PropDNA
Search firms, traders…⌘K
Compare/Aqua Funded vs FundingPips
HEAD-TO-HEAD · 2026

Aqua Funded vs FundingPips

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

METRIC
AQUA
Aqua Funded
EST. 2023
FPIP
FundingPips
✓ VERIFIEDEST. 2022
TRUST SCORE59/10078/100BETTER
PROFIT SPLIT90%BETTER80%
PAYOUT DAYS7d2dBETTER
PASS RATE
MIN COST$1BETTER$29
MAX FUNDING$2,000,000TIE$2,000,000TIE
RATING4/5BETTER0/5
REVIEW COUNT2BETTER0
STEPS2-step2-step
DRAWDOWNTrailingFixed

AQUA FUNDED DETAILS

MARKETS
Forex, Indices, Metals, Commodities, Crypto
PLATFORMS
MT5, cTrader, Match-Trader, TradeLocker

FUNDINGPIPS DETAILS

MARKETS
Forex, Crypto, Indices, Metals, Energies
PLATFORMS
MT5, cTrader, Match-Trader, TradeLocker

Aqua Funded PROS

  • +Min challenge cost of just $1 is exceptionally below the industry average of $186.7, making it highly accessible.
  • +Max funding of $2,000,000 is more than double the industry average of $839,272.7.
  • +Profit split of 90% significantly exceeds the industry average of 84.7%.
  • +Weekend holding, news trading, and EA use are all permitted, offering maximum trading flexibility.

Aqua Funded CONS

  • Overall drawdown of 10% is above the industry average of 7.9%, requiring traders to manage larger potential losses.
  • Profit target of 10% is higher than the industry average of 7.9%, making the challenge harder to pass.
  • Days to first payout of 7 is slightly above the industry average of 6.5 days.

FundingPips PROS

  • +Min challenge cost of $29 is well below the industry average of $186.7, making entry highly affordable.
  • +Max funding of $2,000,000 is more than double the industry average of $839,272.7.
  • +Days to first payout of 2 is significantly faster than the industry average of 6.5 days.
  • +Weekend holding, news trading, and EA use are all permitted, offering broad trading flexibility.

FundingPips CONS

  • Profit split of 80% is below the industry average of 84.7%, giving traders a smaller earnings share.
  • Overall drawdown of 10% exceeds the industry average of 7.9%, requiring traders to absorb larger losses.
  • No fee refund is offered, meaning traders cannot recover the challenge cost upon passing.

PROPDNA VERDICT

Aqua Funded
Lower trust score (59/100). Slower payouts at 7d. 90% profit split.
FundingPips
Higher trust score (78/100). Faster payouts at 2d. 80% profit split.

RELATED LINKS

Aqua Funded Full Review →FundingPips Full Review →All Comparisons →
← COMPARE ALL FIRMS ON PROPDNA
RISK

Trading carries substantial risk of loss. Prop evaluation fees are typically non-refundable and the majority of traders do not pass first attempts. This comparison is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial advice. Read full risk warning

Affiliate disclosure: PropDNA may earn a commission if you start a challenge through links on this page. Scores are calculated algorithmically from verified trader reviews — not influenced by commercial relationships.Privacy Policy