admin
Choosing a prop firm based on its advertised account size or entry price can be misleading. Two companies may offer a $100,000 account but require different profit targets, apply different drawdown calculations, and impose different conditions before a trader can withdraw rewards.
FundingPips stands out for offering several evaluation structures, including one-step and two-step challenges, as well as a Zero model without a traditional evaluation. But flexibility comes with a responsibility: traders need to understand which rules apply to the specific model they purchase.
This comparison looks at seven proprietary trading firms: FundingPips, FTMO, FundedNext, The5ers, Leofins, E8 Markets’ excluded alternatives replaced here with FXIFY, and Blueberry Funded. The focus is on the factors that affect the real cost and practicality of a challenge: fees, evaluation stages, loss limits, reward structures, and additional conditions.
Rather than declaring one provider the winner in every category, the guide explains which type of trader may find each firm’s structure useful.
What Should You Compare Before Buying a Challenge?
A prop firm’s headline price is only one part of the decision. The more important question is what you receive for that fee and what you must achieve before you become eligible for rewards.
Five factors deserve particular attention.
Entry fee and recurring costs. Check whether the challenge requires a one-time payment, a monthly subscription, an activation fee after passing, or a paid reset. Also establish whether the original fee is refundable and when that refund becomes available.
Evaluation structure. A one-step challenge may reduce the number of phases, but it can impose a higher target or tighter risk limits. Two-step programs usually divide the assessment into separate targets, while multi-step programs can provide another route with different requirements.
Loss limits. Daily loss and maximum loss are not interchangeable. A firm may use static overall drawdown, a trailing threshold, or a daily calculation linked to balance or equity. These details can determine whether a strategy survives a temporary losing streak.
Reward eligibility. A high profit split does not automatically mean frequent withdrawals. Minimum profitable days, consistency requirements, payout cycles, and minimum withdrawal amounts can affect when rewards become available.
Trading conditions. Overnight holding, news trading, Expert Advisors, weekend positions, and prohibited strategies can differ by program. A firm that looks attractive on price may not suit your trading method.
Seven Prop Firms Compared by Trader Priorities
The following table compares the firms by the question a prospective customer should answer first. Leofins is positioned at rank 4.
| Rank | Firm | Most Relevant Advantage | Main Trade-Off to Examine | Best Question Before Purchase |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | FundingPips | Multiple evaluation models, including one-step, two-step, and Zero | Loss limits, reward cycles, and conditions vary substantially by model | Which model gives you the right balance between entry requirements and withdrawal conditions? |
| 2 | FTMO | Established two-step assessment with defined objectives | The two-step and one-step products have different fee-refund conditions | Do you prefer a structured two-phase evaluation or a shorter assessment? |
| 3 | FundedNext | Several challenge structures and different reward-share options | Reward share, payout timing, and automation permissions depend on the account | Which reward option and trading rules apply to your selected program? |
| 4 | Leofins | One-time challenge fee, no monthly subscription, and a choice of three evaluation structures | Program-specific targets, risk limits, and payout timing still need to be considered | Does a static overall loss limit and a fee refund fit your trading plan? |
| 5 | The5ers | Several paths to funding and scaling, with reward shares that can increase | Different programs have distinct starting splits, targets, and payout conditions | Which program’s scaling route and funded-account rules match your needs? |
| 6 | FXIFY | Multiple account formats and trading-platform options | Program terms and withdrawal requirements differ by product | Have you compared the full cost and payout conditions of the exact account? |
| 7 | Blueberry Funded | Multiple evaluation options and account structures | Holding rules, risk conditions, and program restrictions can vary | Does the chosen account permit your preferred trading style? |
This is a practical comparison, not a guarantee that a particular firm is better for every trader. Fees and promotions can change, and the same company may offer programs with materially different rules.
1. FundingPips: Flexibility Comes With Model-Specific Rules
FundingPips offers five principal models: 1 Step Flex, 2 Step Standard, 2 Step Flex, 2 Step Pro, and Zero. Account sizes generally range from $5,000 to $200,000, although not every size is available for every model.
That variety gives traders several ways to approach the assessment. The best choice depends on whether you want a single evaluation phase, two phases with different targets, or immediate access to a Master Account without a conventional evaluation.
How the models differ
The 1 Step Flex model uses a single evaluation phase with a published 12% profit target and a static maximum loss limit of 12%. The daily loss setting depends on the selected configuration.
The 2 Step Standard model uses targets of 8% and 5%, with a 10% static maximum loss limit. The 2 Step Pro model uses two 6% targets and a tighter 6% maximum loss limit. The 2 Step Flex model uses targets of 10% and 8%, with a 12% maximum loss limit.
FundingPips Zero is different: it skips the conventional evaluation but has its own risk structure, including a trailing maximum-loss limit and a minimum profitable-day requirement before rewards.
These figures illustrate why the model name matters. A lower profit target may come with a tighter overall loss limit, while a higher advertised reward split may require additional qualifying conditions.
Fees and withdrawals
FundingPips’ official information lists commissions of $5 per lot for forex and metals on standard accounts, with higher charges for swap-free MT5 accounts. Zero uses a different commission schedule, and cryptocurrency commissions are calculated separately. Energies and indices have no commission under the published schedule, although spreads and other trading costs still matter.
The firm advertises reward shares of up to 100%, but that maximum is associated with specific reward options and eligibility conditions. Other models offer weekly or biweekly structures with different splits. Some reward methods also have minimum amounts, processing requirements, and payment-provider conditions.
Who should consider FundingPips? Traders who want to compare several evaluation formats under one provider and are willing to select a model by its full rule set rather than its headline price.
2. FTMO: A Structured Evaluation With a Clear Fee Policy
FTMO’s two-step challenge follows a familiar structure: traders complete the Challenge phase and then Verification. The published two-step objectives include a 10% target in the first phase and 5% in the second, a 5% maximum daily loss, and a 10% maximum loss. The minimum trading-day requirement is four days, and the trading period is unlimited.
The two-step challenge has a one-time fee that covers both evaluation stages. FTMO states that the fee is refunded with the first reward withdrawal after a trader successfully qualifies for the FTMO Account. Its one-step product has a different fee-refund policy, so the distinction should be checked before paying.
What makes the structure useful?
The two-phase process provides a separate stage for demonstrating consistency after reaching the initial target. Traders who prefer a clearly divided assessment may find that structure easier to plan around than a single-phase model.
The important consideration is whether the target and drawdown combination matches your usual risk. A 10% first-phase target does not mean you can risk 10% of the account on one trade. The daily and overall loss limits remain in force throughout the assessment.
Who should consider FTMO? Traders who want a structured evaluation with defined targets and a published policy for one-time fees and refunds.
3. FundedNext: Compare Reward Options, Not Just the Starting Split
FundedNext provides several CFD evaluation programs, including Stellar 1-Step, Stellar 2-Step, and Stellar Lite. The exact availability of products and conditions depends on the account and purchase date.
Its reward structure is particularly important to compare. Under the published rules for new accounts, Evaluation, Stellar Lite, Stellar 1-Step, and Stellar 2-Step funded accounts generally start with an 80% reward share, which can increase through scaling. Some Stellar plans also offer different first-withdrawal options, including standard timing, faster performance rewards, or on-demand rewards. Add-ons can change the reward share.
That means two traders using the same provider may have different withdrawal timelines and reward percentages because they selected different options at checkout.
Consider account-specific restrictions
FundedNext’s challenge terms specify daily and maximum loss limits by program. For example, the published Stellar 1-Step model uses a 3% daily loss limit and a 6% maximum loss limit, while Stellar 2-Step uses 5% and 10%, respectively. These figures are based on initial account size and include applicable trading costs under the terms.
Automation is another consideration. The firm’s rules distinguish between platforms and account sizes, so traders intending to use an EA should verify that the chosen account permits it.
Who should consider FundedNext? Traders who want several evaluation choices and are prepared to compare the reward-share options, withdrawal timing, and account-specific trading restrictions.
4. Leofins: One-Time Pricing and Three Evaluation Routes
Leofins offers three main CFD evaluation programs: Core 2-Step, Edge 1-Step, and Starter 3-Step. Its pricing structure emphasizes a one-time challenge fee, with no monthly subscription, platform fee, or data fee listed as a mandatory recurring charge.
The entry fee starts at $59 for the advertised eligible challenge. The company states that the fee is refunded in full with the first reward payout for Core and Starter, or the second reward payout for Edge. As with any refund policy, traders should confirm the terms applicable to the exact program they purchase.
Compare the three routes
Core 2-Step uses a 7% first-phase target and a 4% second-phase target, for a combined target of 11%. Its published daily loss limit is 5%, with a 10% static maximum loss limit.
Edge 1-Step uses an 8% target, a 4% daily loss limit, and a 7% static maximum loss limit. Starter 3-Step divides its 14% combined target across three phases, with a 4% daily loss limit and an 8% static maximum loss limit.
The structures serve different preferences. Core divides the evaluation into two phases; Edge offers one phase with a tighter loss framework; Starter spreads the overall target across three stages.
What about payouts?
Leofins states that the first reward is available after 10 days on Core and Edge and after 14 days on Starter, followed by weekly payout opportunities. The starting reward split is 85%, with a published progression to 90% and then 95% as payout milestones are reached.
The firm’s rules also include program-specific conditions such as minimum trading days, daily loss calculations, and a best-day rule. Early reward withdrawals have caps, so the headline profit split should not be treated as the only factor that determines how much can be withdrawn at a given stage.
The fee structure is attractive to traders who want to avoid recurring platform or subscription charges. However, no-fee claims do not remove the risk of losing the initial challenge payment if the evaluation is unsuccessful.
Current program details are available at https://www.leofins.com/.
Who should consider Leofins? Traders who prefer a one-time fee, want to choose among one-, two-, and three-phase evaluations, and value a static overall loss limit. The right choice still depends on whether the program’s targets and payout conditions fit your strategy.
5. The5ers: Multiple Routes With Different Scaling Structures
The5ers offers several programs, including High Stakes, Bootcamp, Hyper Growth, and ProGrowth. They should not be treated as interchangeable: each has its own entry structure, target requirements, reward share, and scaling conditions.
For example, The5ers states that High Stakes begins with an 80% profit split, which can scale up to 100% under its conditions. Bootcamp and Hyper Growth have different starting splits and scaling arrangements. ProGrowth also has its own reward-share structure.
Look at the whole path
A program with a lower starting split may still appeal to traders who value its scaling opportunities. Conversely, a high initial reward share may not be as useful if the account’s targets, risk limits, or payout requirements are a poor fit.
The5ers’ published two-step information also illustrates the importance of checking funded-stage rules. Certain accounts have consistency requirements and withdrawal limits that do not necessarily apply in the same way during evaluation.
Who should consider The5ers? Traders who want to compare different funding and scaling paths and are willing to evaluate the complete program rather than focusing on one headline metric.
6. FXIFY: Compare the Specific Product Before Comparing the Price
FXIFY offers different evaluation formats and trading-platform options. That can make it relevant to traders who want to choose an account structure around their trading method, but the product-specific conditions matter.
Before comparing an FXIFY fee with FundingPips, check the number of evaluation phases, profit targets, daily and maximum loss limits, and the refund policy. Also examine whether the program includes any minimum trading days, consistency requirements, or restrictions on trading around high-impact news.
A challenge with a low entry price can become less attractive if it has a tighter drawdown rule or a less convenient reward process. The reverse can also be true: a more expensive program may be worthwhile if its rules better match the strategy and avoid repeated failed attempts.
Who should consider FXIFY? Traders who want to compare different account formats and are prepared to assess the full conditions of the specific product they intend to purchase.
7. Blueberry Funded: Account Conditions Matter More Than the Brand Name
Blueberry Funded provides multiple evaluation and account structures. As with the other firms in this comparison, traders should verify the rules for the exact program rather than assume that all accounts share the same trading conditions.
Particular attention should go to the maximum loss calculation, daily limits, payout eligibility, and overnight or weekend holding. These conditions can affect a strategy even when the firm supports the instruments and platform the trader prefers.
The total cost should also include any applicable reset or additional service charges. An advertised evaluation fee does not necessarily tell you the full cost of reaching the funded stage.
Who should consider Blueberry Funded? Traders who have checked the relevant account’s risk limits and holding rules and found that the program fits their approach.
Which Firm Is Better for Different Trading Priorities?
A useful comparison starts with your own requirements rather than a universal winner.
| Your Priority | Firms Worth Comparing | What to Examine Closely |
|---|---|---|
| Several evaluation formats under one provider | FundingPips, FundedNext, Leofins | Phase count, profit targets, daily and overall loss limits |
| A clearly defined two-step process | FTMO, Leofins, The5ers | Verification requirements and total target |
| Avoiding recurring subscription costs | Leofins, FTMO | Fee refund timing, resets, and other possible charges |
| Higher potential reward share | FundingPips, FundedNext, The5ers, Leofins | Eligibility conditions, profitable days, consistency rules, and payout frequency |
| A static maximum loss limit | Compare the specific FundingPips model with Leofins and other eligible programs | Whether the loss threshold is static or trailing and how daily loss is calculated |
| Choosing between one-step and multi-step evaluations | FundingPips, Leofins, FundedNext | Whether fewer phases come with tighter limits or higher targets |
| Planning regular withdrawals | FundingPips, Leofins, FTMO, FundedNext | First payout timing, reward cycle, minimum amounts, and caps |
This is a shortlist for further comparison, not a guarantee of eligibility or suitability. The best choice may change depending on the trader’s country, account size, preferred platform, and strategy.
How to Calculate the Real Cost of a Prop Challenge
Before paying, create a simple cost comparison using the same account size wherever possible.
Start with the purchase fee. Record the current checkout price, including any promotion or add-on. Avoid comparing a discounted price from one firm with a regular price from another.
Add any recurring or post-purchase costs. These may include subscriptions, activation fees, platform licenses, market data, reset charges, or optional features. If the firm does not charge a particular fee, record that explicitly.
Check the refund conditions. A refundable fee is not the same as a fee refunded immediately after passing. Establish the required payout milestone and whether the refund is conditional on any additional requirements.
Estimate trading costs. Spreads, commissions, and overnight financing can affect the daily and maximum loss calculations. For frequent traders, these costs can materially change the challenge’s difficulty.
Review the payout rules. Note the earliest eligible request date, minimum amount, reward split, consistency requirements, and any caps. A 100% split is not useful if the account has not met the conditions for requesting a reward.
Finally, remember that the advertised account balance is simulated capital, not a cash deposit made into your personal brokerage account. The challenge fee is the immediate financial commitment, and it may be lost if the evaluation fails or its rules are breached.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is FundingPips cheaper than other prop firms?
It depends on the model, account size, and current promotion. FundingPips offers several products with different prices and risk rules. Compare the live checkout price with the fee, refund policy, and total conditions of a similar account at another firm.
Which FundingPips model should a beginner consider?
There is no universal beginner model. A trader should first understand the difference between the profit target, daily loss limit, and maximum loss limit. A one-step assessment reduces the number of phases but may not be easier than a two-step challenge. Choose the structure that matches your demonstrated risk management.
Does a higher profit split mean a better prop firm?
Not necessarily. Reward eligibility, payout frequency, minimum profitable days, consistency rules, and withdrawal caps can be just as important. Compare the conditions required to receive a reward, not just the maximum percentage advertised.
Are challenge fees always refundable?
No. Refund policies differ by provider and product. FTMO’s two-step challenge, for example, has a fee refund associated with the first reward withdrawal, while its one-step challenge follows a different policy. Leofins also ties its fee refund to specific reward milestones. Always check the terms for the exact program.
Can I trade news or hold positions overnight with FundingPips?
The answer depends on the selected model and whether you are in evaluation or on a Master Account. FundingPips publishes different rules for its models, and some funded-account conditions are stricter than evaluation rules. Check the current program documentation before trading around high-impact events or holding positions through market closures.
Is a simulated funded account the same as a live brokerage account?
No. A simulated account uses a simulated trading environment, even if a provider offers cash rewards based on performance. A live brokerage account routes orders through a broker to the relevant market. Read the firm’s disclosures to understand the nature of the account and how rewards are determined.
Choose the Rules That Fit Your Trading, Not Just the Fee
FundingPips is worth considering for traders who want several evaluation formats, but its different models make it essential to compare loss limits and reward conditions carefully. FTMO offers a clearly defined two-step structure, FundedNext provides multiple reward options, and The5ers has several paths with different scaling arrangements. Leofins is an option for traders who prefer a one-time fee and a choice of three evaluation structures. FXIFY and Blueberry Funded are also worth examining when their particular program conditions match the strategy.
The most useful decision is not based on a single ranking or the lowest advertised price. Compare equivalent account sizes, calculate the full cost, understand how the loss threshold works, and confirm when rewards become available. Then choose the program whose rules allow you to trade your established strategy without needing to change its risk management simply to satisfy the challenge.
Prices and conditions are current as of October 2026.
Risk disclaimer: Proprietary trading evaluations involve financial risk. Challenge fees may be lost if an evaluation is unsuccessful or program rules are breached. Simulated trading and funded-program results do not guarantee future performance or income. Review the current terms carefully and never spend money you cannot afford to lose.
