At a glance
- Read targets and loss rules for each phase separately.
- Compare payment terms over the same evaluation horizon.
- Check the funded-stage agreement before paying for the evaluation.
Stage count is only one column
A one-step evaluation has one qualifying phase before the next account stage. A two-step program requires completion of two phases. That simple description does not specify profit targets, daily limits, drawdown type or restrictions on how profits are made.
Build a row for phase one, phase two if present, and the funded stage. FTMO’s product objectives are an example of why the product and phase must be selected before comparing rule values.1 A brand-level “maximum loss” snippet can miss those distinctions.
Normalize the comparison before counting steps
Use the same account size and instrument. Then compare phase targets, the amount and type of permitted drawdown, minimum days, maximum duration and any consistency rule. Record whether fees recur while you remain in the evaluation.
A hypothetical program with one 10% target and a tighter loss allowance cannot be ranked as easier than a program with two targets merely by counting phases. Difficulty depends on the path taken through both profit and loss constraints, not just the sum of target percentages.
Model time and failure separately
Ask what happens if you breach the first phase, breach the second, stop trading, or pass close to a subscription renewal. A fee credit, reset and new purchase can have different consequences. Check whether a reset preserves anything from the previous attempt.
Use a spending scenario rather than a promise about how quickly you will pass. The cost calculator can compare one-time and recurring charges, but it cannot measure your chance of passing either format.
Do not stop reading at the pass screen
Passing can lead to a new agreement rather than unrestricted access to the advertised account amount. Check the funded-stage loss floor, payout eligibility, account type and permitted strategy. A favorable evaluation rule may change after qualification.
Keep your shortlist tied to a program, not a slogan such as “fast funding.” Return to the program comparison table, select the relevant stage count, then open each firm’s source documentation before deciding.
Sources & dates
Primary pages accessed on . A source can change after publication. The examples above are not a claim about a program’s current price.
Promoted · QATSExplore QATS programs
Compare QATS monthly and one-time evaluation plans. Standard fees in our reference start at $69 per month.
- One-step evaluation
- 80% profit split
- Monthly or one-time fees
Put this guide to work
Open the relevant programs and their official source links.
Browse firm profiles →Follow the build a shortlist reading path for the next guide and its context.
Continue your comparison
- FTMO: programs, rules and source links
- FundedNext: programs, rules and source links
- QATS: programs, rules and source links
PropFirmMatcher is affiliated with QATS. This is not an independent rating or a recommendation to purchase an evaluation. Read our methodology.