47 of 90 evaluations have a twin at another firm
7 firms sell one challenge, letter for letter, from $491 to $950
Group these evaluations by every field that decides the odds — total profit target, number of phases, daily loss cap, what breaching it does, overall drawdown and the kind of drawdown — and 47 of 90 land beside at least one twin at a different firm. 15 rulebooks are shared rather than owned.
Inside a group the computed failure figure is not similar, it is the same number, because every input to it is the same number. The price is not: across the 10 groups with more than one published dollar price the spread runs up to 1.93× from cheapest to dearest, with nothing in the rules to account for it.
15% target, 2 phases, 5% daily, 10% static
7 programmes at 7 firms. All compute to 78% at 1% risk per trade, because all six inputs are identical.
| Firm | Programme | $100K | Split | Min days | Fee back on passing |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The5ers | High Stakes | $491 | 100% | 3 | yes |
| HyroTrader | Two-Step Challenge | $579 | 90% | 5 | yes |
| Moneta Funded | 2-Step Challenge | $950 | 88% | 3 | no |
| FTMO | 2-Step | EUR 439 | 90% | 4 | yes |
| Goat Funded Trader | 2-Step Standard | not published | — | — | no |
| Audacity Capital | Ability Challenge | not published | 90% | 4 | yes |
| Funding Traders | 2-Step Pro (PRO10) | not published | — | 4 | no |
Identical: the six figures in the heading, and therefore the odds. Different: the profit split, 88% / 90% / 100%; the minimum trading days, 3 / 4 / 5; whether the fee returns on passing; and the price, 1.93× from cheapest to dearest. One or more are priced in another currency and are left out of that ratio.
10% target, one phase, 3% daily, 6% static
6 programmes at 6 firms. All compute to 97% at 1% risk per trade, because all six inputs are identical.
| Firm | Programme | $100K | Split | Min days | Fee back on passing |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| For Traders | Fast Static (Forex) | $449 | 80% | 3 | no |
| FundedNext | Stellar 1-Step | $569.99 | 95% | 2 | yes |
| Breakout | 1-Step Classic | $800 | — | — | no |
| Moneta Funded | 1-Step Challenge | $840 | 88% | 3 | no |
| The5ers | Pro Growth | not published | — | 3 | — |
| Goat Funded Trader | 1 Step Model (GOAT) | not published | — | — | no |
Identical: the six figures in the heading, and therefore the odds. Different: the profit split, 80% / 88% / 95%; the minimum trading days, 2 / 3; whether the fee returns on passing; and the price, 1.87× from cheapest to dearest.
13% target, 2 phases, 5% daily, 10% static
5 programmes at 5 firms. All compute to 73% at 1% risk per trade, because all six inputs are identical.
| Firm | Programme | $100K | Split | Min days | Fee back on passing |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OneFunded | Core Challenge | $469 | — | 3 | no |
| Funding Pips | 2 Step Standard | $544 | 100% | 3 | no |
| FundedNext | Stellar 2-Step | $549.99 | 95% | 5 | yes |
| Era Trade | 2-Step Challenge | $599 | 80% | — | no |
| Crypto Fund Trader | 2 Phases Evaluation | $660 | — | — | no |
Identical: the six figures in the heading, and therefore the odds. Different: the profit split, 80% / 95% / 100%; the minimum trading days, 3 / 5; whether the fee returns on passing; and the price, 1.41× from cheapest to dearest.
10% target, one phase, 4% daily, 6% static
4 programmes at 4 firms. All compute to 84% at 1% risk per trade, because all six inputs are identical.
| Firm | Programme | $100K | Split | Min days | Fee back on passing |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OneFunded | Flash Challenge | $499 | — | 1 | no |
| Blueberry Funded | 1-Step (Legacy) | $605 | — | 3 | no |
| DNA Funded | 1 Phase | $619 | — | 5 | no |
| HyroTrader | One-Step Challenge | $749 | 90% | 5 | yes |
Identical: the six figures in the heading, and therefore the odds. Different: the minimum trading days, 1 / 3 / 5; whether the fee returns on passing; and the price, 1.50× from cheapest to dearest.
What a shared rulebook does and does not settle
It settles the arithmetic. Every figure this site computes — the chance a losing run ends the attempt, the number of consecutive losses the caps allow, the difficulty ratio — takes its inputs from exactly the fields these groups hold constant. So programmes in one group do not merely score similarly; they score the same number, and any ranking that separates them is separating them on something else.
It settles nothing commercial, and that is where the groups come apart. In the first group above the profit split spans 88% to 100%, the minimum trading days 3 to 5, and the firms do not agree on whether the fee comes back. Those are real differences and they are the ones left to choose on.
Which reframes the usual question. “Which firm is hardest” has no answer inside a group, because the answer is the same for all of them. “What am I paying the difference for” does have one, and the rules do not contain it.
What this does not measure
- · Every rule a firm has. The grouping uses the six fields that feed the odds. Consistency caps, news windows, weekend holding, minimum hold times, payout schedules and what changes once funded are not in it, and they differ inside these groups.
- · How much each firm publishes. The number of extra rules recorded per programme runs from none to nine inside a single group, and that is a fact about how deeply each firm was read here rather than about how much it discloses. It is deliberately not a column.
- · Prices in another currency. Where a firm quotes its $100,000 account in euros or pounds it is shown but left out of the ratio, because a spread across currencies is a spread across exchange rates too.
- · 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 any of these firms pay. No published rule answers that, and it is the difference that would matter most.
Where these rules were read
The5ers — challenge programmes explained — read 2026-08-05
HyroTrader — trading rules — read 2026-08-06
Moneta Funded — product offerings — read 2026-08-23
FTMO — programme comparison and pricing — read 2026-08-05
Goat Funded Trader — models — read 2026-08-06
Audacity Capital — trading guidelines — read 2026-08-06
Funding Traders — account types and trading guidelines — read 2026-08-23
For Traders — our rules — read 2026-08-23
FundedNext — CFD trading objectives — read 2026-08-05
Breakout — programme rules — read 2026-08-23
Questions
- Do prop firms all have the same rules?
- More alike than the marketing suggests. Grouping the 90 evaluations here by total profit target, phase count, daily loss cap, what breaching it does, overall drawdown and drawdown kind puts 47 of them into a group with at least one twin at another firm — 15 shared rulebooks in all. The largest is sold by 7 firms with every one of those figures identical.
- If the rules are the same, is the cheaper one better?
- Not necessarily, and the grouping cannot tell you it is. It holds constant every rule that decides the ODDS and nothing else — inside the largest group the profit split runs from 88% to 100%, the minimum trading days from 3 to 5, and the firms disagree on whether the fee comes back on passing. What the grouping does tell you is that difficulty has stopped being one of the things you are choosing between.
- Why do identical challenges cost different amounts?
- Nothing in the published rules explains it. Across the whole field the $100,000 fee runs from $10 to $950, and inside a single identical rulebook it still runs $491 to $950 — a 1.93× spread with every risk rule held constant. Price tracks the firm, not the product.
- What should I compare instead?
- Once you know which rulebook you are buying, everything that decides the outcome is fixed and the remaining questions are commercial: what share of profit you keep and when that rate applies, whether the fee comes back and at which payout, how many trading days you must show, and what the funded account asks that the evaluation did not. Those differ inside every group on this page.