FundedNext vs FundingPips: which is easier to pass and pay out?
FundedNext and FundingPips compared on their own published rules: profit targets, loss limits, consistency rules and payouts, plus how each account did in our benchmark, where the same made-up trader is replayed against every account. On our 8 measures, FundedNext comes out ahead on 4 and FundingPips on 1, with 3 level.
The verdict, category by category
| FundedNext | FundingPips | Edge | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Easiest challenge to pass pass chance in our benchmark | Stellar 2-Step: 55% | 2 Step Standard: 55% | Level |
| Best chance of passing and getting paid passed and reached a first payout, in our benchmark | Stellar 2-Step: 47% | 2 Step Standard: 47% | Level |
| Instant funding funded from day one, no challenge | Stellar Instant: 83% reach a payout | Zero (instant): 32% reach a payout | FundedNext |
| Most room before failing largest maximum loss; static beats trailing | 10% static (Stellar 2-Step) | 10% static (2 Step Standard) | Level |
| Highest profit split | 80% | 95% | FundingPips |
| Quickest first payout | 5 days | 14 days | FundedNext |
| Accounts with no consistency rule | 3 of 3 | 1 of 2 | FundedNext |
| An account with no daily loss limit | Yes | No | FundedNext |
Which should you choose?
- Choose FundedNext if you want to skip the evaluation and be funded straight away; you want your first payout as soon as possible; you make most of your profit on a few big days; you hold through volatile sessions and a daily limit would cut you off.
- Choose FundingPips if you expect to be paid often and want to keep more of each payout.
- Still not sure? The right firm depends on your strategy, not ours. Upload your backtest and see your own pass and payout chance at both.
Test your strategy at FundedNext Test at FundingPips
2-step challenges: FundedNext Stellar 2-Step vs FundingPips 2 Step Standard
| FundedNext | FundingPips | |
|---|---|---|
| Account | Stellar 2-Step | 2 Step Standard |
| Profit target | 8% / 5% | 8% / 5% |
| Daily loss limit | 5% | 5% |
| Maximum loss | 10% static | 10% static |
| Minimum days | 5 | 3 |
| Time limit | None | None |
| Consistency rule | None | None |
| First payout | After 21 days, 0.1%+ profit | After 14 days, 1%+ profit |
| Profit split | 80% | 80% |
| Price | $549.99 for $100K | $529 for $100K |
| Pass chance (benchmark) | 55% | 55% |
| First payout chance (benchmark) | 47% | 47% |
| Best risk per trade | 0.75% | 0.75% |
| Fee spent per first payout, per $100 | $213 | $213 |
| Rules checked | 8 Nov 2026 | 13 Nov 2026 |
Instant funding accounts: FundedNext Stellar Instant vs FundingPips Zero (instant)
| FundedNext | FundingPips | |
|---|---|---|
| Account | Stellar Instant | Zero (instant) |
| Profit target | None | None |
| Daily loss limit | None | 3% |
| Maximum loss | 6% trailing, locks at start | 5% trailing, locks at start |
| Minimum days | None | None |
| Time limit | None | None |
| Consistency rule | None | 15% |
| First payout | After 14 days, 0.1%+ profit | After 14 days, 4%+ profit |
| Profit split | 70% | 95% |
| Price | $599.99 for $20K | $499 for $100K |
| First payout chance (benchmark) | 83% | 32% |
| Best risk per trade | 0.3% | 0.38% |
| Fee spent per first payout, per $100 | $120 | $313 |
| Rules checked | 8 Nov 2026 | 25 Oct 2026 |
Where a firm has more than one account of a type, the one that did best in our benchmark is shown. "Fee spent per first payout" is what every $100 of challenge fee works out at once failed attempts are counted.
Every account at both firms
| Firm | Account | Type | Profit target | Daily loss | Max loss | Consistency | First payout | Split |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| F | Stellar 2-Step | 2-step | 8% / 5% | 5% | 10% static | None | After 21 days, 0.1%+ profit | 80% |
| F | Stellar 1-Step | 1-step | 10% | 3% | 6% static | None | After 5 days, 0.1%+ profit | 80% |
| F | Stellar Instant | Instant funding | None | None | 6% trailing, locks at start | None | After 14 days, 0.1%+ profit | 70% |
| F | 2 Step Standard | 2-step | 8% / 5% | 5% | 10% static | None | After 14 days, 1%+ profit | 80% |
| F | Zero (instant) | Instant funding | None | 3% | 5% trailing, locks at start | 15% | After 14 days, 4%+ profit | 95% |
About the two firms
FundedNext
FundedNext offers three Stellar accounts. The 2-Step (8% then 5%, 5% daily, 10% fixed maximum loss) is the standard choice, and you pick a payout schedule at checkout: a 21-day cycle at 80%, three profitable days at 60%, or on demand at 90% with a 40% best-day rule. The 1-Step is tighter, with a 3% daily limit and a 6% fixed maximum loss.
Forex & CFDs · United Arab Emirates · cTrader, Match-Trader
Rules to watch: Daily loss includes open P&L and resets at 00:00 server time. Accounts deactivate after 60 days with no trades. Stellar 2-Step payout option is chosen at checkout: 21-day cycle (80%), 3 profitable days (60%) or on-demand (90%, needs 2% profit and 40% best day). Only 40% of profit from trades within 5 minutes of high-impact news counts. Source: fundednext.com/general-rules/cfds/trading-objectives
FundingPips
FundingPips' 2 Step Standard is a classic evaluation: 8% then 5%, a 5% daily limit from the higher of opening balance or equity, and a 10% maximum loss fixed to your start, with an 80% split. It's a sensible fit for most swing and day traders.
Forex & CFDs
Rules to watch: Daily loss measured from the higher of opening balance or equity, resets 00:00 UTC+3. One trade every 30 days or the account breaches. Zero (instant): first 3% of profit can't be withdrawn and you need 7 profitable days (0.25%+) in each rolling 30 days. On 2 Step Standard the weekly and two-week payout cycles have no consistency rule, and the two-week cycle is what PropPassCheck simulates. The On Demand cycle needs a 35% consistency score (no day over 35% of total profit) and 7 profitable days. Sources: help.fundingpips.com/hc/en-us/articles/34501809112081-2-Step-Standard and help.fundingpips.com/hc/en-us/articles/34502157694865-FundingPips-Zero
Questions
Is FundedNext or FundingPips easier to pass?
They are about the same. In our benchmark FundedNext's Stellar 2-Step passed 55% of the time and FundingPips's 2 Step Standard 55%.
Which is more likely to pay out, FundedNext or FundingPips?
Of their challenges, FundedNext's Stellar 2-Step (47%) gave the better chance of passing and reaching a first payout in our benchmark, against 47% for FundingPips's 2 Step Standard. FundedNext's Stellar Instant and FundingPips's Zero (instant), an instant account with no challenge, reached a payout 83% and 32% of the time. This ranks the rules, not the firms' payout records.
Which has the better profit split, FundedNext or FundingPips?
FundingPips, with up to 95% against 80%.
Which gives more room on drawdown, FundedNext or FundingPips?
FundedNext's most forgiving account allows 10% static (Stellar 2-Step); FundingPips's allows 10% static (2 Step Standard). A static limit never moves up behind you, so it is worth more than a trailing one of the same size.
Do FundedNext and FundingPips have consistency rules?
FundedNext: none of its accounts do. FundingPips: 1 of 2 accounts do.
More comparisons
- FTMO vs FundedNext
- FTMO vs FundingPips
- The5%ers vs FundedNext
- FundingPips vs The5%ers
- E8 Markets vs FundedNext
- FundingPips vs E8 Markets
- Alpha Capital Group vs FundingPips
- FundedNext vs FXIFY
- FTMO vs The5%ers
- FTMO vs E8 Markets
- FTMO vs Alpha Capital Group
- FTMO vs FXIFY
PropPassCheck isn't paid by either firm and has no affiliate links. The benchmark ranks rules, not your trading. Confirm the rules on each firm's site before you buy.