platform of unusual depth; Cruveno is an enforcement layer with a journal attached. Both sync from the same MT5 account without interfering with each other, because only one of them ever writes to it.

The split that makes sense: TradesViz for the Sunday review, the retroactive evaluation before you buy your next challenge, and the statistics that tell you which setup is actually carrying your P&L. Cruveno for the Tuesday morning when the first trade goes wrong. Together they cost less than one failed evaluation, and they fail in different directions, which is the useful property.

Where TradesViz wins

A free tier that is actually usable

3,000 executions a month, one account, forever, no card. For a stock trader starting a journal, that is a better offer than anything else in this comparison including ours. Cruveno has no free tier at all.

Retroactive evaluation

Run your real trade history through any firm's ruleset "to find out, before paying for an evaluation." This is the single cleverest feature in the category. It answers the question every prospective funded trader actually has — would I have passed? — using their own trades, for the price of a subscription instead of an evaluation fee. Nothing in Cruveno does this.

Depth of prop firm modelling

36+ pre-built profiles, 60+ account configurations, and all four drawdown types — trailing end-of-day, trailing intraday, static, and trailing-to-static lock — with the correct one applied automatically per profile. Cruveno ships five templates and models session and equity drawdown. On breadth of rule modelling this is not a contest.

Analytics and market coverage

600+ statistics, an options flow feed, a backtester with 70+ indicators, a real-time screener, and coverage across stocks, options, futures, forex, crypto and CFDs. If you trade futures on Tradovate or Rithmic, Cruveno cannot even connect to your account, let alone act on it.

Challenge Mode

Rehearsing an evaluation with real rules enforced on every tick, before spending the fee, is a genuinely good idea well executed. Cruveno has no simulator and no plans for one.

Where Cruveno pulls ahead

It acts on the live account

The one thing on this page that TradesViz has decided not to do. Session and equity drawdown limits are enforced by closing positions through MetaAPI. This needs a master password rather than an investor password, which is a real decision you are making about trust.

Under a second, not "every sync"

Cruveno evaluates the account sub-second from the cloud. A compliance dashboard that updates when your trades sync is measuring in a different unit than a limit that can break in ninety seconds.

Cooldowns that are enforced rather than suggested

After a qualifying loss the cooldown is applied, not recommended. This is the feature traders resent right up until the month it saves an account.

Behavioural signals, not just outcome statistics

Re-entry speed, size escalation after a loss, trade frequency against your own baseline. TradesViz measures what your trades did. BRS measures how you are behaving while you place them.

Emotion captured at the close

A tag written at the moment a trade closes, and the behavioural score at that instant, stored with the trade. Neither can be reconstructed on Sunday, because by Sunday you remember the trade as reasonable.

The bottom line

Two of three branches end at TradesViz. The third is the only one this page is arguing about.

Take TradesViz if you trade futures or equities, if you are still working out whether you would pass an evaluation, or if analytics depth is what you are actually buying. It is the more capable platform and the free tier makes trying it costless.

Take Cruveno if you are funded on MT4 or MT5, you can already recite your firm's drawdown rules from memory, and you have broken them anyway. At that point another dashboard is not the missing piece.

Take both if the budget allows. They genuinely complement each other, and I would rather say that than pretend otherwise.

How we compared these tools

• Every TradesViz figure and quotation here was read from their own pages on 1 August 2026: the pricing page, the prop firm journal page, the broker list, and their blog post on prop firm compliance tracking. Each is recorded in this page's HTML source with its URL and that date.
• The two sentences this page turns on — the live-account alert and the simulator pause — are quoted verbatim rather than summarised, because a paraphrase would be doing the arguing for them.
• We did not run a paid TradesViz subscription end to end. Everything above is what their product is documented to do, not a verdict on how well it does it.
• Pricing in this category changes quarterly. Check before you buy.
• No star ratings. We are one of the two tools being compared, so any score we invented would be worthless.

Check TradesViz's current pricing yourself.

Common questions