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

ICFunded vs Aqua Funded

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

ICFD
ICFunded
Aqua Funded
AQUA
Aqua Funded
EST. 2023
ICFUNDED
METRIC
AQUA FUNDED
56/100
TRUST SCORE
BETTER59/100
4.4/5BETTER
RATING
4/5
80%
PROFIT SPLIT
BETTER90%
$500,000
MAX FUNDING
BETTER$2,000,000
$74
MIN COST
BETTER$1
14d
PAYOUT DAYS
BETTER7d
PASS RATE
2TIE
REVIEW COUNT
TIE2

ICFUNDED DETAILS

STEPS
2-phase
DRAWDOWN
static
MARKETS
forex, indices, metals, commodities, crypto
PLATFORMS
mt5
TYPES
forex, futures

AQUA FUNDED DETAILS

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

ICFunded PROS

  • +Min challenge cost of $74 is well below the industry average of $186.7, lowering entry costs.
  • +Profit split of 80% is provided with bi-weekly payouts, offering regular income access.
  • +Static drawdown type provides clear, fixed risk boundaries for traders to plan around.
  • +Markets include forex, indices, metals, commodities, and crypto, offering reasonable diversification.

ICFunded CONS

  • Max funding of $500,000 is well below the industry average of $839,272.7, limiting upside potential.
  • Key data including days to first payout, profit target, drawdown percentage, and trading condition rules are not provided, limiting transparency.
  • Only MT5 is listed as a platform, offering less choice than most competitors with multiple platform options.

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

ICFunded
Lower trust score (56/100). Slower payouts at 14d. 80% profit split.
Aqua Funded
Higher trust score (59/100). Faster payouts at 7d. 90% profit split.

RELATED LINKS

ICFunded 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