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

Funding Traders vs QT Funded

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

FNDG
Funding Traders
QT Funded
QT
QT Funded
EST. 2023
FUNDING TRADERS
METRIC
QT FUNDED
51/100
TRUST SCORE
BETTER64/100
4/5
RATING
BETTER5/5
90%BETTER
PROFIT SPLIT
80%
$400,000TIE
MAX FUNDING
TIE$400,000
$25
MIN COST
BETTER$12
14d
PAYOUT DAYS
BETTER1d
PASS RATE
1
REVIEW COUNT
BETTER2

FUNDING TRADERS DETAILS

STEPS
2-phase
DRAWDOWN
Fixed
MARKETS
Forex, Indices, Commodities, Crypto, Stocks

QT FUNDED DETAILS

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

Funding Traders PROS

  • +Min challenge cost of $25 is far below the industry average of $186.7, making evaluation highly affordable.
  • +Profit split of 90% exceeds the industry average of 84.7%, with a fee refund also available to traders.
  • +Profit target of 6% is below the industry average of 7.9%, making the evaluation threshold easier to achieve.
  • +Covers five asset classes including Forex, Indices, Commodities, Crypto, and Stocks, offering strong diversification.

Funding Traders CONS

  • Overall drawdown of 6% is below the industry average of 7.9%, providing a tighter risk boundary for traders.
  • Days to first payout of 14 is more than double the industry average of 6.5 days, delaying profit access.
  • Max funding of $400,000 is well below the industry average of $839,272.7, limiting maximum earning potential.

QT Funded PROS

  • +Minimum challenge cost of $12 is drastically below the industry average of $186.7.
  • +Days to first payout of 1 day is far faster than the industry average of 6.5 days.
  • +Fee refund is available, reducing the financial risk of the challenge.
  • +Profit target of 7% is below the industry average of 8%, making the target easier to hit.

QT Funded CONS

  • Profit split of 80% is below the industry average of 84.7%.
  • Overall drawdown of 10% is above the industry average of 7.9%, indicating higher risk tolerance required.
  • News trading is not allowed, restricting a commonly used trading strategy.

PROPDNA VERDICT

Funding Traders
Lower trust score (51/100). Slower payouts at 14d. 90% profit split.
QT Funded
Higher trust score (64/100). Faster payouts at 1d. 80% profit split.

RELATED LINKS

Funding Traders Full Review →QT Funded 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