The short answer
FTMO vs FundedNext, side by side
| Feature |  FTMO |  FundedNext |
|---|---|---|
| Evaluation model | Two-step: FTMO Challenge then Verification, then funded | Multiple models — Evaluation (two-step), Express and Stellar (one/two-step) |
| Headline pricing | One-time challenge fee per account size, refunded on first payout | One-time fee per model/size; lower entry points on the smallest accounts |
| Discount frequency | Promotions exist but are less aggressive | Frequent promotions and discounts on evaluation fees |
| Profit split | Up to 90% on a funded FTMO Account | Up to around 90%, plus a share of profit earned during the challenge |
| Payout track record | Longest, most documented history in forex/CFD prop (since 2015) | High volume of funded traders, but a shorter record (founded ~2022) |
| Drawdown type | Static daily loss limit + overall max loss limit | Daily loss limit + max loss limit, defined per model |
| Platforms | MetaTrader 4, MetaTrader 5, cTrader, DXtrade | MetaTrader 4, MetaTrader 5, cTrader |
| US clients accepted | No — FTMO does not accept US-based clients | No — restricted in several countries, including the US |
| Model flexibility | One core two-step path; simple and consistent | Several models to match speed, budget and risk appetite |
| Best for | Traders who prioritise a proven, well-documented track record | Traders who want flexible models, low entry cost and challenge-phase profit |
Track record: where FTMO pulls ahead
FTMO has operated since 2015, giving it one of the longest and most documented payout histories in forex/CFD prop trading. In our testing it enforced its rules exactly as published, and funded traders report payouts arriving within the stated window. When the product is essentially trust in a firm that holds your fee and pays your profits, that history is its single biggest advantage.
FundedNext launched around 2022 and has grown fast into one of the most popular firms, with a high volume of funded traders. Funded traders report clean payouts from it too — but its record is simply shorter, so we weight it accordingly. If track record is your top priority, FTMO is the more reassuring choice.
Evaluation and flexibility
FTMO uses a single, consistent two-step process — the FTMO Challenge followed by Verification — before you are funded. It is straightforward but offers little variation: there is essentially one path.
FundedNext is the opposite. It offers several models — Evaluation (two-step), Express (faster) and Stellar (one- and two-step variants) — so you can match the route to your style, budget and confidence. The trade-off is complexity: the rules, targets and payout terms differ between models and are easy to confuse, so read the rulebook for the specific model you buy.
Pricing, payouts and the challenge-phase perk
Both charge a one-time fee rather than a subscription. FTMO refunds your fee with your first payout, effectively making the evaluation free once you succeed. FundedNext runs frequent promotions and has lower entry points on its smallest accounts, plus its standout feature: you can earn a share of profit during the challenge phase, which partly offsets the upfront cost.
Profit splits are comparable at up to ~90%, so the split is not the deciding factor. As always, check current pricing before buying — both firms change fees and promotions often — and follow the payout and consistency rules precisely, as those trip up more traders than the headline split.
Rules, drawdown and platforms
FTMO uses a static daily loss limit plus an overall max loss limit, which many traders find predictable. FundedNext applies a daily and maximum loss limit defined per model, so the exact mechanics depend on which plan you choose. Misunderstanding the drawdown is the top reason traders fail at either firm — read the current rules for your specific plan.
On platforms, FTMO supports MetaTrader 4, MetaTrader 5, cTrader and DXtrade, while FundedNext supports MetaTrader 4, MetaTrader 5 and cTrader. Both cover the standard forex/CFD stack, so most strategies transfer; the main adjustment is the rule set rather than the charts.