⌬ FULL FACTOR SPECIFICATIONS
All 11 factors, all 4 tiers, all data sources.
Every firm's sub-score against every factor is published on its scorecard page. Below is the canonical rule set we score against.
Measures: Years in operation, named CEO and founders, real corporate HQ address, Trustpilot rating and volume. Formula: base 7 + 0.5 per year in business + 0.5 each for named CEO, verified HQ, and Trustpilot ≥4.0 with ≥100 reviews. Capped at 10.
10/10
6+ years operating, OR 4 years + all 3 transparency signals (CEO, HQ, Trustpilot ≥4.0/100+ reviews)
9/10
4 years operating + all 3 transparency signals
8/10
2 years operating + all 3 signals, OR 3 years + 2 signals
7/10
Brand-new firm with no verified transparency signals — base 7 + 0 years + 0 bonuses (formula floor)
6/10
(Unreachable — formula floor is 7)
5/10
(Unreachable — formula floor is 7)
4/10
Reserved for firms that cannot be verified at all — no documentation, no public records
3/10
Reserved for firms with multiple negative trust signals
2/10
Reserved for firms with strong negative reputation indicators
1/10
Reserved for confirmed scam or fraud activity
Data source: firm site (about/legal), Trustpilot API, LinkedIn, public registries
Measures: Verified payout proofs (90d), refusal incidents, payout speed. Formula: base 5 + 0.5 per 30 verified payouts (cap +2.5) − 0.5 per refusal report + 1 each for payout speed ≤72h, ≤24h, ≤1h.
10/10
150+ verified payouts in 90d, zero refusals, payout speed under 1 hour
9/10
90+ verified payouts, zero refusals, payout speed under 1 hour
8/10
60 verified payouts, zero refusals, payout speed under 24h
7/10
30 verified payouts, zero refusals, payout speed under 24h
6/10
~10 verified payouts, no refusals, payout speed under 72h
5/10
No verified payout data yet but no refusal reports (baseline)
4/10
~10 verified payouts paired with 2 refusal reports in 90d
3/10
Few verified payouts and 3+ refusal reports
2/10
Mostly refusal reports — very few verified payouts
1/10
Systematic non-payment + active community complaints
Data source: Reddit prop trading subreddits, Discord communities, public payout-proof aggregators, firm's own published payouts page
Measures: Jurisdiction, financial license, ToS clarity, registration number. Formula: base 5 + 2 (tier-1 jurisdiction US/UK/EU/AU/CA/IE/JP/SG) or +1 (tier-2 UAE/Cyprus/Malta/CH/MU) + 1.5 (license held) + 1 (clear ToS) or −1.5 (aggressive ToS) + 0.5 (registration number recorded).
10/10
Tier-1 jurisdiction + holds financial license + clear ToS + registration number on file
9/10
Tier-1 jurisdiction + financial license + clear ToS
8/10
Tier-1 jurisdiction + clear ToS + registration number on file (no license)
7/10
Tier-1 jurisdiction + clear ToS (most common for prop firms)
6/10
Tier-2 jurisdiction + clear ToS + registration number
5/10
Tier-2 jurisdiction only, baseline ToS
4/10
Tier-2 jurisdiction + aggressive ToS clauses
3/10
Opaque jurisdiction + aggressive "we can terminate for any reason" ToS
2/10
No verifiable corporate registration + restrictive terms (rare)
1/10
Confirmed regulatory violations, sanctions, or court action against firm
Data source: firm legal pages, public corporate registries, ToS analysis
Measures: Profit split %, first payout threshold, payout speed, refundable evaluation fee, free reset. Formula: base 5 + gradient ×3 (split 70%→100%) + 1 (threshold ≤$2.5k) or +0.5 (≤$5k) + 0.5 each for payout speed ≤72h/≤24h/≤1h + 0.5 (refundable) + 0.5 (free reset).
10/10
100% profit split + ≤$2.5k payout threshold + ≤1h payout speed + refundable fee + free reset
9/10
90% split + ≤$2.5k threshold + ≤24h payouts + refundable + free reset
8/10
90% split + ≤$5k threshold + ≤24h payouts + refundable (no free reset)
7/10
85% split + ≤$5k threshold + ≤72h payouts + refundable
6/10
80% split + ≤72h payouts + partial refund
5/10
70% split, slow payouts, no refund — formula baseline
4/10
Below 70% split — non-standard low payout structure
3/10
Below 60% split + slow payouts + no refund
2/10
Below 50% split + opaque withdrawal terms
1/10
Sub-40% split OR confirmed non-payment patterns
Data source: firm site (objective)
Measures: Eval steps, profit target %, drawdown style, consistency rule, time limits. Formula: base 5 + 2.5/1.5/0/−1 (instant/1-step/2-step/3+) + 1 (target <6%) or +0.5 (<8%) or −0.5 (≥12%) + 1 (static drawdown) or −0.5 (trailing) + 0.5 (no consistency) or −0.5 (≥30%) + 0.5 (no time limit) or −0.5 (<30 days). Higher = EASIER.
10/10
Instant funding + low target + static drawdown + no consistency + no time limit
9/10
1-step + <6% target + static + no consistency + no time limit
8/10
1-step + <8% target + static + no time limit
7/10
1-step + <10% target + light consistency rule
6/10
2-step + <8% target + static drawdown
5/10
2-step + 10%+ target — formula baseline
4/10
2-step + 12%+ target + trailing drawdown + 30%+ consistency rule
3/10
3-step + aggressive trailing drawdown + tight time limit
2/10
3-step + multiple restrictive rules (consistency + short max days + trailing)
1/10
Effectively un-passable challenge structure (red-flag setup)
Data source: firm site (objective). Higher score = EASIER challenge (trader-favorable axis).
Measures: News trading allowed, EAs/algos allowed, copy trading allowed, weekend hold allowed, hedging allowed. Formula: base 5 + 1 per permission allowed. Each perm = +1 toward the ceiling.
10/10
All 5 permissions allowed (news + EAs + copy + weekend + hedging)
9/10
4 of 5 permissions
8/10
3 of 5 permissions
7/10
2 of 5 permissions
6/10
1 of 5 permissions
5/10
0 of 5 permissions — formula baseline
4/10
No permissions + additional restrictive rules (e.g. lot-size cap)
3/10
Heavy restrictions enforced — multiple strategy types blocked
2/10
Most retail-trader strategies effectively prohibited
1/10
Extremely restrictive — only specific narrow strategies allowed
Data source: firm site (objective)
Measures: Effective price after discount, activation fees, cost per $1k of funding, monthly evaluation fees, discount %. Formula: base 5 + cost-per-$1k gradient (3/2.5/2/1 for <$2/<$3/<$5/<$8) + 1 (no monthly fee) or +0.5 (<$50) + 1 (≥40% discount) or +0.5 (≥20%).
10/10
Cost <$2 per $1k of funding + zero monthly fee + 40%+ discount
9/10
Cost <$3 per $1k + zero monthly fee + 40%+ discount
8/10
Cost <$5 per $1k + zero monthly fee + 20%+ discount
7/10
Cost <$5 per $1k + zero monthly fee
6/10
Cost <$8 per $1k + zero monthly fee
5/10
Cost ≥$8 per $1k of funding — formula baseline
4/10
Cost >$10 per $1k + meaningful activation fee
3/10
Cost >$15 per $1k + activation + monthly evaluation fee
2/10
Cost >$20 per $1k + opaque fee stacking
1/10
Cost >$30 per $1k OR fee structure designed to maximize churn
Data source: firm site + propfirmito propfirm_offer postmeta (existing discount codes)
Measures: Platforms supported (MT4/MT5/cTrader/NinjaTrader/TradingView/TradeLocker/DXtrade/Rithmic/Tradovate/MotiveWave/etc.), spreads, commissions, max leverage, liquidity provider. Formula: base 5 + 1 per supported platform (cap +5). Asset-class breadth not required — single-asset firms (e.g. futures-only) NOT penalized.
10/10
5+ platforms supported
9/10
4 platforms supported
8/10
3 platforms supported
7/10
2 platforms supported
6/10
1 platform supported
5/10
No platform integrations recorded — formula baseline
4/10
Single proprietary platform with notable limitations
3/10
Restrictive platform with reported execution issues
2/10
Frequent execution problems / heavy slippage / requote complaints
1/10
Confirmed widespread execution failures or data feed instability
Data source: firm site + community execution tests
Measures: Max funded account size, scaling plan, multi-account policy, split escalation. Formula: base 5 + 1 (≥$100k max funded) + 1 more (≥$300k) + 1 more (≥$1M) + 1 (multi-account allowed) + 1 (split escalation ≥100%) or +0.5 (≥90%) + 0.5 (scaling plan documented).
10/10
$1M+ max scaling + multi-account + 100% split escalation + documented scaling plan
9/10
$1M+ max + multi-account + 90%+ split escalation
8/10
$300k max + multi-account + 100% split escalation + plan
7/10
$300k max + multi-account + scaling plan documented
6/10
$100k max + multi-account allowed
5/10
No multi-account, no escalation — formula baseline
4/10
Small max account size (under $100k) with no scaling path
3/10
Single-account only + no growth mechanism
2/10
Account size locked + no scaling beyond initial cap
1/10
No scaling potential at all — trader stuck at initial allocation
Data source: firm site (objective)
Measures: Support channels (live chat / email / phone / Discord / Telegram), 24/7 coverage, languages, response time. Formula: base 5 + 0.5 per channel (cap +2.5) + 1 (24/7 coverage) + 1 (3+ languages) or +0.5 (2 languages) + 0.5 each for response ≤72h / ≤24h / ≤1h.
10/10
5 channels (chat+email+phone+Discord+Telegram) + 24/7 + 3+ languages + response under 1h
9/10
3+ channels + 24/7 + 2+ languages + response under 24h
8/10
3 channels + 24/7 + 1 language + response under 24h
7/10
2 channels + 24/7 + 1 language + response under 72h
6/10
2 channels + business hours + 1 language + response under 72h
5/10
1 channel only, slow response — formula baseline
4/10
Slow ticket-only support — response beyond 1 week
3/10
Frequently unresponsive support — community complaints
2/10
Confirmed support failures (tickets ignored / canned responses)
1/10
No reachable support OR known harassment of complaining users
Data source: we test the support channels ourselves + community reports
Measures: 90-day Reddit sentiment, YouTube reviewer consensus, Trustpilot trajectory. Each signal scored 0-10. Formula: average of available signals — `(reddit + youtube + Trustpilot×2) / signal_count`. Trustpilot 0-5 rescaled to 0-10. No tier rounding — the average IS the score.
10/10
Sentiment avg 10 across all signals — uniformly positive
9/10
Sentiment avg 9 — strong positive across Reddit + YouTube + Trustpilot
8/10
Sentiment avg 8 — mostly positive, isolated complaints
7/10
Sentiment avg 7 — stable, occasional mixed reviews
6/10
Sentiment avg 6 — mixed reception
5/10
Sentiment avg 5 — neutral OR no community data yet
4/10
Sentiment avg 4 — mostly negative reception across channels
3/10
Sentiment avg 3 — strongly negative, growing complaint volume
2/10
Sentiment avg 2 — overwhelming complaint pattern
1/10
Sentiment avg 1 — confirmed scam consensus across communities
Data source: Reddit search, Discord scrapes, YouTube transcripts (manual + Firecrawl-assisted)