Topstep vs AquaFutures

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

TOPSTEP DETAILS

+Profit split of 90% is well above the industry average of 84.7%, offering traders a superior earnings share.
+Min challenge cost of $49 is well below the industry average of $186.7, making entry highly accessible.
+Single-step funding is better than the industry average of 1.6 steps, streamlining the path to funded status.
+Founded in 2012, Topstep is one of the most established prop firms, providing strong credibility and track record.

−Max funding of $150,000 is far below the industry average of $839,272.7, significantly limiting earning potential.
−Overall drawdown of 10% with trailing EOD type means drawdown limits tighten as profits grow, increasing risk.
−Days to first payout at 7 is slightly above the industry average of 6.5, a minor but notable delay.

+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.

Topstep

Trust score 70/100. Faster payouts at 3d. 90% profit split.

AquaFutures

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