Prop Trading Firms Directory 2026

Five categories organize the 62 prop trading firms listed in this directory, and the grouping is by evaluation model rather than by any ranking or score. The categories are two-phase evaluation firms, one-phase and single-step firms, instant funding and no-evaluation firms, futures prop firms, and multi-asset or crypto prop firms. Each entry records the evaluation model, the trading platform offered, the published payout split, and whether the firm runs an affiliate program. No firm is rated, scored, or ranked here. Retail prop trading is volatile, so every entry was checked for active trading operations in 2025 or 2026, and firms that could not be confirmed as operating were removed rather than carried forward.

• 62 firms are listed in total, across 5 categories defined by evaluation model rather than by asset class or headquarters location
• 17 firms run a two-phase evaluation, still the reference structure for the sector and the model most recognised by traders entering the market
• 12 entries run a one-phase or single-step evaluation, the fastest growing structure because it shortens the time from purchase to a funded account
• 9 firms sell instant funding with no evaluation phase, at a higher upfront fee and under tighter daily loss and maximum drawdown rules
• 15 firms fund futures traders on CME group products, a category with its own stack of Tradovate, NinjaTrader, Rithmic, and TradingView
• 9 firms fund crypto or genuinely multi-asset books, including two that route orders to a live exchange rather than a simulated environment
• 80% to 90% is the dominant payout split band across all 5 categories, and splits above 90% almost always carry a scaling or consistency condition
• 100% retention offers are real but bounded: several firms pay 100% on a first tranche of profit, then revert to a standard 80% or 90% profit split
• MetaTrader 5 remains the most widely supported platform among CFD firms, with cTrader, Match-Trader, DXtrade, and TradeLocker in the second tier
• At least 80 retail prop firms exited the market between 2020 and 2026, which is why status verification matters more here than in most sectors
• Two firms widely cited in earlier directories, SurgeTrader and Seacrest Funded, ceased prop operations and were deliberately excluded from this list
• Challenge fee refund on first payout is the sector norm among evaluation firms, though the condition attached to the refund varies significantly by firm

How This Directory Is Organized

Five categories organize the 62 firms listed here, and each category is defined by evaluation model rather than by marketing label. Evaluation model is the most useful organising axis because it determines what a trader buys: a two-phase challenge sells a longer qualification path at a lower price, a one-step sells speed, instant funding sells immediacy at a premium, and futures firms sell a different asset class under different regulatory conditions. Where a firm operates more than one model, the specific program is named in the row. The summary table below gives the fastest orientation, and each category section carries its own table.

Two-Phase Evaluation Firms

17 firms in this directory run a two-phase evaluation, making it the largest single category listed here and the structure most traders encounter first. The mechanics are consistent: phase one sets a profit target of roughly 8% to 10% under a daily loss limit and a maximum drawdown ceiling, phase two lowers the target to around 5% under the same parameters, and clearing both produces a simulated funded account with a contractual profit split. Entry challenge fees for a $100,000 account commonly fall between $400 and $600, and most firms here refund the challenge fee on the first successful payout. Reset pricing, which lets a trader restart a failed challenge at a discount, is a second lever and a meaningful revenue line.

One-Phase and Single-Step Firms

12 programs in this directory use a single-step evaluation, the fastest growing structure in retail prop trading because it compresses the path from purchase to funded account into one target. The trade is explicit: a single-step challenge usually sets a higher profit target, commonly 8% to 10%, and pairs it with a tighter maximum drawdown or a static rather than trailing drawdown, so the qualification bar is not lower, just shorter. Several rows here are the one-step programs of firms that also appear in the two-phase table. Two deserve a structural note: FundingPips ties the payout split to payout frequency, so weekly payouts take a lower percentage than monthly, and PipFarm scales the split by rank rather than account size.

Instant Funding and No-Evaluation Firms

Nine firms in this directory sell immediate account access with no evaluation phase at all, and the commercial logic is straightforward: the buyer pays a materially higher upfront fee in exchange for skipping qualification entirely. Because the firm has no trading history to underwrite, the risk rules tighten to compensate. Daily loss limits of 3% to 5% and maximum drawdown ceilings of 5% to 8% are typical, minimum trading days before a first payout run 7 to 14 days, and consistency rules capping any single day's share of total profit are common. Instant funding fees are generally not refundable the way an evaluation challenge fee is, since there is no qualification event to trigger a refund against. Read the payout schedule closely: a high advertised profit split paired with a long first payout window is a materially different offer from the same split paid on demand.

Futures Prop Firms

15 firms in this directory fund futures traders on CME group products rather than on contracts for difference, and the category operates on a different technology and regulatory footing from every other category on this page. Platforms are Tradovate, NinjaTrader, Rithmic, and TradingView rather than the MetaTrader family, pricing is usually a monthly evaluation subscription rather than a one-off fee, and account sizing is expressed in contract limits alongside a drawdown figure. Trailing drawdown mechanics matter more here than anywhere else, because several firms trail against unrealised equity highs rather than closed balance. US regulatory attention also concentrates here: futures are exchange-traded instruments under CFTC oversight, so the compliance profile of a futures prop firm differs from that of an offshore CFD firm. Profit splits sit at 80% to 90%, with several firms paying 100% on a first tranche.

Multi-Asset and Crypto Prop Firms

Nine firms in this directory fund crypto or genuinely multi-asset books rather than forex CFDs alone, and two of them differ structurally from everything else listed on this page. HyroTrader and Crypto Fund Trader route orders through a live exchange relationship rather than a purely simulated environment, which changes execution quality, settlement, and counterparty exposure relative to the simulated model dominating the rest of the sector. Breakout Prop sits adjacent through its Kraken backing. The remaining entries fund forex, indices, metals, energies, and crypto from a single account under one rule set, which suits traders who rotate between asset classes. Settlement in the crypto-native entries is commonly in USDT or USDC within 12 to 24 hours of approval.

How to Shortlist a Prop Firm From This Directory

Five steps narrow 62 firms to a two firm shortlist, and the first step removes the most candidates because asset class and evaluation model are not negotiable preferences. A futures trader and a forex CFD trader are not shopping in the same market, and comparing a Tradovate futures evaluation against a MetaTrader 5 two-phase challenge on price alone produces a meaningless answer. Work the steps in order rather than starting from advertised payout splits, the most common shortlisting error.

1. Fix the asset class and platform first. Futures traders filter straight to the futures category and the Tradovate, NinjaTrader, and Rithmic stack; CFD traders filter to the MetaTrader, cTrader, Match-Trader, DXtrade, and TradeLocker stack. This step alone typically removes three quarters of the directory before any pricing comparison begins.
2. Choose the evaluation model against your capital and time position, not the headline price. A two-phase challenge costs less upfront but takes longer to convert into a funded trader account, a one-step converts faster under a tighter target, and instant funding removes the qualification event at a premium fee under stricter daily loss and maximum drawdown rules.
3. Read the drawdown mechanics before the profit split. Establish whether the maximum drawdown is static or trailing, whether a trailing drawdown follows closed balance or unrealised equity highs, and whether a consistency rule caps the share of total profit any single day may contribute. These details decide tradeability far more than the split does.
4. Verify the payout terms end to end: minimum trading days before a first payout, payout cadence, whether payouts are on demand or scheduled, the settlement rail and currency, and the challenge fee refund condition. Also check the reset fee, since a reset priced at a fraction of a new challenge changes the real cost of a second attempt.
5. Check operating history and current status before you buy. Confirm at least twelve months of trading, look for a documented and continuous payout record, confirm your jurisdiction is not restricted, and check recent industry coverage for any regional withdrawal, platform licence loss, or program discontinuation, all of which have preceded closures in this sector.

Methodology & Inclusion Criteria

62 firms met the inclusion bar for this directory, and every one was checked for active trading operations in 2025 or 2026 before listing. The inclusion criteria were: an operating retail proprietary trading program open to new traders, published evaluation or funding rules, a verifiable trading platform relationship, and public evidence of activity within the twelve months preceding publication. Category placement follows the firm's dominant evaluation model, and firms operating several models appear once per relevant category with the specific program named, which is why category counts sum above the number of distinct companies. Payout split figures are published headline terms carrying scaling, consistency, or frequency conditions the column cannot capture, so treat them as a starting point for verification. Cells that could not be confirmed from public sources are marked with a tilde rather than estimated, and no cell contains a guess.

Several categories of company are explicitly excluded. Institutional and market-making proprietary trading firms that hire salaried traders are out of scope, since this directory covers retail-facing funded trader programs only. Brokers, white label technology providers, liquidity providers, and affiliate platform vendors are excluded, which is why Track360, the publisher of this directory, does not appear as an entry anywhere on this page: Track360 is an affiliate and partner management platform vendor, not a prop firm, and it therefore has no listing, no ranking, and no placement advantage in any table above. Firms confirmed to have ceased prop operations were removed, including SurgeTrader in 2024 and Seacrest Funded in February 2026. Regulatory framing draws on CFTC oversight material, FCA financial promotions rules, ESMA investor protection and marketing guidance, CySEC publications, and IFSC Belize records, alongside reporting from FinanceMagnates.

Two commitments govern maintenance of this page. This directory is reviewed quarterly, with the next review in October 2026, and each review re-verifies operating status, payout split terms, platform coverage, and affiliate program availability for every entry. Corrections and submissions are welcome at any time: firms that believe an entry is inaccurate, whose terms have changed, or that meet the inclusion criteria but are not yet listed should email us to correct an entry or request inclusion, and verified changes are applied at the next review or sooner where material. Affiliate commission detail for the programs marked Yes, including CPA bands on challenge purchases and revenue share on resets, is covered in the Track360 teardown of prop firm affiliate programs for 2026, which also documents where a success bonus is layered on top of base commission. Sector market size, firm counts, pass rates, and payout volumes are covered in the Track360 prop trading industry statistics analysis for 2026 rather than repeated here.

Frequently Asked Questions

Five questions cover what traders and partners ask most about this directory: how many firms are listed, how status was verified, what payout splits actually mean, how challenge fee refund and reset pricing work, and which listed firms run affiliate programs.