Look, the prop firm space is crowded right now. Between FTMO raising their prices, Apex constantly running sales, and new firms popping up every week, figuring out where to drop your evaluation fee can feel like navigating a minefield. Funded Trading Plus (FTP for short) has been making noise since 2021, and traders seem genuinely divided on whether it’s worth the premium pricing.
Having analyzed hundreds of trader reports, Trustpilot reviews, and community feedback across Reddit and Discord, here’s what actually matters about this UK-based firm.
What Sets FTP Apart (And What Doesn’t)
Funded Trading Plus runs on a pretty standard setup at first glance: choose between 1-step, 2-step, or instant funding programs, hit your profit targets without violating drawdown rules, get funded, withdraw profits. The usual prop firm playbook.
But here’s where things get interesting (and expensive). Their baseline pricing starts at $119 for the smallest 1-step challenge. That’s not terrible, but when you compare it to firms running constant 80% off sales, it feels steep. A $100k account will run you around $949 for their Experienced Trader Program. Meanwhile, that same account size at some competitors costs half during promotions.
So why would anyone pay more? The flexibility, apparently.
What Traders Report Working Well:
- No time limits on any evaluation (you could take 6 months if you wanted)
- Weekend holding allowed on most programs
- EAs and automated trading permitted
- News trading allowed (except on Master instant funding)
- Profit splits that can hit 100% after 30% total profit
- Fast payouts, typically 24-48 hours based on user reports
- No monthly fees, ever (buy once, keep trying until you pass)
- Account scaling up to $2.5 million in simulated capital
What’s Frustrating:
- Higher baseline pricing than competitors
- Drawdown rules confuse traders constantly (more on this mess later)
- Spread transparency is basically nonexistent (you have to request demo access to check)
- $25 fee to switch platforms after registration
- cTrader costs an extra $25 just to use
- Only forex/indices/crypto/commodities on CFDs (no actual futures contracts)
The pricing bothers me, honestly. When Apex runs sales at $35 for a $50k futures account and FTP wants $119 minimum, you’re paying 3-4x more. That only makes sense if the rules give you a genuine edge.
Breaking Down The Programs (Because FTP Has Like Seven Of Them)
This is where FTP gets unnecessarily complicated. Instead of offering 2-3 clean options, they’ve got programs stacked on programs. Let me simplify:
One-Phase Experienced Program
- Activation: $119 to $949 depending on account size ($12.5k to $200k)
- Profit target: 10%
- Drawdown: 6% relative max loss, 4% daily
- The deal: Pass one phase, get funded, start at 80% profit split
This is their cheapest option and probably what most traders should start with. A 10% profit target is aggressive (FTMO does 10% then 5% across two phases), but having zero time pressure helps. The 4% daily drawdown resets at 4:59 PM EST each day, which traders report works well for intraday strategies but can hurt swing traders who hold overnight.
Honestly, the relative (trailing) drawdown here is where people blow accounts. More on that nightmare in a minute.
Two-Phase Programs (Advanced, Premium, Prestige)
FTP offers three different 2-phase setups, which seems excessive:
Advanced: 8% profit target phase 1, 5% phase 2. Relative (trailing) drawdown of 10% max, 5% daily. Pricing similar to 1-step but with more breathing room on the profit targets.
Premium: Same profit targets as Advanced but uses a static drawdown instead of trailing. Costs a bit more ($247 for $25k up to $1,097 for $200k), but traders report this makes the rules way easier to understand.
Prestige/Prestige Pro: Their newest programs for 2025. Static drawdown, 10% phase 1 profit target, 5% phase 2. Requires 3 profitable days minimum. Based on community feedback, this is becoming their most popular option because static drawdown just makes sense to more people.
Why do they need three different 2-phase programs? I have no idea. It feels like they’re trying to appeal to everyone and just created confusion instead.
Master Program (Instant Funding)
Here’s where things get wild: $225 to $4,500 for instant access to a funded account, no evaluation needed.
Sounds great until you see the restrictions. No weekend holding allowed (all trades must close Friday). A 6% relative drawdown and 6% daily limit. And since there’s no challenge phase, that activation fee is non-refundable.
For $4,500, you’re getting a $100k simulated account with same-day withdrawal access. Traders who’ve used it report the freedom is nice, but one bad trading session and you’re out thousands with nothing to show for it. That’s a tough pill to swallow.
FTP won the “Best Instant Funding Prop Firm 2025” at some Funded Trading Awards thing, which sounds impressive until you realize how few firms even offer instant funding. It’s like winning “tallest building in Montana” when there are only five buildings total.
The Drawdown Rule Disaster
Real talk: this is where FTP loses people.
They offer both relative (trailing) and static drawdowns depending on which program you choose, and the documentation explaining how each works is buried across help center articles that contradict each other. Traders on Trustpilot constantly mention failing accounts because they didn’t understand when the drawdown “locks” or how it’s calculated.
Here’s what I’ve pieced together from multiple sources:
Relative Drawdown (Experienced, Advanced, Master programs):
- Your max loss limit trails your highest closed balance
- Example: Start with $100k, 6% relative = $94k is your danger zone
- Hit $110k profit? Your new floor is $103.4k (6% of $110k)
- After 6% profit, it “locks” at that level and stops trailing
Static Drawdown (Premium, Prestige programs):
- Max loss stays fixed from your starting balance no matter what
- $100k account, 10% static = you can never drop below $90k total
- Way simpler to track, harder to accidentally breach
The problem? FTP’s platform shows these limits in real-time, but traders report the numbers don’t always update immediately after trades close. When you’re working with a 4% daily limit and the dashboard lags by 30 seconds, that’s enough to accidentally breach during volatile sessions.
Multiple Reddit users mention blowing accounts during NFP or Fed announcements because the drawdown calculation didn’t reflect closed P&L fast enough. That’s genuinely concerning for a firm charging premium prices.
Profit Splits That Actually Impress
One area where FTP genuinely outperforms most competitors: the scaling profit split structure.
You start at 80/20 (80% yours, 20% theirs). Hit 20% total profit on your account and you jump to 90/10. Reach 30% profit and you get 100% of everything after that point.
That 100% split is rare. FTMO caps at 90%. Topstep does 100% on first $10k then 90% after. But FTP’s model rewards consistent growth in a way that actually makes scaling worth the effort.
If you work a $100k account up to $130k, you’ve already crossed into the 100% zone. From that point forward, every dollar of profit is yours. For traders who can maintain consistency over months, this adds up fast.
The catch? You need to withdraw strategically. Some traders report that large withdrawals reset your profit calculation, pushing you back to lower split tiers. The documentation on this is murky, which is frustrating.
Platform Options (And Hidden Fees)
FTP supports Match-Trader, DXTrade, MT4, MT5, and cTrader.
Cool, right? Options are good.
Except cTrader costs an extra $25 just to access. And if you register for one platform then change your mind, that’s another $25 fee to switch (only allowed before you start trading). These nickel-and-dime charges feel petty for a firm already charging premium evaluation fees.
Based on trader reports, most people use MT5 or Match-Trader. Match-Trader has TradingView integration, which is nice for those who build strategies there. But the platform itself feels clunky compared to native TradingView or even standalone MT5.
Spreads are the real black box here. FTP partners with GooeyTrade (a tech provider, not a broker) for their pricing feeds. They don’t publish average spreads anywhere on their site. Customer support tells traders to “check the demo account” if they want to see costs.
That’s absurd. Traders report EUR/USD spreads around 0.8-1.2 pips on average, which is reasonable. A $7 round-turn commission on forex/commodities is competitive. But making people jump through hoops just to see basic cost info? Come on.
Payout Speed and Reliability
This is where FTP actually delivers based on community feedback.
Traders consistently report payouts hitting their accounts within 24-48 hours. Some mention same-day processing. That’s legitimately fast compared to firms that take 7-14 days.
Minimum withdrawal is $50 (once your account is $50 above starting balance). You can request weekly payouts on most programs. Crypto, bank transfer, and wire options available, with FTP not charging withdrawal fees (though your bank/wallet might).
Their Trustpilot score sits at 4.7/5 from 4,500+ reviews. That’s genuinely impressive. For context, FTMO has 4.8/5. Apex sits around 4.6/5. FTP is in the top tier of prop firm reputations.
But here’s what bugs me about those reviews: they’re almost too positive. Like, suspiciously glowing. Multiple 5-star reviews use identical phrasing about “transparent rules” and “fast payouts.” Could just be template responses from happy traders, or could indicate review solicitation. Hard to say.
The negative reviews are what matter more. Common complaints include:
- Failed accounts due to misunderstood drawdown rules
- Risk team denying payouts after claiming “improper risk management” (vague reasoning)
- One trader reported hitting 10k profit in a day and getting flagged for review, then denied funding
That last one is concerning. If you trade too well, some prop firms get nervous and look for rule violations to deny you. FTP seems to have systems in place to catch “lucky” traders vs. skilled ones, but the criteria aren’t clear.
Scaling Plan: Actually Competitive
FTP lets you scale up to $2.5 million in simulated capital. With an optional add-on, you can go to $5 million.
That’s legitimately one of the highest scaling caps in the industry. FTMO tops out at $2 million. Most firms cap around $1-2 million.
To scale, you need to hit 10% profit on your current account size, close all positions, submit a ticket, and pass a risk review. Processing takes up to 2 business days.
The risk review is the wildcard. FTP’s terms mention they evaluate your trading history to ensure you’re not just getting lucky or gambling. If your account shows poor risk management (even if profitable), they can deny scaling.
What counts as “poor risk management”? No one knows. Some traders report scaling after hitting profit targets with no issues. Others mention denials with generic explanations. The lack of transparency here is frustrating.
Customer Support: Surprisingly Solid
One thing traders consistently praise: FTP’s support team actually responds.
They run a Discord with 48,900+ members. Active community, fast answers from staff. Live chat on the website gets replies within minutes according to user reports.
Simon Massey, the CEO, apparently engages directly with traders sometimes. That personal touch is rare in this industry. Most prop firms hide behind support tickets and canned responses.
Educational resources are thin though. They have a blog and YouTube channel with basic content, but nothing comprehensive. If you’re looking for actual trading education, you’ll need to supplement elsewhere.
They do offer PropIQ, which shares data on successful traders and common failure patterns. Interesting concept, not super actionable. A free webinar on passing evaluations exists, but it’s mostly marketing.
Who Should Use FTP (And Who Should Skip)
Consider FTP if:
- You trade forex/indices/crypto and need flexible rules (weekend holding, EAs, news trading)
- You can afford premium pricing for better profit splits long-term
- You’re experienced enough to understand relative vs. static drawdown
- Fast payouts matter more than cheap evaluation fees
- You want scaling potential above $2 million
Skip FTP if:
- You’re on a tight budget and need the cheapest evaluation option
- You primarily trade futures (they only offer CFDs)
- You’re a complete beginner who needs comprehensive education
- You don’t want to deal with complex drawdown calculations
- You trade strategies that need transparent spread data upfront
For experienced forex traders who’ve already passed challenges at other firms, FTP’s flexibility and scaling plan make sense. The 100% profit split after 30% growth is genuinely attractive if you can hit that mark consistently.
For beginners or traders on a budget? The pricing doesn’t justify itself. You can learn the ropes at cheaper firms, then move to FTP once you’re consistently profitable.
Final Verdict
Funded Trading Plus is a legitimate prop firm with fast payouts, strong community engagement, and genuinely flexible trading rules. Their profit split structure rewards long-term consistency better than most competitors.
But they charge premium prices without offering premium transparency. The drawdown rule confusion, hidden spread data, and nickel-and-dime platform fees feel like unnecessary friction. When FTMO offers clearer rules and Apex offers dirt-cheap evaluations, FTP needs to justify that price premium better.
If you’re an experienced trader who values flexibility and can navigate their complex program structure, FTP works. You’ll probably get funded, you’ll definitely get paid, and the scaling opportunities are real.
If you’re still figuring things out or want the simplest path to funding, look elsewhere first. Come back to FTP once you’ve got a proven edge and need the room to grow.