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

Monevis Funding vs Lucid Trading

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

MNVF
Monevis Funding
EST. 2024
LCDT
Lucid Trading
MONEVIS FUNDING
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

MONEVIS FUNDING DETAILS

STEPS
-phase
DRAWDOWN
Static

LUCID TRADING DETAILS

STEPS
2-phase
DRAWDOWN
Trailing EOD
MARKETS
Futures
PLATFORMS
NinjaTrader, Tradovate, Rithmic, MotiveWave, QuantTower

Monevis Funding PROS

  • +Static drawdown type provides a fixed, predictable risk boundary, which some traders prefer for planning.
  • +Czech Republic is an EU-member jurisdiction, which may offer relevant regulatory context.
  • +No platform or market data is available to assess further strengths.
  • +No funding or cost data is provided to compare against industry benchmarks.

Monevis Funding CONS

  • −Founded in 2024, making Monevis Funding a very new firm with limited operational track record.
  • −No profit split, max funding, or challenge cost data is available for comparison against industry averages.
  • −Lack of transparency around key metrics is a concern for traders making informed decisions.

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

Monevis Funding
Higher trust score (0/100). Slower payouts at —d.
Lucid Trading
Higher trust score (0/100). Faster payouts at 1d. 90% profit split.

RELATED LINKS

Monevis Funding Full Review →Lucid Trading 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