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

Finotive Funding vs Blue Guardian

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

FINO

Finotive Funding

EST. 2022

BLGD

Blue Guardian

FINOTIVE FUNDING

METRIC

BLUE GUARDIAN

72/100BETTER

TRUST SCORE

—0/100

0/5TIE

RATING

TIE0/5

90%TIE

PROFIT SPLIT

TIE90%

$300,000—

MAX FUNDING

BETTER$400,000

$49

MIN COST

—

7dTIE

PAYOUT DAYS

TIE7d

—

PASS RATE

—

0TIE

REVIEW COUNT

TIE0

FINOTIVE FUNDING DETAILS

STEPS: 2-phase
DRAWDOWN: Fixed
MARKETS: Forex, Indices, Commodities, Metals
PLATFORMS: MT4, MT5
TYPES: forex

BLUE GUARDIAN DETAILS

STEPS: 3-phase
DRAWDOWN: Trailing EOD
MARKETS: Forex, Futures
PLATFORMS: MT5, Matchtrader, Tradelocker, Tradovate, ProjectX, Volsys, Deepcharts

Finotive Funding PROS

+Profit split of 90% is well above the industry average of 84.7%
+Min challenge cost of $49 is significantly below the industry average of $186.7
+On-demand payouts offer greater flexibility than monthly or bi-weekly schedules
+Weekend holding, news trading, and EA use are all permitted, maximising trading flexibility

Finotive Funding CONS

−Profit target of 10% is above the industry average of 7.9%, requiring more gain to pass evaluation
−Max funding of $300,000 is below the industry average of $839,272.7
−Two steps to funded is slightly above the industry average of 1.6 steps

Blue Guardian PROS

+Profit split of 90% exceeds the industry average of 84.7%, favouring the trader
+On-demand payout frequency offers maximum withdrawal flexibility
+Max funding of $400,000 provides substantial capital access for traders
+Offers both Forex and Futures markets, giving traders access to multiple asset classes

Blue Guardian CONS

−Three steps to funded is above the industry average of 1.6, requiring more evaluation stages
−Overall drawdown of 6% is below the industry average of 7.9%, providing less loss tolerance
−No min challenge cost or profit target data is provided for full comparison

PROPDNA VERDICT

Finotive Funding

Higher trust score (72/100). Faster payouts at 7d. 90% profit split.

START WITH FINO