Funding Pips vs FTMO

FTMO is the better prop firm for most serious traders in 2026. Funding Pips is the better choice if you prioritise lower entry costs, easier evaluation targets and more flexible reward splits.

The biggest difference is not simply price or profit split. It is how much complexity you are willing to accept after passing the evaluation.

FTMO has the longer operating history, simpler funded-stage rules, a stronger current Trustpilot rating and a particularly attractive 2-Step model where the challenge fee is refunded with the first reward. Funding Pips can be cheaper to enter and offers reward options ranging from weekly payments to a 100% monthly split, but several of those options come with consistency requirements, profitable-day requirements and additional risk controls.

Our verdict:

• Best overall: FTMO
• Best for lower challenge costs: Funding Pips
• Best for flexible reward splits: Funding Pips
• Best for straightforward rules: FTMO
• Best traditional 2-step evaluation economics: Funding Pips
• Best for long-term confidence and operating history: FTMO
• Best for swing traders: FTMO 2-Step Swing
• Best if you want your evaluation fee refunded quickly: FTMO 2-Step

Funding Pips vs FTMO at a glance

Funding Pips currently supports MT5, cTrader and Match-Trader, while FTMO supports MT4, MT5 and cTrader. FTMO discontinued DXtrade as a newly selectable platform in March 2026.

Pricing and promotional discounts can change, so compare the current checkout price before purchasing rather than relying on a static comparison table.

Is FTMO better than Funding Pips?

The reason is not that FTMO offers the highest headline profit split. It does not. Funding Pips can offer up to a 100% reward split.

FTMO wins because the total proposition is easier to evaluate.

FTMO was established in 2015 and currently states that it serves traders in more than 140 countries. Its 2-Step model uses a familiar 10% Phase 1 target, 5% Verification target, 5% maximum daily loss and 10% maximum loss. Once eligible for a reward, FTMO 2-Step traders initially receive 80% of simulated profits, with the ratio increasing to 90% under qualifying programmes.

Funding Pips can beat those economics in several areas, but you have to read the specific model and reward cycle carefully.

For example, Funding Pips 2 Step Standard currently offers an 8% Phase 1 target and 5% Phase 2 target, which is objectively easier than FTMO's 10% and 5% targets if everything else is equal. It also requires three minimum trading days rather than FTMO's four.

The trade-off comes later.

Funding Pips' Master Account can introduce rules around profit concentration, reward-cycle consistency, profitable days, trade-idea risk and its Striking System depending on the model, account size and reward option selected. That creates more ways for a profitable trader to misunderstand a condition that affects a reward.

For traders who want the least ambiguity between passing a challenge and withdrawing rewards consistently, FTMO gets the overall win.

Which is easier to pass: Funding Pips or FTMO?

Here is the most useful like-for-like comparison.

Funding Pips 2 Step Standard vs FTMO 2-Step

Funding Pips therefore gives a trader the same headline 10% maximum-loss allowance as FTMO while requiring 8% instead of 10% in Phase 1.

Another way to look at it is the profit-target-to-maximum-loss ratio.

For Phase 1:

• Funding Pips requires an 8% gain against a 10% maximum-loss allowance, a ratio of 0.8
• FTMO requires a 10% gain against a 10% maximum-loss allowance, a ratio of 1.0

That does not mean you should use the entire drawdown allowance. It simply shows that Funding Pips asks for less profit relative to the headline loss budget.

If your only objective is maximising the probability of passing a traditional 2-step challenge, Funding Pips has the better numbers.

Funding Pips vs FTMO profit splits and payouts

This distinction matters because saying one firm has a “100% profit split” without explaining the conditions is fairly useless.

Funding Pips reward options

Funding Pips 2 Step Standard currently offers multiple reward cycles:

The 100% monthly option applies to eligible Evaluation Accounts purchased from 15 August 2026. Funding Pips defines the 35% consistency requirement so that no single trading day can represent more than 35% of total profit. Its monthly option also requires at least seven profitable days, each producing at least 0.5% of the starting Master Account size.

That means 100% does not automatically mean better.

A trader who wants to extract profits quickly may prefer the smaller weekly or bi-weekly percentage. A consistent trader who does not need frequent cash flow may prefer the 100% monthly structure.

FTMO reward options

FTMO allows a reward request on the 14th day or later after the first trade on the relevant FTMO Account.

FTMO currently pays:

• 90% on FTMO Accounts obtained through the 1-Step Challenge
• 80% initially on FTMO Accounts obtained through the 2-Step Challenge
• Up to 90% on 2-Step accounts after qualifying for the relevant Scaling or Premium conditions

FTMO states that a reward request is generally reviewed within one to two business days, with payment typically sent within another one to two business days after the invoice is approved.

Funding Pips wins on payout choice. FTMO wins on simplicity.

FTMO has the better challenge fee refund

This is an underrated difference.

FTMO refunds the 2-Step Challenge fee with the trader's first Reward. Funding Pips currently refunds the original 2 Step Standard registration fee after the fourth reward.

FTMO does not refund its 1-Step Challenge fee.

Funding Pips' fourth-reward refund applies specifically to its 1 Step and 2 Step Standard milestone structure according to its current reward documentation, while models including 1 Step Flex, 2 Step Pro, 2 Step Flex and Zero are excluded from that particular refund perk.

For a trader comparing standard 2-step challenges, FTMO's first-reward refund is significantly more attractive.

You recover your challenge cost earlier instead of needing to maintain the account through several payout cycles.

Is Funding Pips cheaper than FTMO?

Funding Pips has advertised selected 2 Step Pro accounts from $29 for a $5,000 evaluation, with its $100,000 2 Step Pro shown at $399 in the firm's published pricing. That particular model uses 6% profit targets in both phases, a 3% daily loss limit and 6% maximum loss, so it should not be confused with Funding Pips 2 Step Standard.

FTMO currently starts its 1-Step Challenge at €79 for a $10,000 account, while the 2-Step $10,000 Challenge starts at €89. FTMO's $100,000 2-Step list price has been shown at €540, with promotional pricing of €439 available under specific conditions at the time of checking.

Do not choose solely on challenge fee.

A $100 saving is irrelevant if the firm's Master-account rules are a poor fit for how you trade.

Funding Pips has lower targets, but more rule complexity

This is probably the most important distinction in the entire comparison.

A lot of prop-firm comparisons stop at:

Profit target + drawdown + price + profit split.

That misses what actually determines whether a trader keeps getting paid after passing.

Funding Pips has made its evaluation products competitive on headline numbers. Its 2 Step Standard requires only 8% in Phase 1 and 5% in Phase 2, with a 10% maximum loss.

However, current Funding Pips rules can also include:

• a Profit Concentration Policy
• reward-cycle consistency requirements
• minimum profitable days
• minimum reward amounts
• the Striking System on qualifying Master Accounts
• rules defining multiple positions as one “trade idea”
• restrictions surrounding high-impact news
• a 30-day inactivity rule
• temporary restrictions on weekend holding on Master Accounts
• dynamic leverage on certain instruments

For example, Funding Pips' Profit Concentration Policy can apply where a single trade idea generates more than 60% of the evaluation phase's profit target. It does not automatically fail the evaluation, but it can create additional profitable-day requirements before rewards can be requested after reaching the Master Account.

That is not inherently bad. Plenty of disciplined traders will operate comfortably inside those rules.

But it makes Funding Pips a firm where reading the exact rules for your chosen model and reward cycle is part of the strategy.

FTMO also has prohibited trading practices and account restrictions, but its core evaluation and reward framework is easier to reason about.

Which prop firm is better for news trading?

On an FTMO Standard Account, selected news events create a restricted period beginning two minutes before and ending two minutes after the release. These restrictions apply once trading the FTMO Account, not during the evaluation. FTMO Swing accounts do not have those news restrictions.

Funding Pips also allows news exposure during evaluations, but its Master Account rules are more restrictive. On Funding Pips 2 Step Standard, opening or closing positions within five minutes before or five minutes after specified high-impact news can lead to profit deductions. Separate restrictions apply around high-impact speeches.

If macro releases are central to your edge, FTMO 2-Step Swing is the cleaner fit.

Which is better for swing trading?

FTMO's Swing account type allows positions to remain open overnight and over weekends and removes the Standard account's selected-news restrictions. FTMO Swing is available specifically through the 2-Step Challenge.

Funding Pips currently permits weekend holding during evaluation phases on its main evaluation models, but its Master Accounts are subject to a temporary restriction that requires weekend positions to be closed or automatically closes them.

If your system regularly holds trades from Friday into Monday, this difference alone can make FTMO the obvious choice.

Funding Pips vs FTMO for Expert Advisors and automated trading

FTMO allows Expert Advisors, but warns that traders using widely distributed third-party EAs can create strategy duplication and capital-allocation issues. It also limits server hyperactivity, including excessive order activity.

Funding Pips has a stricter default policy. Third-party EAs are generally permitted as trade or risk-management tools rather than for completely automated decision-making.

Funding Pips does permit full automation where the trader owns the EA and can provide proof of ownership, potentially including source code, version-control history or development evidence.

If you run proprietary automation, either may work.

If you use a commercial third-party bot, FTMO is likely the easier firm to work with, subject to its own prohibited-practice and duplication rules.

Which has better trading platforms?

Neither firm has a decisive overall platform advantage.

Funding Pips supports:

• MetaTrader 5
• cTrader
• Match-Trader

FTMO supports:

• MetaTrader 4
• MetaTrader 5
• cTrader

Funding Pips is better if you specifically want Match-Trader. FTMO is better if you still require MT4.

Funding Pips notes that cTrader is unavailable to US residents and citizens, while Match-Trader remains available in supported jurisdictions including the US and Canada. Geographic eligibility should therefore be checked before choosing a platform.

Which is more trustworthy: FTMO or Funding Pips?

FTMO was established in 2015. The company says it now serves more than 140 countries and has paid more than $650 million in rewards worldwide. These payout figures are company-reported rather than independently audited figures, so they should be treated as such.

On Trustpilot on 10 September 2026:

• FTMO: 4.8/5 from roughly 51,600 reviews
• Funding Pips: 4.5/5 from roughly 67,950 reviews

Funding Pips actually has the larger review count, while FTMO has the higher rating and a lower proportion of one-star reviews at the time checked. Trustpilot reviews are useful sentiment data, not proof of solvency or future payout performance.

FTMO Group has also completed its acquisition of OANDA, an established regulated brokerage group. That strengthens FTMO Group's corporate footprint, but it is important not to confuse the two products: an FTMO Challenge or FTMO Account is still a simulated trading product, not an OANDA brokerage account.

Funding Pips similarly states that its evaluation and Master environment uses simulated trading rather than customers depositing capital into a live brokerage account.

For that reason, “Which is regulated?” is not quite the right question. The more useful question is whether the firm's rules, contractual structure, payout history and operating record give you sufficient confidence to pay an evaluation fee.

On those criteria, FTMO gets the trust win.

Funding Pips vs FTMO for different types of trader

Funding Pips vs FTMO: the final verdict

Funding Pips is not losing this comparison because its offer is weak. In several areas its offer is actually better.

The 2 Step Standard's 8% Phase 1 target is easier than FTMO's 10%. Funding Pips can be cheaper. Its payout structure is considerably more flexible, and the potential 100% monthly reward split is commercially attractive.

But those benefits come with more moving parts.

For most traders, the objective is not to buy the cheapest challenge or screenshot the highest possible profit split. It is to pass, keep the account and repeatedly withdraw rewards without accidentally colliding with a rule you misunderstood.

That is why FTMO is our overall winner in the Funding Pips vs FTMO comparison for 2026.

Its operating history is longer, its rules are easier to model, its 2-Step fee refund is better, its Swing option is substantially better for longer-term traders, and its current external review profile is stronger.

Funding Pips remains the more interesting choice for traders who value price, lower targets and payout flexibility enough to justify studying the exact rules attached to their chosen model.

Best overall: FTMO.

Best value alternative: Funding Pips.

Before purchasing either challenge, check the current rules for the exact account type you intend to trade. Prop-firm conditions, promotional prices, platform availability and reward policies can change, and rules applying during an evaluation are not always identical to those applying after you reach an FTMO Account or Funding Pips Master Account.

Frequently asked questions

Is Funding Pips better than FTMO?

For most traders, FTMO is the stronger default choice.

Is Funding Pips easier than FTMO?

Funding Pips requires an 8% Phase 1 target and 5% Phase 2 target versus FTMO's 10% and 5%, while both offer a 10% headline maximum loss under these specific models.

Does Funding Pips really offer a 100% profit split?

For Funding Pips 2 Step Standard, the monthly option currently requires a 35% consistency score and seven qualifying profitable days, among other applicable Master-account conditions.

How quickly does FTMO pay out?

FTMO says the account review normally takes one to two business days and payment is typically sent within another one to two business days after invoice approval.

Does FTMO or Funding Pips use real funded accounts?

FTMO explicitly describes its FTMO Accounts as demo accounts using fictitious capital. Funding Pips likewise describes its environment as simulated and states that its website does not provide customers with live brokerage accounts.