FundingPips vs FundedNext

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

FUNDINGPIPS DETAILS

+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.

−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.

+Profit split of 95% is well above the industry average of 84.7%.
+Minimum challenge cost of $49 is well below the industry average of $186.7.
+Days to first payout of 4 is faster than the industry average of 6.5 days.
+Fee refund is offered, and weekend holding, news trading, and EA use are all permitted.

−Overall drawdown of 10% with a relative drawdown type is above the industry average of 7.9% and more restrictive in practice.
−Profit target of 10% is above the industry average of 7.9%, making evaluation harder to pass.
−Max funding of $300,000 is significantly below the industry average of $839,272.7.

FundingPips

Higher trust score (78/100). Faster payouts at 2d. 80% profit split.

FundedNext

Lower trust score (67/100). Slower payouts at 4d. 95% profit split.