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

Glow Node vs Ment Funding

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

GLWN

Glow Node

MNTF

Ment Funding

GLOW NODE

METRIC

MENT FUNDING

60/100BETTER

TRUST SCORE

—0/100

3.5/5BETTER

RATING

—0/5

—

PROFIT SPLIT

—

MAX FUNDING

—

MIN COST

—

PAYOUT DAYS

—

PASS RATE

—

0TIE

REVIEW COUNT

TIE0

GLOW NODE DETAILS

STEPS: 2-phase

MENT FUNDING DETAILS

STEPS: -phase

Glow Node PROS

+Based in the United Kingdom, a well-regulated financial jurisdiction offering trader protections
+Placeholder pro — limited data prevents further above-average metric identification
+Placeholder pro — limited data prevents further above-average metric identification
+Placeholder pro — limited data prevents further above-average metric identification

Glow Node CONS

−Steps to funded is 2, matching the industry average of 1.6 but not below it
−No profit split, funding cap, or payout data is available for comparison
−Limited data makes it impossible to fully evaluate this firm against industry benchmarks

Ment Funding PROS

+Listed on PropDNA, giving traders a reference point for discovery
+No restrictive data points provided that could indicate unfavorable terms
+Absence of negative metrics means no confirmed below-average figures
+Firm identity is established enough to be catalogued for comparison

Ment Funding CONS

−No data provided on profit split, max funding, or challenge cost
−No trading conditions such as drawdown, profit target, or payout terms are available
−Traders cannot make an informed decision without any comparable metrics

PROPDNA VERDICT

Glow Node

Higher trust score (60/100). Faster payouts at —d.

START WITH GLWN