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
Great Point Capital vs Lucid Trading
Side-by-side comparison of trust scores, profit splits, payout speed, and real trader reviews. Independent data — no sponsored rankings.
GPCP
Great Point Capital
LCDT
Lucid Trading
GREAT POINT CAPITAL
METRIC
LUCID TRADING
0/100TIE
TRUST SCORE
TIE0/100
0/5TIE
RATING
TIE0/5
—
PROFIT SPLIT
90%
—
MAX FUNDING
—
—
MIN COST
$90
—
PAYOUT DAYS
1d
—
PASS RATE
—
0TIE
REVIEW COUNT
TIE0
GREAT POINT CAPITAL DETAILS
- STEPS
- -phase
LUCID TRADING DETAILS
- STEPS
- 2-phase
- DRAWDOWN
- Trailing EOD
- MARKETS
- Futures
- PLATFORMS
- NinjaTrader, Tradovate, Rithmic, MotiveWave, QuantTower
Great Point Capital PROS
- +US-based firm may benefit from operating in a well-regulated and established financial environment.
- +Great Point Capital name suggests an institutionally oriented approach to trader funding.
- +US location may provide access to a broad range of market instruments and trading hours.
- +Presence on a comparison platform indicates some degree of public accountability and visibility.
Great Point Capital CONS
- −No trading data has been provided for this firm, making any objective evaluation impossible.
- −Without profit split, drawdown, funding levels, or challenge cost, no industry comparisons can be made.
- −Traders cannot make informed decisions without disclosure of core terms and conditions for this firm.
Lucid Trading PROS
- +Profit split of 90% is above the industry average of 84.7%
- +Days to first payout of 1 is significantly faster than the industry average of 6.5 days
- +On-demand payouts offer maximum flexibility in accessing earned profits
- +Wide platform selection including NinjaTrader, Tradovate, Rithmic, MotiveWave, and QuantTower
Lucid Trading CONS
- −No max funding data provided, preventing comparison to the industry average of $839,272.70
- −Profit target of 8% is slightly above the industry average of 7.9%, marginally harder to achieve
- −Trailing EOD drawdown type can be more restrictive than fixed drawdown structures
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