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 For Traders

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

FPIP

FundingPips

✓ VERIFIEDEST. 2022

FORT

For Traders

EST. 2023

FUNDINGPIPS

METRIC

FOR TRADERS

78/100BETTER

TRUST SCORE

—65/100

0/5TIE

RATING

TIE0/5

80%—

PROFIT SPLIT

BETTER90%

$2,000,000BETTER

MAX FUNDING

—$300,000

$29BETTER

MIN COST

—$42

2dTIE

PAYOUT DAYS

TIE2d

—

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

FOR TRADERS DETAILS

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

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.

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

PROPDNA VERDICT

FundingPips

Higher trust score (78/100). Faster payouts at 2d. 80% profit split.

START WITH FPIP