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

For Traders vs QT Funded

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

For Traders
FORT
For Traders
EST. 2023
QT Funded
QT
QT Funded
EST. 2023
FOR TRADERS
METRIC
QT FUNDED
65/100
TRUST SCORE
BETTER72/100
0/5TIE
RATING
TIE0/5
90%BETTER
PROFIT SPLIT
80%
$300,000
MAX FUNDING
BETTER$400,000
$42
MIN COST
BETTER$12
2d
PAYOUT DAYS
BETTER1d
PASS RATE
0TIE
REVIEW COUNT
TIE0

FOR TRADERS DETAILS

STEPS
1-phase
DRAWDOWN
Trailing
MARKETS
Forex, Indices, Commodities, Metals
PLATFORMS
cTrader, TradeLocker, DXtrade

QT FUNDED DETAILS

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

For Traders PROS

  • +Days to first payout of 2 is significantly faster than the industry average of 6.5 days
  • +Min challenge cost of $42 is dramatically below the industry average of $186.7
  • +Profit split of 90% exceeds the industry average of 84.7%, favouring the trader
  • +Single-step funding process beats the industry average of 1.6 steps for faster capital access

For Traders CONS

  • Profit target of 9% is slightly above the industry average of 7.9%, requiring more effort to pass
  • News trading and EA/automated trading are not allowed, limiting strategy flexibility
  • Overall drawdown of 6% is below the industry average of 7.9%, offering less loss tolerance

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

For Traders
Lower trust score (65/100). Slower payouts at 2d. 90% profit split.
QT Funded
Higher trust score (72/100). Faster payouts at 1d. 80% profit split.

RELATED LINKS

For 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