OneUp Trader vs Trading Cult

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.

+Min challenge cost of $30 is significantly below the industry average of $186.7, lowering the barrier to entry.
+Max funding of $2,000,000 is more than double the industry average of $839,272.7.
+Fixed drawdown type provides traders with predictable and stable risk boundaries.
+Profit target of 8% aligns with the industry average of 7.9%, setting a fair challenge threshold.

−News trading and EA/automated trading are both not allowed, severely restricting trading strategies.
−Weekend holding is not allowed, limiting flexibility for traders with longer-term positions.
−Days to first payout of 14 is more than double the industry average of 6.5 days, delaying trader income.

OneUp Trader

Higher trust score (60/100). Faster payouts at 1d. 90% profit split.

Trading Cult

Lower trust score (54/100). Slower payouts at 14d. 80% profit split.