Six models, and a number we do not believe
Goat’s best-looking model is the one we refuse to recommend
Pay Later Model computes at 5%, which would be the softest figure anywhere on this site — 73 points clear of anything else Goat sell. It prices its drawdown as trailing intraday, following the equity high within the session, and that is the one shape every calculation here measures optimistically rather than pessimistically.
So it stays in the table with its figure, and it cannot win a recommendation. Of the 4 models we can measure fairly, 2-Step Standard is the softest at 78%.
All 6 models
| Model | Phases | Target | Daily | Overall | Drawdown | Losses | Fails |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pay Later Model not ranked — see below | 1 | 4% | None | 8% | Trailing, intraday | 8 | 5% |
| GOAT Blitz not ranked — see below | 1 | 3% | 3% | 5% | Trailing, intraday | 3 | 60% |
| 2-Step Standard | 2 | 15% | 5% | 10% | Static | 5 | 78% |
| 2 Step GOAT Model | 2 | 14% | 4% | 10% | Static | 4 | 92% |
| 3 Step Model | 3 | 18% | 4% | 8% | Static | 4 | 96% |
| 1 Step Model (GOAT) | 1 | 10% | 3% | 6% | Static | 3 | 97% |
At 1% risk per trade, a 40% win rate and 2R winners. The shaded rows carry figures this model produces and does not stand behind. No fees appear because Goat publish account sizes without prices on the pages read.
Goat Funded Trader — models — read 2026-08-06
Why Pay Later Model and GOAT Blitz are not ranked
Every figure on this site applies a loss cap at its starting level. On a static drawdown that is pessimistic — banked profit buys room the model does not credit. On a drawdown that trails at the end of each day it is close to right. On one that trails intraday it is neither: the floor follows the equity high within the session, so a gain you never closed still raises it, and giving that gain back can end an account on a day it never lost money.
The real allowance is therefore smaller than modelled and the failure rate higher than shown. Recommending the programme we compute least accurately, on the strength of computing it least accurately, is exactly the failure this site is built to avoid — so these rows keep their figures, keep this caveat, and cannot win.
The rule was written the day Pay Later Model entered this data and took the site-wide recommendation on the strength of 5%.
Of the 4 we do stand behind
They spread from 78% to 97%, and the ordering is the daily loss cap rather than the profit target — 2-Step Standard caps the day at 5% and computes 78%; 2 Step GOAT Model caps the day at 4% and computes 92%; 3 Step Model caps the day at 4% and computes 96%; 1 Step Model (GOAT) caps the day at 3% and computes 97%.
2-Step Standard asks the most profit of the 4 at 15% and is the softest of them, which is the pattern FundedNext's Stellar ladder shows across three rungs and Alpha Capital's across two families. Firms raise the target and the caps together, and the caps are worth more.
What this does not measure
- · Cost. Goat publish sizes without prices on the pages read, so no fee is recorded and Goat is absent from the cost comparisons rather than present with invented figures.
- · The profit split. 80% appears on each model page, the firm's own table shows an 80%–100% add-on, and its scaling plan reaches 95% after fifteen payouts and five months. None of those is a maximum a reader could act on, so the field is empty.
- · Assumes each trade is independent. Correlated positions — three majors against the dollar — lose together and count as one.
- · Assumes every trade risks the same amount. Raising size after a loss shortens the streak you can survive.
- · Uses your stated win rate. If that came from a demo account or a good month, the figure below is optimistic.
- · Whether Goat pay. No published rule answers that.
On the numbers above
Goat Funded Trader — 2-Step Standard
It comes out ahead on the chance a losing streak ends the attempt, at 1% risk per trade, at 78% — 14 percentage points clear of Goat Funded Trader's 2 Step GOAT Model, the next best.
This is computed from the published rules, not chosen. Whichever programme wins that calculation appears here, including firms we earn nothing from, and it changes when the rules do. It says nothing about cost, the profit split, and any programme whose drawdown trails intraday.
Questions
- Which Goat Funded Trader model is easiest to pass?
- On the raw figures, Pay Later Model at 5% — and this site will not recommend it. Its drawdown trails the equity high within the trading day, and every figure here applies a cap at its starting level, which understates how tight an intraday trail really is. Of the 4 models we can measure fairly, 2-Step Standard is the softest at 78%.
- Why not just recommend the model with the best number?
- Because we know that number flatters it. A drawdown that follows your equity high inside the session can be breached by giving back an unrealised gain on a day the account never lost money — the real allowance is smaller than modelled, and the failure rate larger. Recommending the programme we compute least accurately, on the strength of computing it least accurately, is the failure this site exists to avoid. Pay Later Model took the site-wide recommendation the day it was added, which is when the rule barring it was written.
- What is the difference between the GOAT models and the Standard ones?
- Goat name two of their models after themselves and it is not a difficulty grade. Pay Later Model asks 4% against 8%; GOAT Blitz asks 3% against 5%; 2-Step Standard asks 15% against 10%; 2 Step GOAT Model asks 14% against 10%; 3 Step Model asks 18% against 8%; 1 Step Model (GOAT) asks 10% against 6%. The ordering that matters is the daily loss cap, which is what ends an attempt: 2-Step Standard at 5%, 2 Step GOAT Model at 4%, 3 Step Model at 4%, 1 Step Model (GOAT) at 3%.
- Why are no fees shown?
- Goat publish account sizes on the pages we could read without prices attached to them, so no fee ladder is recorded. A size without its fee cannot fill a tier, and a fee taken from somewhere other than the firm is not a fee we will print. That means Goat is absent from the cost comparisons on this site rather than appearing in them with invented numbers.
- What about the profit split?
- Not recorded, for the same reason. Goat print 80% on each model page, but their own table shows an "80%–100% add-on" and their scaling plan reaches 95% after fifteen payouts and five months on the funded account. Eighty is not the maximum and ninety-five is not reachable in the sense a pricing page implies, so the field is left empty rather than filled with either.