Earn2Trade vs FundingPips: which prop firm is better in 2026?

Entry cost

FundingPips opens at $29 against $150 for Earn2Trade, a substantial gap on the smallest account. The headline fee is rarely the real cost, though: what matters is the price of a reset after a failed attempt, whether the fee comes back on the first payout, and whether an activation fee appears when you move to a funded account. Compare those three lines in the table above before deciding on price alone.

Risk rules side by side

Earn2Trade applies a trailing (end of day) drawdown, with a 2.2 % daily limit. FundingPips applies a static drawdown capped at 6 %, with a 3 % daily limit. This is the single most consequential difference between the two. A static drawdown is measured once, from the starting balance, and never moves; a trailing drawdown follows your equity upward, so a winning streak raises the floor you can no longer fall below. Intraday trailing is stricter still, because it tracks unrealised peaks reached inside the session — profit you never actually banked can permanently raise your loss threshold.

Payout terms compared

Earn2Trade keeps 80 % of profits, then pays Weekly. FundingPips keeps 100 % of profits, allows a first withdrawal after 7 days, then pays Cycle of your choice: weekly (60%), bi-weekly (80%), on demand (90%) or monthly (100%). Payout frequency deserves as much attention as the split itself: a slightly lower share paid every two weeks compounds faster than a headline percentage locked behind a monthly cycle and a long first-withdrawal delay.

Platforms and instruments

Earn2Trade is the only one of the two to offer ninjatrader, tradovate, tradingview, rithmic. FundingPips covers mt5, ctrader, match-trader, which its rival does not. Platform choice is not cosmetic: order execution, available order types and the reliability of your automation all depend on it, and switching mid-evaluation is rarely possible.

Trust and longevity

Earn2Trade has been running since 2016, 6 years longer than FundingPips. On Trustpilot they sit at 4.6/5 and 4.5/5 respectively. Our trust pillar scores them 94/100 and 81/100, which weighs age, corporate transparency and public payout evidence. In an industry with no financial regulator overseeing these evaluations, longevity and a verifiable payout history are the closest thing to a guarantee.