Head to head
The5ers vs Funding Pips
Two 100%-split forex firms with static drawdown at entry-level prices.
| Metric | The5ers | Funding Pips |
|---|---|---|
| Trust score | 86/100 | 80/100 |
| Profit split | 100% | 100% |
| Entry price | $39 | $32 |
| Evaluation | 1-step | 1-step |
| Drawdown | Static | Static |
| First payout | 14 days | 5 days |
| Max allocation | $4M | $200k |
| Founded | 2016 | 2022 |
Our verdict
Both top out at a 100% split and both use static drawdown. The5ers has the stronger trust score (86 vs 80) and a longer payout record; Funding Pips is cheaper to start ($32 vs $39) and pays every 5 days instead of bi-weekly.
Drawdown mechanics: the rule that decides the account
The5ers runs static drawdown — measured from the starting balance and never trailing your equity — once you are in profit the whole buffer stays yours. Funding Pips runs static drawdown — measured from the starting balance and never trailing your equity — once you are in profit the whole buffer stays yours. This single difference decides more accounts than the profit split does, because it changes how much of an open winner you are allowed to give back before the account closes.
Because both firms use the same model, the deciding factor moves to the daily and consistency layer: The5ers applies none on high-stakes, Funding Pips applies none on 2-step. Where the drawdown mechanics match, the consistency rule is what usually gates the first withdrawal.
12-month cost of ownership
Sticker price is the wrong comparison unit, because almost nobody passes on the first attempt. Modelled over a realistic first year — The5ers at $39 entry: $39 for one pass, $78 at two attempts, $117 at three; Funding Pips at $32 entry: $32 for one pass, $64 at two attempts, $96 at three — Funding Pips is roughly 1.2x cheaper per attempt than The5ers. Over three attempts that gap compounds to $21.
Two adjustments matter on top of that. Futures-style firms typically bill the funded account monthly or charge an activation fee, so a year of ownership adds cost after you pass, while most forex-style evaluation firms charge once and several refund the fee with the first payout. And allocation is not equal: The5ers scales to $4M against $200k at Funding Pips, so cost per dollar of eventual buying power can invert the ranking above.
Net of all that, the practical read is simple. If you are still proving a strategy, the cheaper per-attempt firm is the rational place to burn attempts. If you are already consistent, pay up for the firm whose payout record and allocation ceiling you actually intend to use.
Payout speed and payout evidence
The5ers allows a first withdrawal around day 14 and pays bi-weekly; Funding Pips allows it around day 5 and pays every 5 days. Funding Pips gets money moving 9 days sooner than The5ers, which matters most on a first funded account where you want proof of the payout rail before you size up.
Speed without evidence is worthless, so weigh it against how well each firm's payouts are documented: The5ers scores 87/100 on our payout-evidence metric and Funding Pips scores 81/100, feeding trust scores of 86 and 80 respectively. The gap between a fast-paying firm with thin public evidence and a slower one with years of verifiable payout history is the single largest risk you carry in this category.
Also check the withdrawal gate, not just the calendar. The5ers applies none on high-stakes and Funding Pips applies none on 2-step — a consistency cap can hold back a large winning week regardless of how often the firm says it pays.
Rulebooks side by side
The5ers
- Static drawdown throughout. No trailing element on the instant-funding or high-stakes accounts. Your loss limit is fixed relative to the starting balance.
- Scaling gates instead of evaluations. Account size doubles at defined profit milestones. The rules that matter are the milestone thresholds and the drawdown at each level, not a one-off pass/fail target.
- No consistency rule on high-stakes. Withdrawals are not gated on how evenly your profit was distributed, which makes real cash extraction simpler than at most futures firms.
Funding Pips
- Static drawdown. Maximum loss is measured from the initial balance on the standard models, so banked profit permanently widens your buffer.
- No consistency rule on the two-step. The classic two-phase route does not gate withdrawals on daily profit distribution. The faster one-phase models apply more conditions — check which you bought.
- Frequent rule revisions. Treat the published rulebook as version-dated. The most common Funding Pips complaint we see is a trader applying last year's rules to this year's account.
Choose Funding Pips if
You want the cheapest entry and the fastest payout cycle.