1.9 pts
to FundedNext
The full 11-factor scorecard.
Each factor scored 0-10 then weighted into the composite. Bars are color-saturated for the winner of each row, dimmed for the runner-up. Weights from the published methodology.
Who wins which category.
Bucket scores are factor-weighted averages within each methodology bucket. Auto-generated from the raw data above — regenerated on every refresh.
Safety 7.1vs7.1
Safety is a tie — both firms land at the same weighted score on this bucket. The differentiator will be your other factor preferences.
Terms 8.3vs7.8
On Terms (Profit Split, Challenge Difficulty, Rule Flexibility, Value for Price), FundedNext wins narrowly. Lower entry fee per $1k of funding, looser challenge structure, or better trader permissions tilt this bucket. The trader-facing economics favor FundedNext.
Execution & Growth 6.6vs6.7
On Execution & Growth (Trading Conditions, Scaling Potential, Customer Support), Funding Pips wins narrowly. Platform variety, scaling cap, and support responsiveness combined. If you're planning to scale beyond the initial account size, Funding Pips gives you more headroom.
Social Proof 9.0vs9.0
Social Proof is a tie — both firms land at the same weighted score on this bucket. The differentiator will be your other factor preferences.
Top-3 accounts from each firm.
Each account scored individually with our account-level methodology (re-weights factors 4, 5, 6, 7, 9 using account-specific data). Compare apples-to-apples by size and program type.
FundedNext TOP-3
Funding Pips TOP-3
Pick a firm and start the challenge.
Both affiliate links carry our tracking code. Discount codes are firm-published, not exclusives — copy and paste at checkout.
Compare these firms with peers.
Each link is a separate full scorecard. Browse to triangulate the right firm for your trading style.