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

FuturesElite vs Aqua Funded

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

FTEL
FuturesElite
Aqua Funded
AQUA
Aqua Funded
EST. 2023
FUTURESELITE
METRIC
AQUA FUNDED
59/100TIE
TRUST SCORE
TIE59/100
4/5TIE
RATING
TIE4/5
100%BETTER
PROFIT SPLIT
90%
$150,000
MAX FUNDING
BETTER$2,000,000
$79
MIN COST
BETTER$1
1dBETTER
PAYOUT DAYS
7d
PASS RATE
1
REVIEW COUNT
BETTER2

FUTURESELITE DETAILS

STEPS
1-phase
DRAWDOWN
Trailing
MARKETS
Futures
PLATFORMS
Tradovate, NinjaTrader, Quantower, Atas

AQUA FUNDED DETAILS

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

FuturesElite PROS

  • +Profit split of 100% is exceptional and far above the industry average of 84.7%, maximising trader earnings.
  • +Days to first payout of 1 is far faster than the industry average of 6.5 days.
  • +Steps to funded is 1, well below the industry average of 1.6, enabling faster access to capital.
  • +Profit target of 6% is below the industry average of 7.9%, making the challenge easier to achieve.

FuturesElite CONS

  • Max funding of $150,000 is significantly below the industry average of $839,272.7, limiting earning potential.
  • Overall drawdown is dollar-denominated at $2,000 and cannot be meaningfully compared to the percentage-based industry average.
  • No daily drawdown limit is listed, which may introduce uncertainty around intraday risk controls.

Aqua Funded PROS

  • +Min challenge cost of just $1 is exceptionally below the industry average of $186.7, making it highly accessible.
  • +Max funding of $2,000,000 is more than double the industry average of $839,272.7.
  • +Profit split of 90% significantly exceeds the industry average of 84.7%.
  • +Weekend holding, news trading, and EA use are all permitted, offering maximum trading flexibility.

Aqua Funded CONS

  • Overall drawdown of 10% is above the industry average of 7.9%, requiring traders to manage larger potential losses.
  • Profit target of 10% is higher than the industry average of 7.9%, making the challenge harder to pass.
  • Days to first payout of 7 is slightly above the industry average of 6.5 days.

PROPDNA VERDICT

FuturesElite
Higher trust score (59/100). Faster payouts at 1d. 100% profit split.
Aqua Funded
Higher trust score (59/100). Slower payouts at 7d. 90% profit split.

RELATED LINKS

FuturesElite Full Review →Aqua 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