Funded Futures Network vs Topstep

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

FUNDED FUTURES NETWORK DETAILS

+Min challenge cost of $81 is well below the industry average of $186.7, significantly reducing entry costs.
+Days to first payout of 0 means instant payouts, far better than the industry average of 6.5 days.
+On-demand payout frequency gives traders maximum flexibility in accessing their profits.
+Profit target of 6% is below the industry average of 7.9%, making the challenge easier to complete.

−Profit split of 80% is below the industry average of 84.7%, reducing the trader's share of earnings.
−Max funding of $250,000 is significantly below the industry average of $839,272.7, limiting scale.
−Two-step funding process is above the industry average of 1.6 steps, adding an extra evaluation hurdle.

+Profit split of 90% is well above the industry average of 84.7%, offering traders a superior earnings share.
+Min challenge cost of $49 is well below the industry average of $186.7, making entry highly accessible.
+Single-step funding is better than the industry average of 1.6 steps, streamlining the path to funded status.
+Founded in 2012, Topstep is one of the most established prop firms, providing strong credibility and track record.

−Max funding of $150,000 is far below the industry average of $839,272.7, significantly limiting earning potential.
−Overall drawdown of 10% with trailing EOD type means drawdown limits tighten as profits grow, increasing risk.
−Days to first payout at 7 is slightly above the industry average of 6.5, a minor but notable delay.

Funded Futures Network

Lower trust score (59/100). Faster payouts at 0d. 80% profit split.

Topstep

Higher trust score (69/100). Slower payouts at 7d. 90% profit split.