RISK

Trading carries substantial risk of loss. Prop evaluation fees are typically non-refundable and the majority of traders do not pass first attempts. This comparison is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial advice. Read full risk warning

HEAD-TO-HEAD COMPARISON · 2026

Aqua Funded vs The Funded Trader

Side-by-side comparison of trust scores, profit splits, payout speed, and real trader reviews. Independent data — no sponsored rankings.

Aqua Funded
AQUA
Aqua Funded
EST. 2023
TFTR
The Funded Trader
AQUA FUNDED
METRIC
THE FUNDED TRADER
54/100BETTER
TRUST SCORE
0/100
0/5TIE
RATING
TIE0/5
90%
PROFIT SPLIT
$2,000,000BETTER
MAX FUNDING
$600,000
$1BETTER
MIN COST
$489
7d
PAYOUT DAYS
PASS RATE
0TIE
REVIEW COUNT
TIE0

AQUA FUNDED DETAILS

STEPS
2-phase
DRAWDOWN
Trailing
MARKETS
Forex, Indices, Metals, Commodities, Crypto
PLATFORMS
MT5, cTrader, Match-Trader, TradeLocker

THE FUNDED TRADER DETAILS

STEPS
2-phase
DRAWDOWN
Fixed
PLATFORMS
MATCH-TRADER, DXTrade, cTrader

Aqua Funded PROS

  • +Min challenge cost of just $1 is exceptionally below the industry average of $186.7, making it highly accessible.
  • +Max funding of $2,000,000 is more than double the industry average of $839,272.7.
  • +Profit split of 90% significantly exceeds the industry average of 84.7%.
  • +Weekend holding, news trading, and EA use are all permitted, offering maximum trading flexibility.

Aqua Funded CONS

  • Overall drawdown of 10% is above the industry average of 7.9%, requiring traders to manage larger potential losses.
  • Profit target of 10% is higher than the industry average of 7.9%, making the challenge harder to pass.
  • Days to first payout of 7 is slightly above the industry average of 6.5 days.

The Funded Trader PROS

  • +News trading is explicitly allowed, giving traders more strategic flexibility during high-impact events.
  • +Offers three platforms including MATCH-TRADER, DXTrade, and cTrader, well above typical single-platform firms.
  • +Overall drawdown of 8% is slightly above the industry average of 7.9%, broadly in line with norms.
  • +Max funding of $600,000 is below the industry average of $839,272.7 but still a substantial capital allocation.

The Funded Trader CONS

  • Min challenge cost of $489 is significantly above the industry average of $186.7, raising the barrier to entry.
  • Profit target of 10% is above the industry average of 7.9%, requiring stronger performance to pass evaluation.
  • Two steps to funded exceeds the industry average of 1.6, adding time and cost before reaching a live account.

PROPDNA VERDICT

Aqua Funded
Higher trust score (54/100). Faster payouts at 7d. 90% profit split.
The Funded Trader
Lower trust score (0/100). Slower payouts at —d.

RELATED LINKS

Aqua Funded Full Review →The Funded Trader Full Review →All Comparisons →
← COMPARE ALL FIRMS ON PROPDNA

Affiliate disclosure: PropDNA may earn a commission if you start a challenge through links on this page. Scores are calculated algorithmically from verified trader reviews — not influenced by commercial relationships.Privacy Policy