Rules compared
| Rule | FTMO | FundedNext |
|---|---|---|
| Market | Forex / CFD | Forex / CFD |
| Phases | Two-phase | Two-phase |
| Eval cost (mid tier) | $540 | $480 |
| Profit target | 10% + 5% | 8% + 5% |
| Max drawdown | Static · 10% | Static · 10% |
| Daily loss limit | 5% | 5% |
| Consistency rule | None | None |
| Min trading days | 4 | 5 |
| Max days | Unlimited | Unlimited |
| Profit split | 80% | 90% |
| Payout buffer | 1% | 1% |
| Trailing on funded | No | No |
| Payout frequency | Every 14 days | Every 14 days |
Simulated outcomes, same trader
Identical balanced archetype (50% win rate, 1.2R average winner, 3 trades a day), 10,000 simulated evaluations against each firm's exact ruleset.
| Metric | FTMO | FundedNext |
|---|---|---|
| Pass rate | 20.3% | 25.0% |
| Payout rate (if passed) | 54.4% | 54.4% |
| Joint withdrawal probability | 11.0% | 13.6% |
| Expected P&L over 50 challenges | -$19.3k | -$14.9k |
| Failures from drawdown breach | 9% | 10% |
| Failures from daily loss | 28% | 30% |
Which should you pick?
FTMO: FTMO is the reference standard in forex prop — two phases, static drawdown, and the most consistent payout track record in the industry. The two-phase structure lowers raw pass rates, but funded traders who pass historically get paid. The 'default' choice; not the cheapest, not the most generous, but the most reliable.
FundedNext: FundedNext's stellar model has a one-phase option with a 15% profit target — one of the highest in the space, offset by generous drawdown. Two-phase Evaluation is closer to FTMO's structure at a slightly lower cost. Payout track record is strong; the choice between models is really a question of trader style.
On the numbers above, FundedNext is the better expected-value choice for a balanced profile — but archetypes are not you. A scalper and a swing trader can flip this ranking entirely, because drawdown type punishes lumpy P&L far more than frequent small P&L. Run your own drawdown numbers first, then simulate your real stats.
Frequently asked
Is FTMO or FundedNext easier to pass?+
In our simulation of a balanced 50%-win-rate trader, FTMO passes 20.3% of the time and FundedNext passes 25.0% — so FundedNext is the easier evaluation for that profile. The gap is driven mostly by drawdown type (Static vs Static) and the number of phases.
Which is cheaper, FTMO or FundedNext?+
The mid-tier evaluation costs $540 at FTMO and $480 at FundedNext. Sticker price is the wrong comparison though: over 50 attempted challenges our simulation nets -$19.3k at FTMO versus -$14.9k at FundedNext, because a cheaper eval you fail more often is not cheaper.
Which pays out more reliably, FTMO or FundedNext?+
Conditional on passing, our model gives FTMO a 54.4% chance of reaching a first payout versus 54.4% at FundedNext. End to end — pass and withdraw — that is 11.0% vs 13.6%. Profit splits are 80% and 90%.
What is the biggest rule difference between FTMO and FundedNext?+
FTMO uses a static drawdown of 10% with a 5% daily loss limit; FundedNext uses a static drawdown of 10% with a 5% daily loss limit. FTMO is the stricter ruleset for most trading styles.
Compare both firms using YOUR trading stats
Log your trades in the journal, push your real win rate and R-multiple into the simulator, and see which of these two rulesets you actually clear.
Run my simulationMore FTMO comparisons
Based on publicly listed rules as of 2026-07-15. Independent — not affiliated with FTMO or FundedNext. Rules change; verify before paying. Simulations are estimates, not guarantees.