ℹ️This page may contain affiliate links. We earn a commission if you purchase through our links, at no extra cost to you. Learn more
Updated 2026-03-08
FundingPips vs AquaFunded: Which Prop Firm Is Better?
Traders choosing between FundingPips and AquaFunded face a classic trade-off between proven track record and trader-friendly terms. FundingPips offers an easier 8% Phase 1 profit target compared to AquaFunded's 10%, but AquaFunded counters with a 90% profit split versus FundingPips' 60% starting rate. This comparison examines their challenge structures, payout terms, platform options, and trading restrictions to help you determine which firm better matches your trading style and experience level.
F
FundingPips
Est. 2022 · Dubai, UAE
4.5
48,000 reviews
VS
1 wins
6 ties
7 wins
A
AquaFunded
Est. 2023 · N/A
4.3
200 reviews
Feature
FundingPips
AquaFunded
Challenge Price ($100K)
N/A
$283
Phase 1 Profit Target
8%✓ Easier to pass
10%
Phase 2 Profit Target
5%
5%
Max Daily Loss
5%
5%
Max Total Loss
10%
10%
Min Trading Days
3 days
None✓ No minimum
Time Limit (Phase 1)
No limit
No limit
Payout Split
60% (up to 100%)
90% (up to 100%)✓ Higher starting split
FundingPips
Pros
+Zero reward denials policy for peace of mind trading
+Flexible payout cycles from weekly to on-demand with up to 100% profit share
+Multiple platform options including MT5, Match-Trader and cTrader
+Claims over $200M earned by traders globally with strong payout track record
+Instant funding option available alongside traditional evaluation process
Cons
−Limited information available about detailed trading rules and restrictions
−Newer firm established in 2022 with less track record than older competitors
−Maximum simulated capital capped at $300K which is lower than some rivals
AquaFunded
Pros
+Instant funding option available to skip evaluation challenges
+Up to 100% profit split with payout on demand
+No time limits on challenges — trade at your own pace
+Reward guarantee with 24-hour payout or $1000 compensation
Cons
−Relatively new firm (founded 2023) with limited track record
−Lower Trustpilot review count compared to established competitors
−Some account sizes show higher daily loss limits (5%) vs 3% standard
−Instant funding requires higher fees than challenge models
Our Verdict
Which Should You Choose?
AquaFunded emerges as the better choice for experienced traders who value flexibility and higher profit retention. The 90% profit split significantly outweighs the 2% higher Phase 1 target for profitable traders, and the lack of minimum trading days plus unrestricted news trading make it ideal for scalpers and news traders. The additional platform options (TradeLocker) also provide more execution flexibility.
FundingPips suits newer traders or those who struggle with consistency. The 8% Phase 1 target is meaningfully easier to achieve than 10%, which matters more for traders still developing their edge. However, the 60% profit split and more restrictive trading environment make it less attractive for proven profitable traders.
For most serious traders, AquaFunded's superior terms outweigh FundingPips' easier challenge, despite FundingPips having a more established reputation with 48,000 Trustpilot reviews versus 200.
Choose FundingPips if:
→Zero reward denials policy for peace of mind trading
→Flexible payout cycles from weekly to on-demand with up to 100% profit share
→Multiple platform options including MT5, Match-Trader and cTrader
→Claims over $200M earned by traders globally with strong payout track record
Choose AquaFunded if:
→Instant funding option available to skip evaluation challenges
→Up to 100% profit split with payout on demand
→No time limits on challenges — trade at your own pace
Disclaimer:This comparison is for informational purposes only. Prop firm rules change regularly — always verify current terms on each firm's official website before purchasing a challenge. This is not financial advice. Updated 2026-03-08.