Cross-firm
FundingPips vs FTMO vs FundedNext — when does which win?
Three patterns dominate the cross-firm comparison:
Slow-burn portfolios with infrequent signals
FundingPips' 3-day minimum gives it the lowest bar in the catalog (FTMO needs 4, FundedNext 5). With FTMO also moving to unlimited time in 2026, FundingPips' edge over FTMO for low-frequency portfolios is now the 1-day-lower minimum and the 8% target (vs FTMO's 10%). Pass Lab consistently surfaces FundingPips for low-frequency portfolios.
Gold-heavy portfolios after the 2026 leverage adjustments
FundingPips' 1:30 metals leverage is mid-pack: more permissive than FundedNext's post-2026 1:10 cut, less permissive than FTMO's 1:30 (effectively tied). For XAUUSD-heavy strategies, the FundingPips vs FTMO comparison becomes about other rules (profit target, minimum trading days — both are now unlimited time after FTMO removed its cap in 2026). FundedNext's metals leverage cut typically bumps it below FundingPips for gold-trading EAs.
Aggressive portfolios with 30%+ daily volatility
If your EA's worst day approaches the 5% daily DD line, FundingPips' static 10% total DD is friendlier than FTMO 1-step's 10% trailing-EoD line. Static doesn't follow your equity peak; trailing does. Mean-reversion and grid EAs that recover from large drawdowns survive FundingPips' static rules.