FTMO vs FundingPips vs WICK Funded: 2026

Short answer: this page compares three evaluation firms head-to-head — FTMO, the nine-year industry benchmark with a 4.8/5 Trustpilot score; FundingPips, the budget challenger with a $29 entry and a split that can reach 100%; and WICK Funded, a newer, explicitly simulated firm built around an in-house terminal, an AI coach, and a native AI-agent connection. All three run the same basic model but differ sharply on price, rules and platform.

What FTMO, FundingPips and WICK Funded actually are

All three are proprietary-trading evaluation firms. You pay a one-time challenge fee, hit a profit target inside set risk rules, and get a funded account where you keep a profit split. FTMO has run this model since 2015 and funded over 200,000 traders. FundingPips is newer but has grown fast on price and flexible rules, with 39,000+ Trustpilot reviews at 4.5/5. WICK Funded launched in 2026 as an explicitly simulated firm — every account trades simulated balances against real market prices, stated plainly rather than implied otherwise — built around its own web and mobile terminal instead of MetaTrader.

FTMO vs FundingPips vs WICK Funded: the comparison table

Last checked: October 2026 — confirm on each firm's site.

Where the three firms actually differ

Track record. FTMO is the safer bet if a long payout history is your top filter — nine years and the review volume to match. FundingPips is younger but has already built a large user base fast, largely on price. WICK Funded is the newest of the three by a wide margin; it hasn't built a payout history yet, and says so plainly rather than leaning on borrowed trust.

Rules flexibility. FundingPips removes the consistency rule entirely on most plans — no cap on how much of your profit can come from one good day. FTMO keeps a consistency expectation baked into its standard process. WICK sits between the two: a 25-35% single-day cap that's looser than a hard consistency requirement but still a real constraint, clearly stated rather than buried in fine print.

Profit split ceiling. FundingPips can go as high as 100% on its Hot Seat tier, the highest of the three, though reaching it usually means hitting specific milestones first. WICK's ladder tops out at 95%, ahead of FTMO's 90% ceiling. Read the fine print on all three before assuming you start at the top number.

Payout cadence. FundingPips pays weekly, the fastest of the three. FTMO runs closer to a two-week cycle. WICK also pays bi-weekly, but in USDC on Solana rather than a bank transfer — a real difference if you're not already comfortable with crypto rails, though it removes bank processing delays for traders who are.

Price. FundingPips and WICK are both far cheaper to start than FTMO ($29 and $49 respectively versus roughly €155). FTMO's entry price reflects its brand and track record more than any difference in software quality.

Platform and tooling. FTMO and FundingPips both run on third-party retail platforms — MetaTrader, cTrader, TradeLocker. WICK runs its own in-house web and mobile terminal with real-time P&L, drag-to-modify SL/TP and a built-in AI coach, which neither competitor offers. The honest trade-off is familiarity: if you already trade on MT4/MT5 with a library of indicators and EAs, switching to WICK's terminal is a real adjustment, not a pure upgrade.

AI and automation. Neither FTMO nor FundingPips offers a first-party account API or a native AI-agent connection. WICK publishes a documented REST API (OpenAPI 3.1) and a one-click MCP connection so you can wire Claude, ChatGPT or Cursor directly to your account — a meaningful differentiator if you build or run trading agents, and one that doesn't depend on reverse-engineering a MetaTrader EA bridge.

Which one should you pick?

Pick FTMO if a long, independently verified track record matters more to you than price or software — it's the most-discussed, most-documented process in the category. Pick FundingPips if you want the loosest rules and the highest theoretical split at the lowest possible entry price, and you're comfortable being an early adopter relative to FTMO's history. Pick WICK Funded if you want a modern in-house terminal, a built-in AI coach and the ability to connect an AI agent directly to your account, and you're comfortable with a firm that's upfront about being new and fully simulated, paid out in USDC on Solana.

Ready to see the rules for yourself? Start the 2-Step Challenge.

FAQ

Is FTMO, FundingPips or WICK Funded better for beginners? FTMO's free educational resources and long-standing process make it a safe place to learn the evaluation flow. FundingPips' lack of a consistency rule can be forgiving while you're still figuring out position sizing. WICK's built-in AI coach reviews trades and flags habits as you go, which can help beginners understand mistakes faster, though it's the only one of the three without years of trader feedback behind it.

Which has the highest profit split? FundingPips can reach 100% on its top tier. WICK ladders to 95%. FTMO caps at 90%. Check the exact conditions for reaching each firm's ceiling before comparing on this metric alone.

Which pays out fastest? FundingPips pays weekly. WICK and FTMO both run roughly bi-weekly cycles, though WICK pays in USDC on Solana while FTMO typically pays by bank transfer.

Do all three use real money? Check FTMO and FundingPips' own disclosures — terms vary and change over time. WICK Funded is explicit that all its accounts are simulated; see the 2-Step Challenge page for how that model works.

Can I connect an AI agent to any of these firms? Only WICK Funded offers a native one-click MCP connection today. FTMO and FundingPips both run on MetaTrader-family platforms, so automation is possible through Expert Advisors or cBots, but there's no first-party account API built specifically for AI agents.

Simulated trading evaluation — no real funds are traded. Not financial advice.