Average prop firm profit split
6 min read·Updated July 20, 2026
Across 34 firms, the mean profit split is 90.1% and the median is 90%. 6 firms (18%) advertise 100% on at least one plan.
Profit split is the single most-advertised number in prop trading, and it has drifted upward over the last three years to the point of becoming a weak signal: when 18% of firms offer 100% on some plan, "100% split" tells you almost nothing about whether that firm is a good choice. The useful comparison is no longer whether a split is high, but whether it is high AND the firm has the payout evidence to back it.
The spread across categories is narrower than most traders expect. Futures firms average 92%, forex firms 90%, crypto firms 90% and multi-asset firms 88% — all clustered within a few points of each other. That clustering is itself informative: profit split has become a commoditised marketing lever rather than a genuine point of differentiation, which is why we weight it lightly in our own scoring relative to payout evidence and rule stability.
7 firms (21%) sit below the 90% mark that has become the informal floor for a competitive offer. That is not automatically a red flag — a firm can charge less on split and more on structure elsewhere — but it is worth checking what that firm offers instead: usually a lower entry price, a shorter evaluation, or a more forgiving drawdown model.
One pattern worth flagging explicitly: some of the highest advertised splits cluster among the youngest firms in our dataset, which tend to carry lower payout-proof scores. A 100% split from a firm with two years of operating history and thin published payout evidence is not automatically worse than a 90% split from a firm with a decade of record — but it is a different risk profile, and the split number alone does not tell you which one you are looking at.
| Category | Average split | Firms in category |
|---|---|---|
| Futures | 92% | 13 |
| Forex | 90% | 15 |
| Crypto | 90% | 1 |
| Multi-asset | 88% | 5 |
| Firm | Split | Category | Payout proof score |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apex Trader Funding | 100% | Futures | 88/100 |
| The5ers | 100% | Forex | 87/100 |
| Funding Pips | 100% | Forex | 81/100 |
| E8 Markets | 100% | Multi-asset | 80/100 |
| Elite Trader Funding | 100% | Futures | 78/100 |
| Bulenox | 100% | Futures | 76/100 |
| FundedNext | 95% | Forex | 84/100 |
| Goat Funded Trader | 95% | Forex | 76/100 |
Methodology & sources
- Profit split figures use each firm's highest currently advertised split, taken from our per-firm dataset.
- Category averages are simple arithmetic means, not weighted by firm size or account volume, which we do not have visibility into.
- Split alone is a weak predictor of realised payout; cross-reference with payout proof score before treating a high split as a reason to choose a firm.
Source data: our own 34-firm dataset, the same records used across every firm review and comparison on this site. See the statistics hub for the full methodology and cross-topic figures.
FAQ
- What is a good profit split for a prop firm?
- 90% or higher is now standard across the industry; treat anything above that as parity with the market rather than a standout feature, and weight payout evidence more heavily in your decision.
- Do higher splits mean lower quality firms?
- Not automatically, but our data shows a correlation between the highest advertised splits and younger firms with thinner payout evidence. Check the firm's payout proof score before treating a 100% split as decisive.
- Does profit split apply to the evaluation phase or only the funded account?
- Almost universally only the funded account. A handful of firms (see FundedNext) pay a smaller profit share during the evaluation itself, which we note on individual firm pages.