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
Goat Funded Futures vs ATFunded
Side-by-side comparison of trust scores, profit splits, payout speed, and real trader reviews. Independent data — no sponsored rankings.
GFFU
Goat Funded Futures
ATFD
ATFunded
GOAT FUNDED FUTURES
METRIC
ATFUNDED
0/100TIE
TRUST SCORE
TIE0/100
0/5TIE
RATING
TIE0/5
—
PROFIT SPLIT
80%
—
MAX FUNDING
$200,000
—
MIN COST
$49
—
PAYOUT DAYS
14d
—
PASS RATE
—
0TIE
REVIEW COUNT
TIE0
GOAT FUNDED FUTURES DETAILS
- STEPS
- -phase
- MARKETS
- Futures
ATFUNDED DETAILS
- STEPS
- 2-phase
- DRAWDOWN
- Trailing EOD
- MARKETS
- Forex, Indices, Commodities, Crypto
Goat Funded Futures PROS
- +Listed as a futures firm, providing access to an asset class not offered by all prop firms.
- +Hong Kong base may offer access to Asian market hours and related futures instruments.
- +Futures markets offer high liquidity and defined contract structures attractive to professional traders.
- +Specialisation in futures suggests a focused and potentially expert evaluation framework.
Goat Funded Futures CONS
- −No trading data has been provided for this firm, making objective comparison impossible.
- −Without profit split, drawdown, funding levels, or challenge cost, no industry benchmarks can be applied.
- −Traders cannot assess suitability or value without disclosure of core terms and conditions.
ATFunded PROS
- +Min challenge cost of $49 is well below the industry average of $186.7, making entry very affordable.
- +EA/automated trading is permitted, supporting algorithmic and systematic trading strategies.
- +Overall drawdown of 10% is above the industry average of 7.9%, offering more buffer before a breach occurs.
- +Multi-market access including Forex, Indices, Commodities, and Crypto provides good diversification options.
ATFunded CONS
- −Profit split of 80% is below the industry average of 84.7%, meaning traders retain less of their profits.
- −Max funding of $200,000 is significantly below the industry average of $839,272.7, limiting earning potential.
- −Days to first payout at 14 is more than double the industry average of 6.5 days, significantly slowing cash flow.
PROPDNA VERDICT
RELATED LINKS
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