Getfunded,withfulltrust.

CFD prop firms fund forex, gold, index and commodity traders through paid evaluations, using contract-for-difference pricing on platforms like MT5, cTrader and Match-Trader. You pass a one- or two-phase challenge inside loss limits, receive a funded account, and keep 80–100% of profits — without depositing trading capital of your own. It's the oldest and largest segment of prop funding, ranging from decade-old institutions like FTMO and The5ers to aggressive discounters, and it's where competition has pushed a $100K evaluation down to roughly $419 on average with codes applied — less than half what it cost a few years ago.

The classic format is two phases: roughly 8–10% profit target in phase one, 4–5% in phase two, all while respecting a daily loss limit (usually 4–5%) and an overall drawdown (8–12%). One-step challenges compress that into a single 8–12% target with tighter drawdown, and instant-funding products skip evaluation entirely at a much higher fee. Pass, and the funded account runs the same loss limits with a profit split instead of a target. The fine print that decides outcomes: whether the daily loss counts floating positions, whether the drawdown is static or trailing, and what the risk-per-trade and consistency clauses say — our programs table surfaces all of it per challenge.

The honest answer from reading thousands of public reviews: the money is real and so are the disputes. Millions in payouts are documented across firms like The5ers (1,000 five-star reviews, many from repeat-payout traders), E8 Markets (six one-star reviews in 478) and FTMO. But CFD funding also has the industry's most active enforcement desks — copy-trading allegations, IP flags and discretionary conduct labels cluster at a handful of firms, almost always after profits accumulate. The gap between the cleanest and roughest firm is enormous and invisible from the marketing, which is why we publish a review analysis for every single firm, one-star reports included.

No — and any page implying otherwise is selling something. CFD evaluation firms are not licensed brokers; most operate from offshore or lightly-regulated jurisdictions, your challenge is a simulated environment, and your relationship with the firm is purely contractual. Some firms borrow credibility from regulated infrastructure — Fintokei runs alongside EU-regulated Purple Trading, Blueberry Funded is backed by an Australian brokerage — which genuinely improves execution quality but does not put your payouts under a regulator's protection. Treat every firm as an unregulated counterparty: cap your exposure to the fee you can afford to lose, withdraw often, and weight documented payout history over any claim on a website, including ours.

Because the fee prices the whole package: rule generosity, enforcement risk and brand. A $40 two-step $10K at Alpha Capital and a $500+ evaluation at FTMO can fund the same strategy — the premium buys polish, support speed and rule stability, while the discount is often financed by stricter fine print or a busier risk desk. Discount codes compound the spread: across our database the average verified code saves about 28%, and price-per-dollar-of-buying-power varies by a factor of ten between firms. The pricing chart normalises all of it, with codes applied, so you compare real costs instead of marketing anchors.

By aggregated review score in our database: E8 Markets leads at 4.8 across 478 reviews with the cleanest payout record among large firms, The5ers holds 4.7 across 1,250 — the best high-volume score we track — and FTMO's 4.5 remains the establishment benchmark. Value picks depend on your tolerance: Funding Pips is the price leader with a busy risk team, FundedNext pairs excellent support with aggressive funded-stage enforcement, and Blueberry Funded offers the tier's best execution against its most active conduct desk. There is no single best — there's the best fit for your strategy and risk tolerance, which is what the reviews and finder are for.

MT5 remains the default — most firms offer it — with cTrader, Match-Trader and TradeLocker as the standard alternatives and DXTrade at several majors. MT4 is nearly extinct in prop funding. The wrinkle that matters for US-based traders: MetaTrader access is restricted at several firms, pushing them to Match-Trader or cTrader builds. A few firms also gate specific features — copy-trading tools, VPS use, EA permissions — by platform, and those permissions have been the subject of enough disputes that we track them in our reviews. If you're platform-sensitive, filter first.

Standard splits run 80–90%, with several firms reaching 95–100% on scaled accounts or as paid upgrades. Payout cadence has become the real competitive front: Funding Pips and FundedNext process most withdrawals in minutes to hours, The5ers runs 24–48 hours, and the slower firms still settle within a few business days — bi-weekly cycles with minimum thresholds are increasingly rare. Per our review analysis, payout speed claims largely hold up at the top firms; the disputes are almost never about slowness, they're about denials, which is a firm-selection problem rather than a market-wide one.

The typical CFD structure is a 4–5% daily loss limit plus an 8–12% overall drawdown, and the details decide everything. Static drawdowns (fixed floor below starting balance) are the CFD norm — about half of all challenges we track — but trailing variants exist and some 'balance-based' daily limits count floating losses, meaning an open trade can breach you intraday even if it later recovers. CFD's average drawdown-to-target ratio of 1:0.65 is the most generous of the three markets we track. Two clauses to read before any purchase: how the daily loss is measured (balance vs equity, server-day boundaries) and whether a risk-per-trade cap counts commissions — both have ended funded accounts over technicalities.

It varies more than any other rule set, and it's where discounted challenges get expensive. News windows: some firms ban trading minutes around tier-1 releases (with disputes documented over speech durations and window boundaries), others explicitly allow it — FXIFY and CTI market news-trading freedom as features. EAs and bots are allowed at many firms but 'system-assisted patterns' can still trigger reviews; VPS policies tightened industry-wide in 2026 and were applied retroactively at least once. Weekend holding is usually fine for swing-designated accounts and banned on others within the same firm. The rules pages in our database record each firm's current stance — check them, not the sales page.

Many accept US clients, but the roster shifts and the platform picture narrows — FTMO stopped onboarding new US traders, several firms exclude the US outright, and MetaTrader restrictions push US users onto Match-Trader or cTrader at the firms that do accept them. Payment rails add friction too: card processing for US customers fails at some offshore firms, making crypto the practical payment path. Futures funding is the smoother route for US residents overall, but if CFD is your market, our US-traders guide tracks which firms currently work and on what platforms.

Yes — every code is tested against the firm's own checkout before it's listed, re-checked weekly, and re-verified after every firm announcement. The prices you see across the site already include the discount, so there's no mental math. When a code dies or a firm changes its offer, the change flows through our database to every page automatically; when we can't verify a code for a firm, we say so plainly rather than listing a fake one.

Through affiliate partnerships: when you buy a challenge via our links or codes, the firm pays us a commission at no extra cost to you — the codes usually make your challenge cheaper than buying direct. That's the whole model. It's also why we publish the unflattering parts — payout-denial patterns, one-star review analyses, honest 'no code exists' pages — because the only durable edge an affiliate site has is being the one that doesn't spin.

Prices, rules and codes live in our own database, refreshed by automated daily and weekly scrapes plus manual verification whenever a firm announces changes. Every table, chart and comparison on the site is generated from that single source, so nothing is hand-edited into inconsistency. Review statistics aggregate thousands of publicly posted trader reviews, and our research page recomputes all industry statistics on every deployment.

Completely. The database, the comparison tools, the pricing chart, the finder, the simulator, the reviews, the research statistics and every discount code are free with no account, no email wall and no paywall. If you want to support the site, using our codes when you buy a challenge does it — and usually saves you money at the same time.