ATFunded vs DNA Funded

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

ATFUNDED DETAILS

+Min challenge cost of $49 is well below the industry average of $186.7, making entry very affordable.
+EA/automated trading is permitted, supporting algorithmic and systematic trading strategies.
+Overall drawdown of 10% is above the industry average of 7.9%, offering more buffer before a breach occurs.
+Multi-market access including Forex, Indices, Commodities, and Crypto provides good diversification options.

−Profit split of 80% is below the industry average of 84.7%, meaning traders retain less of their profits.
−Max funding of $200,000 is significantly below the industry average of $839,272.7, limiting earning potential.
−Days to first payout at 14 is more than double the industry average of 6.5 days, significantly slowing cash flow.

+No performance data is available to identify any above-average metrics for this firm
+No fee, payout, or structure data provided to evaluate competitiveness
+No platform or market data available to assess trading flexibility
+Country of operation (Australia) is noted, but no regulatory or structural data exists

−No data is provided for this firm, making any meaningful comparison impossible
−Traders cannot assess profit split, funding, or costs against the 84.7% and $186.7 averages
−Complete absence of data is a significant transparency concern for traders making financial decisions

ATFunded

Higher trust score (54/100). Faster payouts at 14d. 80% profit split.

DNA Funded

Lower trust score (0/100). Slower payouts at —d.