Home · Tools · Funding Pips Review
Funding Pips review 2026
Funding Pips has become one of the most popular prop firms in the world by being cheap and flexible. But low fees mean nothing if the rules trip you up. This review covers the challenge models, the drawdown rules that actually fail most traders, the payout structure, and an honest comparison with FTMO.
The four challenge models
Funding Pips is unusual in offering four different routes to a funded account, so you can match the rules to your style instead of forcing one structure on everyone.
| Model | Profit target | Daily loss | Max drawdown | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2-Step Standard | 8% → 5% | 5% | 10% static | Most room. Weekend holding & EAs allowed, no consistency rule in evaluation. The best all-rounder. |
| 2-Step Pro | 6% → 6% | 3% | 6% static | Cheapest entry (~$29). Tighter rules + a 45% consistency rule and higher per-lot commission. |
| 1-Step | 10% | ~3–4% | 6% static | One phase, faster on paper but the tight drawdown makes it statistically harder. |
| Zero (Instant) | — | 3% | ~5% trailing | Skip the evaluation, but the tightest rules: trailing drawdown, a consistency score and minimum profitable days. |
Trading rules that actually matter
The rules during the evaluation are forgiving; the funded-account rules are stricter. That gap is where most traders get caught.
Drawdown
The headline feature is static drawdown on the 1-Step and 2-Step plans — your loss limit is fixed from your starting balance and never moves, so a profitable run can’t tighten the floor on you. Only the Zero account uses a trailing model. On funded accounts there is also a max-loss-per-trade rule (a single trade can’t generate more than ~3% of balance), which targets all-or-nothing gambling.
News, weekends & EAs
During the evaluation you can trade the news, hold over weekends and use EAs on most plans. Once funded, you generally cannot open or close trades within about 5 minutes either side of a high-impact news release — profit made in that window can be removed. Always re-read the funded rules the day you get the account.
Consistency & minimum days
The Standard 2-Step has no consistency rule in evaluation; the Pro and Zero models do (no single day can be too large a share of total profit). All paths require a minimum of about 3 trading days per phase. There is no time limit, which removes the “force a trade before the deadline” pressure.
Profit split & payouts
The split is tied to how often you withdraw. Faster cycles pay a lower share and slower cycles pay more — for example weekly payouts at a lower split, up to 100% on a monthly cycle for standard accounts; in practice most funded traders sit in the 80–95% range. Payouts run on cycles such as weekly (“Tuesday Payday”), bi-weekly, monthly or on-demand once you qualify, with a small withdrawal fee. On the 1-Step and standard 2-Step, your evaluation fee is refunded after the fourth successful payout.
Pros & cons
👍 Pros
- Very low entry cost (from ~$29)
- Static drawdown on most plans — no moving target
- Four models to match any style
- Large, public payout history ($260M+)
- Weekend holding & EAs allowed on most plans
- Fee refunded after the 4th payout
👎 Cons
- Funded rules are stricter than evaluation rules
- Pro & Zero models have consistency rules
- Max-loss-per-trade rule can catch swing traders
- Zero account uses tight trailing drawdown
- No MT4; higher commissions on Pro
- Younger firm (2022) than the oldest names
Funding Pips vs FTMO
These are the two firms most beginners compare. FTMO is the older, larger, more proven brand; Funding Pips is cheaper and more flexible. Here’s the side-by-side (2026 figures — always verify on each firm’s site before buying).
| Funding Pips | FTMO | |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2022 (Dubai) | 2015 (Prague) |
| Paid out | $260M+ | $500M+ |
| Entry price ($10K-ish) | From ~$29 ($5K) | From ~€79–€89 ($10K) |
| Main evaluation | 2-Step 8%→5% (+ 1-Step, Pro, Zero) | 2-Step 10%→5% (+ 1-Step) |
| Drawdown | 5% daily / 10% static | 5% daily / 10% static (2-Step) |
| Profit split | ~80–100% (by cycle) | 80%, up to 90% scaling |
| Scaling cap | ~$2M | ~$400K |
| Platforms | MT5, cTrader, Match-Trader | MT4, MT5, cTrader, DXtrade |
| Best for | Low cost & flexibility | Proven reliability & track record |
Verdict
Funding Pips earns its popularity: it’s cheap, flexible, and the static-drawdown models are genuinely trader-friendly. The catch is the same as every prop firm — the funded-account rules (news window, max-loss-per-trade, consistency on some plans) fail more traders than the market does. If you go in on the 2-Step Standard, trade with 0.5–1% risk, and treat the rules as hard constraints, it’s one of the best-value paths to a funded account in 2026.
Pass the challenge with a real risk system
Most traders fail prop challenges on risk, not strategy. FXLiquidityHub VIP gives you daily plans, a drawdown framework and the prop-firm survival system.
Join VIP →