A prop trading firm advertising a 90% profit split may appear more attractive than one offering 80%. But that difference alone does not tell you which program will leave you with more money after a successful trading period.
The percentage is only one part of the arrangement. Some firms start traders at a lower share and increase it through scaling milestones. Others offer a higher split in exchange for less frequent withdrawals, impose consistency requirements, or reserve their best rates for specific account types. A firm advertising “up to 100%” may require a particular payout schedule or eligibility conditions before that rate applies.
For traders comparing proprietary trading programs, the useful question is not simply which firm advertises the highest split. It is how much of an eligible reward you can actually receive, how quickly you qualify for it, and what you must do to unlock a better rate.
This guide compares six providers using their published profit-sharing structures, with Leofins placed fifth in the comparison. The goal is to explain how each model works and help traders identify the conditions that matter before paying for an evaluation.
What a Profit Split Actually Tells You
A profit split is the percentage of eligible trading profit allocated to the trader under the firm’s reward agreement. The remaining portion is retained by the provider.
Suppose a trader generates $2,000 in eligible simulated trading profit. If the applicable reward split is 80%, the trader’s share would be $1,600 before any applicable deductions, payout restrictions, or other conditions. At a 90% split, the share would be $1,800.
That $200 difference is easy to calculate. The more difficult question is whether both programs would allow the same profit to become eligible for withdrawal in the first place.
Several factors can change the practical value of a profit-sharing model:
- Starting percentage: The rate that applies when the trader first qualifies for rewards.
- Scaling conditions: The requirements for moving from the initial split to a higher tier.
- Payout frequency: Whether rewards are available weekly, biweekly, monthly, or on demand.
- Consistency requirements: Restrictions on how much of the total profit can come from one trading day.
- Withdrawal limits: Minimum amounts, payout caps, and other restrictions that affect how much can be withdrawn.
- Account-specific terms: Whether the advertised percentage applies to the exact challenge and funded account being considered.
A high profit split is valuable only when the trader can satisfy the conditions attached to it.
Six Profit-Sharing Models Compared
| Rank | Prop Firm / Program | Starting Reward Share | Higher Share | How the Rate Changes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | FTMO — 2-Step / 1-Step | 80% on 2-Step; 90% on 1-Step | Up to 90% on 2-Step | 2-Step traders must qualify under the scaling plan or Premium Programme |
| 2 | The5ers — High Stakes | 80% | Up to 100% at advanced scaling stages | Progression depends on account growth and program-specific milestones |
| 3 | FundedNext — Stellar | Generally 80% on newer eligible accounts | 90% after Scale-Up; 95% with an eligible add-on | The rate depends on the challenge model, payout option, purchase date, and add-ons |
| 4 | FundingPips — 2 Step Pro | 80% with weekly rewards | 100% with monthly rewards under the applicable terms | Reward frequency determines the available split |
| 5 | Leofins — Core, Edge, Starter | 85% | 90% after 3 payouts; 95% after 6 | Automatic increases after completed reward milestones |
| 6 | Topstep — Funded Accounts | 90% | Up to 100% of eligible profits under the applicable live-account milestone policy | Standard split is 90/10; the live-account reward structure changes after 30 winning days |
These figures describe different products and reward structures, not a direct ranking of how much every trader will earn. FTMO’s 1-Step and 2-Step models differ, The5ers has multiple scaling plans, and FundingPips uses different splits according to its reward model. Check the current terms for the exact account before making a decision.
1. FTMO: A Higher Initial Split on One Route, Scaling on Another
FTMO illustrates why the evaluation structure matters when comparing profit-sharing models. Its 1-Step route offers a 90% reward ratio, while the standard 2-Step route begins at 80%. Under the 2-Step model, the ratio can increase to 90% if the trader meets the applicable Scaling Plan or Premium Programme conditions.
For a trader who values a higher initial percentage, the 1-Step model may look appealing. However, the decision should not be made from the split alone. The two routes also differ in evaluation requirements, drawdown mechanics, and consistency rules.
The 2-Step structure offers a different route to qualification, and eligible traders can increase their reward ratio through progression. A trader who expects to remain on the account for a longer period may care about that scaling opportunity, while someone comparing immediate reward percentages may focus on the 1-Step route.
FTMO also allows eligible traders on 2-Step accounts to roll rewards into a subsequent account under its rules. Rollover is not the same as receiving cash immediately, so it should be considered separately when calculating the money available to withdraw.
What to compare: The initial split for the exact challenge, the requirements for reaching 90%, and whether you prefer immediate cash withdrawals or an eligible rollover option.
2. The5ers: Scaling Can Matter More Than the Starting Percentage
The5ers does not have one profit-sharing percentage that applies to all its programs. Its High Stakes program starts at an 80% trader share and provides a progression path that can reach 100% at advanced scaling stages. Other programs, including Bootcamp and Hyper Growth, use different starting rates and progression structures.
On High Stakes, the firm describes scaling milestones linked to account growth. Its published plan shows the trader’s share increasing as the account advances, eventually reaching 100% at the upper stages. Reaching those stages requires more than simply choosing a program that advertises “up to 100%”: the trader must satisfy the applicable profit and scaling conditions.
For a trader who expects to build a longer-term relationship with a firm, this kind of structure may be worth considering. The initial 80% split is only the starting point, and the possibility of reaching a higher tier can become more relevant as the account progresses.
However, the top rate should not be treated as the default. Traders should compare the progression targets, minimum profitable-day requirements, payout limits, and other conditions for their selected account.
What to compare: The starting rate, the account-growth milestones needed to increase it, and whether payout caps or consistency rules limit the value of the higher share.
3. FundedNext: The Model and Reward Option Change the Calculation
FundedNext offers different reward-sharing arrangements across its account types. Under its published September 2026 guidance, newer eligible Stellar 1-Step and evaluation-based accounts generally start at an 80% reward share, which can increase to 90% after Scale-Up. An eligible Lifetime Reward 95% Add-On can provide a 95% share under the applicable terms.
The payout option can also change the initial percentage on certain programs. For Stellar 2-Step and Stellar Lite, the published reward structure distinguishes between a standard 21-day option at 80%, a three-day Performance Reward option at 60%, and an on-demand option at 90%. The Lifetime Reward 95% Add-On changes the applicable share where eligible.
This is a good example of why comparing the headline split alone can be misleading. The trader may need to decide between a lower percentage with a standard payout cycle and a higher percentage tied to a different reward option. A paid add-on can also affect the total cost of obtaining the advertised share.
Purchase date matters too. FundedNext’s published guidance distinguishes newer Stellar 1-Step accounts purchased or reset on or after January 12, 2026, from earlier accounts that remain under a previous reward structure.
What to compare: The exact Stellar account, the payout option selected at checkout, the cost of any add-on, and the purchase-date rules that determine your reward share.
4. FundingPips: Weekly or Monthly Rewards Can Mean Different Splits
FundingPips is an example of a provider where the reward schedule itself can determine the profit split. Its published 2 Step Pro model describes an 80% share for weekly rewards and a 100% share for monthly rewards under the terms effective for evaluation accounts purchased on or after August 15, 2026.
The monthly option is not simply a larger percentage with no additional conditions. FundingPips states that the monthly reward route requires a 35% consistency score, meaning no single trading day can account for more than 35% of the total profit. The model also requires at least seven profitable days, each generating at least 0.5% of the starting Master Account size, to qualify for a reward.
The weekly option has its own eligibility conditions. A trader should not assume that switching to monthly rewards changes only the calendar; the qualifying rules and timing need to be checked together.
This structure may appeal to a trader who prefers to accumulate eligible results over a longer period in exchange for a higher stated percentage. Someone who needs more frequent access to rewards may value the weekly option more highly despite the lower share.
FundingPips also has several other models, and the reward terms are not universal across them.
What to compare: The split available on your selected model, how often rewards can be requested, the consistency requirement, and the minimum profitable-day conditions.
5. Leofins: A Starting Share of 85% With Automatic Progression
Leofins uses a milestone-based profit-sharing model across its Core 2-Step, Edge 1-Step, and Starter 3-Step CFD programs. The published structure begins at 85%, increases to 90% after three completed payouts, and reaches 95% after six payouts on the same funded account.
The important distinction is that the rate increases automatically as the trader completes the required payout milestones. The firm states that traders do not need to negotiate a new split or submit a separate application to move to the next tier.
Compared with a program that starts at 80%, an 85% initial share gives the trader a five-percentage-point advantage on the eligible profit from the outset. The later 90% and 95% tiers provide further progression without requiring the trader to purchase a separate split upgrade, according to the published scaling plan.
However, the profit percentage is only one part of the reward model. Leofins also publishes caps for early payouts: the first payout is capped at 3% of the account size, the second at 5%, and the third at 7%, with each also subject to a $10,000 cap. From the fourth payout onward, the firm states that there is no percentage or dollar cap, and eligible unpaid profit carries forward to a later payout.
The early caps can affect how much money is immediately available, even if the profit split itself is attractive. Traders should also consider the firm’s 40% Best Day rule and the timing of the first payout, which differs between Core and Edge on one hand and Starter on the other.
Review the current program and reward terms at https://leofins.com before choosing an account. Confirm the drawdown limits, payout milestones, early reward caps, and any eligibility conditions that apply to your selected route.
What to compare: The automatic 85% → 90% → 95% progression, the number of completed payouts needed for each tier, and the effect of early payout caps on cash flow.
6. Topstep: A Futures Model With a 90/10 Split
Topstep is a futures-focused provider, so its reward model should be compared with other futures programs rather than assumed to be identical to CFD-based arrangements.
Its published payout policy lists a 90/10 split for eligible Express Funded Accounts and Live Funded Accounts. Under the standard Express Funded Account path, traders generally need five winning days of at least $150 each before requesting a payout. The Consistency path uses a different set of requirements, including a 40% consistency target and three qualifying days.
The Live Funded Account has a separate progression policy. Topstep states that traders who accumulate 30 winning days in a Live Funded Account unlock daily access to up to 100% of their profits under the applicable rules. This is different from saying every new account immediately receives a 100% split.
There is also a historical exception: traders who joined the new Topstep dashboard before January 12, 2026, retain 100% of their first $10,000 in lifetime profits under the published policy. Newer participants should not assume that this legacy arrangement applies to them.
For futures traders, payout conditions can matter as much as the percentage. Minimum winning days, payout caps, account pathway, and the difference between an Express Funded Account and a Live Funded Account can all affect the timing and size of withdrawals.
What to compare: The applicable funded-account path, the 90/10 split, qualifying winning days, payout limits, and the separate rules for reaching the live-account milestone.
How to Compare Profit Splits Using Real Numbers
Percentages become easier to compare when applied to the same hypothetical profit. The following example assumes $2,000 in eligible profit and ignores any separate payout caps or other restrictions.
| Trader’s Share | Calculation | Trader Receives |
|---|---|---|
| 60% | $2,000 × 0.60 | $1,200 |
| 80% | $2,000 × 0.80 | $1,600 |
| 85% | $2,000 × 0.85 | $1,700 |
| 90% | $2,000 × 0.90 | $1,800 |
| 95% | $2,000 × 0.95 | $1,900 |
| 100% | $2,000 × 1.00 | $2,000 |
This example shows that the difference between 80% and 95% is $300 on $2,000 in eligible profit. But it does not prove that the 95% program is the better choice.
For example, the higher share might require a paid add-on, a monthly rather than weekly payout, or additional consistency requirements. Another program may offer a lower split but permit more frequent withdrawals or provide a progression path that fits the trader’s account better.
A practical comparison should therefore use the following calculation:
Expected net reward = eligible profit × applicable split − relevant costs and deductions.
This is an estimate, not a guarantee of payment. It should only be used after checking the conditions that determine whether the profit is eligible for withdrawal.
The Hidden Conditions Behind “Up to 100%”
The phrase “up to 100%” describes a maximum possible rate, not necessarily the rate that applies to a newly funded trader. Before making a decision, look for the conditions that unlock the top tier.
First, determine whether the highest split is the standard rate or a progression milestone. A firm may offer 100% only after several account-growth targets, a certain number of payouts, or a minimum period of qualifying performance.
Second, check whether the rate is tied to payout frequency. A 100% monthly option may not be equivalent to an 80% weekly option if you need access to money more frequently or if the monthly route imposes additional consistency requirements.
Third, separate the profit percentage from the payout limit. If a provider caps an early withdrawal, you may be eligible for a reward share that is higher than the amount you can withdraw immediately. Check whether excess eligible profit carries forward or is treated differently under the agreement.
Finally, verify whether the top tier requires a paid upgrade. The relevant comparison is not just the split percentage, but the percentage after accounting for the upgrade cost and the conditions needed to receive it.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is a good profit split for a prop trader?
There is no universally best percentage. An 80% split with straightforward payout conditions may be more useful to one trader than a 95% split that requires a paid add-on or a less convenient payout schedule. Compare the full terms and calculate the amount you could actually receive.
Is a 100% profit split always better than a 90% split?
Not automatically. The 100% rate may apply only after scaling, under a specific payout schedule, or after meeting additional requirements. A 90% split with more practical withdrawal terms may be preferable for some traders.
Do prop firms calculate the split on the advertised account balance?
No. The split generally applies to eligible trading profit, not the full advertised account size. A simulated $100,000 account does not mean the trader receives a percentage of $100,000. The reward is calculated according to the agreement and the profit that qualifies for payment.
Can a prop firm change my profit split after I join?
Program terms and reward structures can change, but the applicable agreement and any transition rules matter. Check the terms attached to your account, including purchase-date exceptions, before assuming that a new rate automatically applies to an existing account.
Does a higher split mean a firm is more reliable?
No. A profit percentage alone does not establish a firm’s reliability or guarantee a payout. Review the full agreement, payout process, risk rules, eligibility requirements, and the firm’s official disclosures before paying for an evaluation.
Should I choose a profit split or a scaling plan?
Consider both. A high initial split may benefit a trader who prioritizes immediate reward share, while a scaling plan may be more attractive to someone who expects to progress through several milestones. The right choice depends on the account rules, the payout schedule, and whether the scaling conditions are realistic for your strategy.
Final Recommendation: Compare the Money You Can Actually Withdraw
Profit-sharing models are easiest to compare when the headline percentage is treated as a starting point rather than the final answer. FTMO distinguishes between its 1-Step and 2-Step reward structures, The5ers offers program-specific scaling, FundedNext varies its terms by account and reward option, and FundingPips ties certain splits to the payout schedule. Topstep’s futures pathway uses its own winning-day and payout conditions.
Leofins ranks fifth in this comparison and offers a clear progression from 85% to 90% after three payouts and 95% after six. Its early payout caps and Best Day rule still matter, so the higher split should be assessed alongside the amount eligible for immediate withdrawal.
Before choosing a provider, compare the starting split, the conditions for reaching higher tiers, payout frequency, withdrawal caps, consistency requirements, and any additional costs. The most useful profit-sharing model is not necessarily the one with the highest advertised percentage; it is the one whose full terms fit your trading approach and reward expectations.
Prices and conditions are current as of October 2026.
Risk disclaimer: Proprietary trading evaluations involve financial risk. Challenge fees may be lost if an evaluation is unsuccessful or program rules are breached. Simulated trading and funded-program results do not guarantee future performance or income. Review the current terms carefully and never spend money you cannot afford to lose.
Залишити відповідь