How we rank prop firms
Every firm on this site is scored against the same fixed scorecard. No firm can pay for a higher rank, and affiliate status carries zero weight. Here is exactly how the scoring works, what evidence levels mean, and where our limits are.
The four pillars
Every firm receives a score from 0 to 10 on each of four pillars. The pillars are weighted, and the weighted blend produces the overall score you see in our rankings. The weights reflect what actually determines whether a trader has a good experience and gets paid.
| Pillar | Weight | What it measures |
|---|---|---|
| Rule transparency | 30% | How clearly rules are stated, whether conditions are hidden until the payout stage, and how predictable enforcement is. |
| Payout reliability | 30% | Track record of actually paying, processing speed, payout cadence, and any history of delays or disputes. |
| Trading conditions | 25% | Drawdown structure, profit split, funding ceiling, platform choice, and rule flexibility for different styles. |
| Trader experience | 15% | Onboarding, dashboard quality, support responsiveness, and the overall day-to-day experience. |
We publish the per-pillar scores for every firm on the homepage scorecard, not just the final number — so you can see why a firm scored as it did and weight the pillars differently if your priorities differ from ours.
Evidence levels: what we tested vs verified
This is the part of our methodology we take most seriously. We will not imply we have tested something we haven't. Every review carries one of four explicit evidence levels:
- Tested payout — we completed a full payout cycle with our own funded capital at this firm.
- Tested challenge — we purchased and ran a challenge, verifying the platform and rules, but have not completed a full payout cycle.
- Public terms verified — we verified the firm's specs against its own published terms and pricing, but have not independently traded it.
- Trader feedback only — our assessment draws on documented terms plus third-party trader feedback; we have not independently tested it.
You will see this badge at the top of every review and in the "sources checked" block at the bottom. It is the most honest way we know to tell you how much weight our assessment of a given firm can bear.
How firms are selected
We include firms that are large enough to matter to traders, have meaningful public track records or trader followings, and span the range of what the market offers — from the established incumbents to the notable newer entrants. We deliberately include firms we score poorly, and we flag specific concerns (such as a Trustpilot guideline breach or a payout disruption) rather than quietly omitting troubled firms.
How affiliate relationships are handled
We may earn a commission when a reader signs up through some of our links. This is disclosed on every relevant page. Critically, affiliate status is not one of our scoring pillars and carries zero weight in the rankings. A firm we have an affiliate relationship with is scored on exactly the same scorecard as one we do not, and our ranking order is determined solely by the weighted pillar scores. See our affiliate disclosure for the full statement.
Our limits
We are a research desk, not an auditor. We cannot independently verify a firm's internal finances, and a firm's past payout record — however strong — is not a guarantee of future behaviour, especially in a young, lightly regulated industry. Terms change frequently. We date our data, mark figures that change, and tell you to confirm specifics on the firm's own site before buying. Nothing on this site is financial advice.
Our #1 prop firm for 2026
TraderScale tops our scorecard on rule transparency, US accessibility and payout clarity.
Read the TraderScale review Compare all 10 firms