FundedNext vs AquaFutures

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

FUNDEDNEXT DETAILS

+Profit split of 95% is well above the industry average of 84.7%.
+Minimum challenge cost of $49 is well below the industry average of $186.7.
+Days to first payout of 4 is faster than the industry average of 6.5 days.
+Fee refund is offered, and weekend holding, news trading, and EA use are all permitted.

−Overall drawdown of 10% with a relative drawdown type is above the industry average of 7.9% and more restrictive in practice.
−Profit target of 10% is above the industry average of 7.9%, making evaluation harder to pass.
−Max funding of $300,000 is significantly below the industry average of $839,272.7.

+Listed as a futures firm, which offers an asset class not available at all prop firms.
+Firm name suggests an association with the Aqua brand, which may indicate shared infrastructure or credibility.
+Futures trading can provide access to high-liquidity instruments with defined contract specifications.
+The futures category is a growing segment within prop trading, reflecting market demand.

−No data has been provided for this firm, making any objective assessment impossible.
−Without metrics such as profit split, drawdown, funding levels, or challenge cost, no comparisons can be made.
−Traders should seek full disclosure of terms before considering this firm, as critical information is absent.

FundedNext

Trust score 55/100. Slower payouts at 21d. 80% profit split.

AquaFutures

Not yet rated by PropDNA traders. Faster payouts at 5d. 90% profit split.