1. Corporate Identity and Regional Restrictions
Atmos Funded and QT Funded represent two different approaches to the prop trading business, starting from their geographical base and accessibility.
- Geographical Presence: Atmos Funded is headquartered in the United Arab Emirates, while QT Funded operates from South Africa.
- Restricted Access: Atmos Funded has a significantly more restrictive policy regarding banned countries. Notably, they do not accept clients from the USA or the UAE itself. In contrast, QT Funded is more accessible to international traders, excluding only a few high-risk jurisdictions like Iran, Syria, and North Korea.
- Operational History: Both are relatively new firms (Atmos founded in 2024, QT in 2023), but QT Funded shows a much higher volume of public feedback, suggesting a larger active user base.
2. Platform Diversity and Brokerage
The choice of trading environment is a major differentiator between these two firms.
- Platform Options: Atmos Funded is strictly limited to MetaTrader 5. QT Funded offers superior flexibility, providing MetaTrader 5, cTrader, and TradeLocker. This makes QT a better choice for traders who prefer modern interfaces or mobile-optimized platforms like TradeLocker.
- Broker Integration: Atmos utilizes Taurex, a third-party broker, providing a degree of separation between the prop firm and the execution. QT Funded uses Quant Tekel, which is an internal or closely affiliated brokerage solution.
- Asset Classes: Both firms offer a standard range of Forex, Commodities, Indices, and Crypto. However, the leverage and commission structures differ, with QT offering slightly higher leverage on indices (1:20 vs 1:10 at Atmos).
3. Challenge Models and Scaling
Traders have different paths to funding depending on the firm chosen.
- Program Variety: Atmos offers 1-Step, 2-Step, and Instant Funding. They also feature a unique "Nova" model with a very low initial cost ($5) but a high "funded fee" upon passing.
- Three-Step Evaluation: QT Funded is one of the few firms offering a 3-Step challenge (Prime Three Step). This model reduces the profit target per phase (6% each), making it potentially less stressful for traders who prefer a longer, more conservative evaluation process.
- Instant Funding Logic: Both firms offer Instant Funding, but the drawdown mechanics differ. Atmos Instant accounts use a Trailing Drawdown that eventually locks at the initial balance, whereas QT Instant also uses a trailing model but with different drawdown percentages (6% max).
4. Drawdown Mechanics and Risk Calculations
The way a firm calculates losses can be the difference between a successful payout and a breached account.
- Daily Drawdown Basis: Atmos Funded calculates daily drawdown based on the higher value between Equity and Balance. This is a stricter rule as it accounts for floating profits/losses. QT Funded uses a Balance-based daily drawdown, which is generally considered more "trader-friendly" as it allows for more flexibility during intraday swings.
- Static vs. Trailing Drawdown:
- Atmos: Uses Trailing Drawdown for 1-Step and Instant accounts, but Static Drawdown for 2-Step accounts.
- QT Funded: Offers Static Drawdown on its Prime and Power models, which is the most favorable condition for traders as the maximum loss limit never moves upward.
5. Trading Rules and Restrictions
There are several "hidden" conditions that traders must monitor to avoid violations.
- Stop Loss (SL) Requirement: QT Funded mandates that a Stop Loss must be placed within 60 seconds of opening a trade on funded accounts. Atmos Funded does not have a mandatory SL rule, offering more freedom for manual traders.
- News Trading: Both firms restrict news trading but with different windows. Atmos bans trading ±2 minutes from high-impact events. QT Funded extends this to ±5 minutes for most accounts, though their "Prime On Demand" model removes this restriction entirely.
- Expert Advisors (EAs): Atmos allows EAs without specific hurdles. QT Funded requires a pre-approval process before using any EA, which adds an extra layer of bureaucracy for algorithmic traders.
- Consistency Rules: Both firms employ consistency rules. Atmos restricts any single day from exceeding 20% to 45% of total profit (depending on the account). QT Funded has similar limits (25% to 35%). These rules prevent "gambling" on single events to pass a challenge.
6. Payouts and Profit Sharing
- Profit Split: Both start at a standard 80%. However, QT Funded allows an upgrade to 90% via add-ons and offers up to 100% split on their "Prime On Demand" accounts.
- Payout Frequency: Atmos generally pays out every 14 days, though some models are "On Demand." QT Funded offers a choice between Biweekly and On Demand for their Prime accounts.
- Refund Policy: Atmos does not offer refunds of the challenge fee. QT Funded only offers a refund if the trader specifically purchases a refund add-on at checkout.
7. Summary: Which Firm to Choose?
Choose Atmos Funded if:
- You are an algorithmic trader who wants to use EAs without a pre-approval process.
- You prefer using a third-party broker (Taurex) rather than a firm's internal brokerage.
- You do not want to be forced to use a Stop Loss on every trade.
- You are interested in the Nova model to test your skills with a very low initial entry cost.
Choose QT Funded if:
- You want a Balance-based daily drawdown and Static overall drawdown (Prime/Power models).
- You require platform variety, such as cTrader or TradeLocker.
- You are looking for the highest possible profit split (up to 100%).
- You prefer a 3-Step evaluation to keep profit targets lower and more manageable.
- You reside in a country restricted by Atmos, such as the USA or UAE.






















