Skip to content
    Head to head

    FTMO vs FundingPips: Compared Rule by Rule for 2026

    FTMO is the established forex prop benchmark; FundingPips is the most aggressive of the post-2022 cohort, competing on price and split. Both ship with cTrader and MT5, both use static drawdown, but they diverge on consistency rules and operational maturity.

    Side-by-side comparison

    RuleFTMOFundingPips
    MarketsForex, Indices, Commodities, Crypto, StocksForex, Indices, Metals, Crypto, Energies
    Audited variants24
    Evaluation1-Step or 2-Step1-Step or 2-Step
    Account sizes"0K to $200K$5K to "00K
    Fee (100K)€540~$499
    Profit split80 to 90%60 to 95% (frequency dependent)
    Max drawdown10%10%
    Drawdown typeStaticStatic
    Daily loss5%5%
    Consistency ruleNone15% score
    Min trading days4None specified
    Payout speed1 to 2 days1 to 3 days
    Payout frequencyBi-weekly / MonthlyWeekly / Bi-weekly / Monthly
    News tradingRestricted on funded accounts (2-min window)Allowed
    EAs / botsAllowed with restrictionsAllowed
    Weekend holdingSwing account onlyAllowed
    Scaling cap$400K (up to $2M)Progressive
    US tradersVia FTMO US / OANDA onlyYes
    Trustpilot4.8 (29,000+)4.5 (30,312+)
    Value score9286

    Verdict

    Pick FTMO if longevity, regulated execution and operational maturity matter most. Pick FundingPips if you want lower fees, a higher cap on the profit split and faster onboarding, accepting that the firm has roughly four years of operating history versus FTMO's ten.

    FTMO strengths

    Longest track record, $200M+ paid, static drawdown, no consistency rule

    FTMO weaknesses

    $400K scaling cap, no futures, news restrictions on funded accounts, US traders via FTMO US only

    FundingPips strengths

    "25M+ total payouts, widest platform selection, flexible payout frequency tiers

    FundingPips weaknesses

    Split tied to withdrawal frequency (60% weekly vs 95% infrequent), 15% consistency score, recent rule change complaints

    Other matchups