QT Funded vs Lucid Trading

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

QT FUNDED DETAILS

+Minimum challenge cost of $12 is drastically below the industry average of $186.7.
+Days to first payout of 1 day is far faster than the industry average of 6.5 days.
+Fee refund is available, reducing the financial risk of the challenge.
+Profit target of 7% is below the industry average of 8%, making the target easier to hit.

−Profit split of 80% is below the industry average of 84.7%.
−Overall drawdown of 10% is above the industry average of 7.9%, indicating higher risk tolerance required.
−News trading is not allowed, restricting a commonly used trading strategy.

+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

−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

QT Funded

Higher trust score (65/100). Faster payouts at 1d. 80% profit split.

Lucid Trading

Lower trust score (63/100). Faster payouts at 1d. 90% profit split.