FTMOvsFundingPips

FTMO and FundingPips both offer a 80% profit split, so the real differentiators come down to cost, capital, and rules. FTMO charges $540 and funds up to $400,000, while FundingPips charges $422 and funds up to $400,000. FTMO uses a 2-step evaluation; FundingPips uses 2 steps.

FundingPips's challenge fee of $422 is lower than FTMO's $540, making it the lower-cost option for traders focused on upfront fees.

Both FTMO and FundingPips offer a 80% profit split, so there is no meaningful difference in how profits are shared. Other factors—such as payout frequency, scaling plans, and maximum allocation—are likely to have a greater impact on your decision.

Both FTMO and FundingPips offer a maximum allocation of $400,000. Other factors—such as scaling plans, payout frequency, and evaluation rules—are likely to have a greater impact on your decision.

Both firms use a 2-step evaluation. FTMO requires 4 minimum trading days per phase, while FundingPips requires 1. FundingPips provides greater scheduling flexibility.

FTMO uses Balance Based drawdown, while FundingPips uses Balance Equity Highest Eod.

FTMO pays out every 14 days, while FundingPips pays out every 7 days.

FundingPips offers more frequent access to profits, which may appeal to traders who prioritize regular cash flow.

Both FTMO and FundingPips offer a scaling plan, allowing funded traders to increase their account allocation over time by meeting performance targets.

FTMO holds a 3.4 rating from 7 reviews, while FundingPips holds a 3 rating from 10 reviews. FTMO scores higher, but FundingPips's rating is based on a larger sample size, so both factors are worth considering.