ℹ️This page may contain affiliate links. We earn a commission if you purchase through our links, at no extra cost to you. Learn more
Updated 2026-03-08
FundingPips vs For Traders: Which Prop Firm Is Better?
Traders choosing between FundingPips and For Traders face a decision between easier profit targets versus higher initial payouts. FundingPips requires just 8% profit in Phase 1 compared to For Traders' 10% target, making it potentially easier to pass the evaluation. Both firms offer identical risk management rules and similar overall structures, but their approach to profit splits creates an interesting trade-off. This comparison examines how these differences impact your path to funded trading.
F
FundingPips
Est. 2022 · Dubai, UAE
4.5
48,000 reviews
VS
3 wins
9 ties
0 wins
FT
For Traders
Est. 2023 · N/A
4.5
1,000 reviews
Feature
FundingPips
For Traders
Challenge Price ($100K)
N/A
$399
Phase 1 Profit Target
8%✓ Easier to pass
10%
Phase 2 Profit Target
5%✓ Easier to pass
7%
Max Daily Loss
5%
5%
Max Total Loss
10%
10%
Min Trading Days
3 days
3 days
Time Limit (Phase 1)
No limit
No limit
Payout Split
60% (up to 100%)✓ Higher profit split
70% (up to 90%)
FundingPips
Pros
+Zero reward denials policy for peace of mind trading
+Flexible payout cycles from weekly to on-demand with up to 100% profit share
+Multiple platform options including MT5, Match-Trader and cTrader
+Claims over $200M earned by traders globally with strong payout track record
+Instant funding option available alongside traditional evaluation process
Cons
−Limited information available about detailed trading rules and restrictions
−Newer firm established in 2022 with less track record than older competitors
−Maximum simulated capital capped at $300K which is lower than some rivals
For Traders
Pros
+48-hour reward guarantee with 100% profit split if delayed
+AI-powered coaching to help traders pass evaluations
+Multi-asset trading including crypto with weekend trading
+Customizable challenge rules based on trading strategy
+Raw spreads with low $2 per lot commissions
Cons
−Relatively new firm established in 2023
−Limited account size options compared to competitors
−News trading restricted to challenge phase only
−Maximum virtual capital allocation requires premium program qualification
Our Verdict
Which Should You Choose?
FundingPips suits traders who struggle with evaluation phases or prefer a more gradual path to funded accounts. The 8% Phase 1 target versus For Traders' 10% requirement makes a meaningful difference in pass rates, especially for conservative trading styles. The lower 5% Phase 2 target further reduces evaluation pressure, though you start with a lower 60% payout split.
For Traders works better for confident traders who can consistently hit higher profit targets and want immediate reward for their performance. The 70% starting payout split versus FundingPips' 60% means more money in your pocket from day one of funded trading. However, the higher evaluation hurdles (10% and 7% profit targets) will filter out more traders.
Bottom line: Choose FundingPips if you want the highest probability of passing evaluations, especially if you're newer to prop trading. Choose For Traders if you're confident in hitting higher profit targets and want to maximize your immediate earnings from funded accounts.
Choose FundingPips if:
→Zero reward denials policy for peace of mind trading
→Flexible payout cycles from weekly to on-demand with up to 100% profit share
→Multiple platform options including MT5, Match-Trader and cTrader
→Claims over $200M earned by traders globally with strong payout track record
Choose For Traders if:
→48-hour reward guarantee with 100% profit split if delayed
→AI-powered coaching to help traders pass evaluations
→Multi-asset trading including crypto with weekend trading
→Customizable challenge rules based on trading strategy
Disclaimer:This comparison is for informational purposes only. Prop firm rules change regularly — always verify current terms on each firm's official website before purchasing a challenge. This is not financial advice. Updated 2026-03-08.