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

RebelsFunding vs Funded Futures Network

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

RBLS

RebelsFunding

EST. 2023

FFNT

Funded Futures Network

EST. 2022

REBELSFUNDING

METRIC

FUNDED FUTURES NETWORK

0/100TIE

TRUST SCORE

TIE0/100

0/5TIE

RATING

TIE0/5

80%TIE

PROFIT SPLIT

TIE80%

$320,000BETTER

MAX FUNDING

—$250,000

$9BETTER

MIN COST

—$81

—

PAYOUT DAYS

—

PASS RATE

—

0TIE

REVIEW COUNT

TIE0

REBELSFUNDING DETAILS

STEPS: 4-phase
DRAWDOWN: Fixed
MARKETS: Forex

FUNDED FUTURES NETWORK DETAILS

STEPS: 2-phase
DRAWDOWN: Trailing EOD
MARKETS: Futures
PLATFORMS: Rithmic, Onyx, Quantower

RebelsFunding PROS

+Min challenge cost of $9 is extraordinarily low compared to the industry average of $186.7, minimising entry risk.
+Profit target of 5% is well below the industry average of 7.9%, making the challenge easier to complete.
+Fee refund is available, giving traders the opportunity to recover the challenge cost.
+Fixed drawdown type provides clearly defined and stable risk parameters for traders.

RebelsFunding CONS

−Steps to funded is 4, far above the industry average of 1.6, requiring significantly more evaluation stages.
−Max funding of $320,000 is well below the industry average of $839,272.7, limiting potential earnings.
−Markets are limited to forex only, offering no diversification into indices, metals, commodities, or crypto.

Funded Futures Network PROS

+Min challenge cost of $81 is well below the industry average of $186.7, significantly reducing entry costs.
+Days to first payout of 0 means instant payouts, far better than the industry average of 6.5 days.
+On-demand payout frequency gives traders maximum flexibility in accessing their profits.
+Profit target of 6% is below the industry average of 7.9%, making the challenge easier to complete.

Funded Futures Network CONS

−Profit split of 80% is below the industry average of 84.7%, reducing the trader's share of earnings.
−Max funding of $250,000 is significantly below the industry average of $839,272.7, limiting scale.
−Two-step funding process is above the industry average of 1.6 steps, adding an extra evaluation hurdle.

PROPDNA VERDICT

RebelsFunding

Higher trust score (0/100). Slower payouts at —d. 80% profit split.

START WITH RBLS