OneUp Trader vs Goat Funded Futures

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, providing access to an asset class not offered by all prop firms.
+Hong Kong base may offer access to Asian market hours and related futures instruments.
+Futures markets offer high liquidity and defined contract structures attractive to professional traders.
+Specialisation in futures suggests a focused and potentially expert evaluation framework.

−No trading data has been provided for this firm, making objective comparison impossible.
−Without profit split, drawdown, funding levels, or challenge cost, no industry benchmarks can be applied.
−Traders cannot assess suitability or value without disclosure of core terms and conditions.

OneUp Trader

Higher trust score (64/100). Faster payouts at 1d. 90% profit split.

Goat Funded Futures

Lower trust score (63/100). Slower payouts at 2d. 90% profit split.