1. Business Structure and Operational Transparency
Comparing the corporate foundations of these two firms reveals distinct approaches to geographical presence and operational setup:
- Geographical Presence: Funded Trader Markets is based in Cyprus, a traditional hub for financial services, although they list Cyprus itself as a banned country for clients. QT Funded operates from South Africa, providing a different regulatory landscape and wider access to African and international markets.
- Brokerage and Execution: QT Funded uses its own broker, Quant Tekel, which suggests tighter control over the trading environment but requires traders to trust their internal execution. Funded Trader Markets utilizes a Liquidity Provider model across a wider array of platforms including MT5, cTrader, TradeLocker, and MatchTrader, offering more technical flexibility.
- Transparency: Both firms identify their leadership (Revin Zabala for Funded Trader Markets and Tanswell Sassman for QT Funded), which adds a layer of accountability often missing in the prop firm industry.
2. Evaluation Models and Capital Scaling
The choice between these firms depends heavily on the trader's preferred evaluation path:
- Step Diversity: Funded Trader Markets focuses on 1-step (Nitro) and 2-step (Prime/Plus) evaluations. QT Funded offers 2-step and 3-step models. The 3-step model at QT Funded allows for a lower entry price point, which is beneficial for traders with limited initial capital.
- Instant Funding: Both firms offer Instant Funding accounts. However, Funded Trader Markets provides a broader range of sizes (up to $100,000), while QT Funded limits Instant accounts to $99,000 total allocation.
- Maximum Allocation: Funded Trader Markets allows for a much higher total limit of $1,800,000, compared to QT Funded’s $400,000. This makes Funded Trader Markets more suitable for professional traders looking to scale to high six-figure or seven-figure management.
3. Drawdown Dynamics and Risk Protocols
The way drawdown is calculated is perhaps the most critical difference for a trader's account longevity:
- Daily Drawdown: QT Funded uses a Balance-based daily drawdown, which is generally considered more trader-friendly as it ignores floating profits. Funded Trader Markets uses an EOD (End of Day) High-watermark for its daily drawdown. This means if you have a large floating profit that retracts before the day ends, your drawdown limit for the next day could be significantly tighter.
- Static vs. Trailing Drawdown: Both firms use Static Max Drawdown for their premier 2-step accounts, which is the industry gold standard. However, both switch to Trailing Drawdown for their Instant Funding models.
- The Shield Risk Protocol (Funded Trader Markets): This is a specific constraint where accounts like 2-Step Plus have a Maximum Floating Loss limit of 1%. Breaching this does not lose the account immediately but reduces the profit split significantly (down to 50% or lower), adding a layer of "soft-breach" complexity not found in QT Funded.
4. Trading Restrictions and Strategy Freedom
There is a clear divide in how much freedom a trader has regarding their execution style:
- News Trading: Funded Trader Markets allows news trading without explicit restrictions across its plans. QT Funded imposes a 5-minute "no-trade" window before and after high-impact news (except for the QT Prime On Demand plan).
- Expert Advisors (EAs): Funded Trader Markets allows EAs freely. QT Funded requires a pre-approval process for EAs, which could be a hurdle for traders using proprietary or commercial bots.
- Mandatory Stop Loss: QT Funded requires a Stop Loss to be placed within 60 seconds of opening a trade on funded accounts. Funded Trader Markets does not have a mandatory SL rule, though they use it as a criteria for their "Profit Breach" payouts.
- Position Stacking: QT Funded strictly prohibits having three or more open positions on the same asset simultaneously. Funded Trader Markets allows stacking, which is essential for traders who scale into positions.
5. Payout Structures and Profit Sharing
While both firms offer high potential splits, the "fine print" differs:
- Profit Split Percentages: Funded Trader Markets offers up to 100% on Nitro X accounts and a sliding scale for others. QT Funded offers an 80-90% split, but their QT Prime On Demand can reach 100%.
- Payout Fees: Funded Trader Markets charges a 5% processing fee on crypto payouts, which is a significant cost to consider. QT Funded does not explicitly list a processing fee of that magnitude but requires a 1% to 5% profit hurdle depending on the plan.
- Payout Guarantee: Funded Trader Markets offers a 24-hour payout guarantee for amounts up to $1000. If they fail, they double the payout. This provides a unique level of security regarding liquidity.
- Consistency Rules: Both firms employ consistency rules. Funded Trader Markets uses a profit cap per day (e.g., 20-25% of total profit) to prevent "gambling" a single news event. QT Funded uses a similar 25-35% rule.
6. Summary of Differences: When to Choose Which?
Choose Funded Trader Markets if:
- You want to manage large capital (up to $1.8M).
- You prefer 1-step evaluations with fast paths to funding.
- You trade News or use EAs without needing manual approval.
- You value a payout speed guarantee and don't mind the 5% crypto fee.
- You are comfortable with EOD High-watermark drawdown calculations.
Choose QT Funded if:
- You prefer Balance-based daily drawdown (safer for your trading style).
- You are looking for a 3-step evaluation to save on initial entry fees.
- You are a disciplined trader who already uses Stop Losses and doesn't stack more than 3 positions.
- You want the potential for a 100% profit split on a 2-step model without a 5% crypto withdrawal fee.
- You prefer a firm with a physical HQ in South Africa and a dedicated internal broker.






















