Scoring criteria
Our overall rating (out of 5.0) is a weighted average of five factors:
The most heavily weighted factor. We evaluate average payout processing time, documented payout denials or disputes, consistency of payout schedules, and total verified payouts over the firm's lifetime. A firm that pays $400M over a decade scores higher than a firm that advertises fast payouts but has been operating for 6 months. We cross-reference Trustpilot reviews, Reddit threads, and direct trader reports.
We evaluate the overall fairness and clarity of the firm's rule structure: drawdown type (static vs trailing vs EOD), daily loss limits, consistency rules, time limits, news trading restrictions, overnight/weekend holding policies, and EA permissions. Firms with static drawdown, no consistency rule, and no time limits score highest. We penalize firms with ambiguous or frequently-changed rules.
We evaluate total cost of funding: challenge fee, activation fees, subscription costs, and the realistic cost-per-attempt based on estimated pass rates. The cheapest firm isn't automatically the best value — a $109 challenge with a 4% drawdown may cost more per funded trader than a $299 challenge with 10% drawdown.
We evaluate the starting split, maximum achievable split, and how realistic the scaling path is. A firm starting at 80% that scales to 100% over a documented path scores higher than a firm advertising 90% with no scaling. We verify advertised splits against actual funded trader reports where available.
We evaluate platform diversity, platform quality, and access restrictions. Firms offering MT5 + cTrader + a proprietary option score higher than single-platform firms. We penalize firms that restrict US traders to inferior platforms or charge extra fees for specific platform access.
What disqualifies a firm
We remove firms from our database if any of the following are confirmed:
- Verified non-payment of legitimate withdrawal requests
- Undisclosed rule changes applied retroactively to funded traders
- Systematic banning of profitable traders without documented rule violations
- Closure without communication or resolution for active funded accounts
- Fabricated payout statistics or fake Trustpilot reviews
Data sources
Our evaluations combine firsthand testing (our editors hold challenge accounts with the firms they review), publicly available data (Trustpilot, firm websites, SEC/FCA filings where applicable), and community reports (Reddit, trading forums, Discord). We do not accept paid placement, sponsored rankings, or review embargoes.
Update frequency
Rankings are reviewed monthly. Discount codes are verified daily. Rule changes are updated within 48 hours of confirmation. The "Last verified" date on each page indicates the most recent review.
Limitations
We are not regulators. Our ratings reflect our editorial judgment based on available evidence. We cannot guarantee that a firm rated 4.5/5 will not change its policies, experience financial difficulties, or shut down.
Past payout history does not guarantee future performance. Always withdraw profits regularly and never risk more than you can afford to lose on challenge fees.
