OneUp Trader vs AquaFutures

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

ONEUP TRADER DETAILS

MARKETS: Futures (CME, CBOT, COMEX, NYMEX - equity index, currency, energy, metals, agricultural, interest rate futures)
PLATFORMS: NinjaTrader, R, Trader Pro, Sierra Chart, Bookmap, MultiCharts, Quantower, MotiveWave, Jigsaw Trading, Agena Trader, Volfix, Medved Trader
TYPES: futures, large-cap

+Single-step funding process is faster than the industry average of 1.6 steps.
+Minimum challenge cost of $125 is below the industry average of $186.7.
+Profit target of 6% is below the industry average of 7.9%, making evaluation easier to pass.
+Founded in 2017, making it one of the more established prop firms in the industry.

−Days to first payout of 14 is more than double the industry average of 6.5 days.
−Max funding of $250,000 is well below the industry average of $839,272.7.
−Weekend holding is not allowed, restricting trader flexibility over weekends.

+Listed as a futures firm, which offers an asset class not available at all prop firms.
+Firm name suggests an association with the Aqua brand, which may indicate shared infrastructure or credibility.
+Futures trading can provide access to high-liquidity instruments with defined contract specifications.
+The futures category is a growing segment within prop trading, reflecting market demand.

−No data has been provided for this firm, making any objective assessment impossible.
−Without metrics such as profit split, drawdown, funding levels, or challenge cost, no comparisons can be made.
−Traders should seek full disclosure of terms before considering this firm, as critical information is absent.

OneUp Trader

Trust score 60/100. Faster payouts at 1d. 90% profit split.

AquaFutures

Not yet rated by PropDNA traders. Slower payouts at 5d. 90% profit split.