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

FundingPips vs Blue Guardian

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

FundingPips
FPIP
FundingPips
✓ VERIFIEDEST. 2022
BLGD
Blue Guardian
FUNDINGPIPS
METRIC
BLUE GUARDIAN
78/100BETTER
TRUST SCORE
0/100
0/5TIE
RATING
TIE0/5
80%
PROFIT SPLIT
BETTER90%
$2,000,000BETTER
MAX FUNDING
$400,000
$29
MIN COST
2dBETTER
PAYOUT DAYS
7d
PASS RATE
0TIE
REVIEW COUNT
TIE0

FUNDINGPIPS DETAILS

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

BLUE GUARDIAN DETAILS

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

FundingPips PROS

  • +Min challenge cost of $29 is well below the industry average of $186.7, making entry highly affordable.
  • +Max funding of $2,000,000 is more than double the industry average of $839,272.7.
  • +Days to first payout of 2 is significantly faster than the industry average of 6.5 days.
  • +Weekend holding, news trading, and EA use are all permitted, offering broad trading flexibility.

FundingPips CONS

  • Profit split of 80% is below the industry average of 84.7%, giving traders a smaller earnings share.
  • Overall drawdown of 10% exceeds the industry average of 7.9%, requiring traders to absorb larger losses.
  • No fee refund is offered, meaning traders cannot recover the challenge cost upon passing.

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

FundingPips
Higher trust score (78/100). Faster payouts at 2d. 80% profit split.
Blue Guardian
Lower trust score (0/100). Slower payouts at 7d. 90% profit split.

RELATED LINKS

FundingPips Full Review →Blue Guardian 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