FTMO vs The5ers 2026: A Head-to-Head Comparison

Why Firm Safety Matters: The MyForexFunds Collapse

On 30 August 2023, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) and the Ontario Securities Commission filed emergency actions against Traders Global Group Inc., operating as MyForexFunds (MFF). Approximately $310 million in customer funds were frozen. At the time, MFF had over 135,000 active clients and was the largest retail prop firm in the world by volume. The founder was charged with fraud.

The CFTC alleged that MFF misrepresented how traders were funded — payouts were coming directly from challenge fee revenue rather than from genuine trading capital — and that rules were modified post-challenge to make receiving a payout systematically harder. The firm collapsed virtually overnight. Funded traders lost access to their accounts with no recourse.

The MFF case established the benchmark for what can go wrong in the retail prop space. It demonstrated that rapid growth, high payout splits, and an active community are not indicators of legitimacy. It also proved that the business model — fee-funded payouts — is structurally fragile: if payout demand spikes without a matching challenge fee intake, the firm is insolvent. Every prop firm comparison must be read through this lens. Operational history, transparent corporate structure, and independently verified payout records are not nice-to-haves. They are the minimum filter.

Both FTMO and The5ers pre-date MFF's collapse and have continued operating through the regulatory turbulence that followed. Neither has been subject to regulatory enforcement action. That shared baseline matters — but it is not the end of the due diligence.

• MFF had 135,000+ clients and $310M in frozen funds when it collapsed in August 2023
• The CFTC alleged payouts came from challenge fees, not genuine trading capital
• Post-collapse, traders lost funded account access with no path to recovery
• Rapid growth and high payout splits are not safety signals — MFF excelled at both
• Transparent corporate structure and verifiable payout history are the minimum filter for any prop firm

Side-by-Side Comparison Table

The table below covers the key structural differences between FTMO and The5ers as of mid-2026. Verify current pricing and specific terms directly with each firm before committing challenge fees — both firms update their product offerings periodically.

The most consequential differences are not in the headline split percentages but in the drawdown mechanics and trading restrictions. Read the drawdown type row carefully: it determines how much buffer you actually have, and the gap between 'sounds similar' and 'works completely differently in practice' is where most traders get caught out.

• Evaluation structure — FTMO: two-step challenge only (Phase 1: 10% target, Phase 2: 5% target); The5ers: multiple paths including a one-step Hyper programme and a growth-oriented Bootcamp model
• Drawdown type — FTMO: trailing max drawdown that locks at initial balance once equity rises 10% (a hybrid that protects against the worst trailing trap); The5ers: relative drawdown calculated from equity peak on most accounts — confirm current model before signing up
• Daily drawdown limit — FTMO: 5% of initial balance; The5ers: varies by programme, typically 4–5% — verify current terms
• Profit split — FTMO: 80% to trader (scales to 90% with consistency milestones); The5ers: starts at 50% on some programmes, scales to 100% on highest tier — the headline is attractive but check what tier you actually start on
• Challenge fees — Both: range roughly $150–$600+ depending on account size; FTMO refunds the challenge fee on first funded payout; The5ers does not refund fees on most programmes — verify current terms
• Payout frequency — FTMO: monthly payout cycle with a minimum $1 profit threshold to request; The5ers: bi-weekly payouts available on funded accounts
• News trading rules — FTMO: news trading permitted; no ban on opening or holding positions around high-impact news events; The5ers: news trading generally permitted — confirm current policy for the specific programme you are evaluating
• Expert Advisers (EAs) / automated trading — FTMO: EAs permitted on funded accounts, subject to not using prohibited strategies (e.g., latency arbitrage, tick scalping); The5ers: EAs explicitly supported, including on challenge accounts — The5ers is more permissive and EA-friendly overall

Evaluation Structure: How Each Firm Tests You

FTMO operates a single evaluation model: a two-step challenge. Phase 1 requires a 10% profit target. Phase 2 requires an additional 5%. Both phases carry a 5% daily drawdown limit and a 10% maximum drawdown limit. There are no time limits on completing the phases — you can take as long as you need, which removes one of the most common sources of reckless trading behaviour (the end-of-window panic). Minimum trading days apply (typically four days per phase). The structure is well-understood and has not meaningfully changed in years, which is itself a stability signal.

The5ers offers more programme diversity. The core model is a two-phase evaluation similar to FTMO, but The5ers also offers a Hyper programme (single-phase, faster path to funding) and a Bootcamp model aimed at slower, consistency-first traders who want to build capital gradually rather than pass a challenge in one go. The Bootcamp in particular suits swing traders who do not want the pressure of a defined challenge window. The trade-off is that the initial funded capital is lower and the profit split starts smaller — the 'earn your way up' model is genuinely structured that way, not a marketing line.

For most traders, the FTMO two-step is the better starting point: the rules are deeply understood, the community knowledge base is vast, and the absence of time pressure means methodical traders are not disadvantaged. For traders who have already passed challenges elsewhere, or who want to build a long-term relationship with a firm that scales capital over time rather than via multiple accounts, The5ers' Bootcamp or growth tracks offer a legitimate alternative structure.

• FTMO: two-step only, no time limits, 10% then 5% targets, 5% daily drawdown, 10% max drawdown
• The5ers: multi-programme (two-step, Hyper one-step, Bootcamp growth model)
• FTMO's stability and unchanged rules are a signal of operational maturity
• The5ers' Bootcamp suits swing traders who want gradual capital scaling without a pass/fail challenge
• Both firms allow unlimited time on standard two-step evaluation phases — no end-of-window pressure

Drawdown Rules: The Technical Crux

Drawdown rules are where prop firm challenges are actually won and lost. Profit targets are the finish line — drawdown rules are the minefield you have to cross to reach it. The majority of challenge failures are drawdown breaches, not failure to hit the profit target.

FTMO uses a trailing maximum drawdown that 'locks' once your equity reaches 10% above the starting balance. In practice: on a $100,000 account, your drawdown floor trails your equity peak up to a maximum floor of $90,000 (the starting balance minus 10%). Once you have grown to $110,000, your floor is locked at $100,000 — it will not rise further. This is a materially better mechanic than a fully trailing drawdown, which keeps rising with every tick of equity. The FTMO hybrid protects you from the scenario where a strong first week followed by normal mean-reversion triggers a breach at a level that would appear safe on a static-drawdown account.

The5ers' drawdown mechanics vary by programme. On some accounts, drawdown is calculated relative to the equity peak including open positions — meaning floating losses can trigger failure even if no trade is closed. This is the most aggressive form of drawdown rule and requires active position management. Confirm precisely which drawdown type applies to the programme you are evaluating before committing. The distinction between 'drawdown calculated on closed equity only' and 'drawdown calculated on real-time equity including open positions' is the single most consequential rule difference in this comparison.

Daily drawdown limits at both firms operate on intraday equity, not closed P&L. This means an open loss can breach the daily limit even if you never close the position. Size every position with the worst-case intraday adverse excursion factored in — not just the target exit.

• FTMO's trailing drawdown locks at the initial balance floor once equity rises 10% — a trader-friendly hybrid that prevents the 'floor chasing your gains' trap
• The5ers drawdown type varies by programme — confirm whether it trails on closed equity or real-time equity (including open positions)
• Real-time equity trailing drawdown is the most aggressive variant: a floating loss alone can cause failure
• Daily drawdown limits at both firms count open positions — intraday equity, not closed P&L
• Most challenge failures are drawdown breaches, not profit target misses — treat drawdown mechanics as the primary evaluation criterion

Payout Structure, Fees, and the Challenge Fee Refund

FTMO's default profit split is 80% to the trader, scaling to 90% after demonstrated consistency (typically three months of profitable trading with no rule violations). The challenge fee is refunded on the first funded payout — meaning if you pass and receive a payout, the cost of your challenge is returned to you. This matters: a $300 challenge fee refunded on payout means your net cost of access to an $200,000 funded account is zero, provided you trade profitably. Monthly payout cycle with a minimum $1 threshold.

The5ers' profit split structure is programme-dependent. The Bootcamp and growth-track programmes can start at 50% and scale to 100% at the highest tier. The headline '100% profit split' is real but applies at the top of the scaling ladder — confirm what split tier you begin on. The5ers does not typically refund challenge fees. Bi-weekly payout frequency is an advantage for cash-flow-conscious traders who want faster access to profits.

Fee comparison at specific account sizes changes frequently — both firms run promotions and adjust pricing. Always verify the current fee structure directly on each firm's website. The critical comparison is not the absolute fee but the fee relative to the account size, drawdown room, and the probability of passing given your strategy. A $150 challenge fee for a $25,000 account with generous drawdown rules may represent better value than a $100 fee for the same account size with tighter rules.

The5ers' bi-weekly payout is the practical advantage here for active traders. FTMO's monthly cycle is standard but means waiting up to 30 days per withdrawal cycle. Neither is a dealbreaker, but if consistent cash flow from trading is part of your operating model, The5ers' frequency is preferable.

• FTMO: 80% split scaling to 90%, challenge fee refunded on first payout, monthly payouts
• The5ers: split starts as low as 50% on some programmes, scales to 100% at top tier, no fee refund, bi-weekly payouts
• FTMO's fee refund on first payout means net cost of access can be zero for successful traders
• The5ers bi-weekly payout frequency suits traders who want faster capital access
• Verify current fees directly — both firms update pricing and run promotions regularly

News Trading, EAs, and Strategy Compatibility

FTMO does not ban news trading. Traders may open and hold positions during high-impact news events — NFP, CPI, FOMC, ECB rate decisions — without restriction. This is a significant competitive advantage over firms that prohibit news volatility strategies. If your edge relies on news catalysts, FTMO does not require you to abandon or modify your approach.

The5ers similarly does not impose a blanket news trading ban, though policy details can vary by programme. Confirm the current position on high-impact news events for the specific account type you are evaluating — The5ers' programme range means terms are not uniform across the board.

On automated trading, The5ers is the more permissive firm. EAs are explicitly supported, including during the challenge phase, and The5ers actively markets to algorithmic traders. FTMO permits EAs on funded accounts but prohibits specific strategy types (latency arbitrage, tick scalping, high-frequency strategies that exploit platform-level execution advantages). If you are running a rule-based or automated strategy, FTMO requires that it does not fall into the prohibited category — read the prohibited strategies clause in full before subscribing.

For manual discretionary traders, news trading policy is the key differentiator from firms that ban it (of which there are many). The fact that both FTMO and The5ers permit news trading puts them both ahead of the majority of the prop firm market on this dimension. For algorithmic traders, The5ers' EA permissiveness during the challenge phase — not just on the funded account — is a meaningful practical advantage: you can run your system through the evaluation without switching to manual execution.

• FTMO: news trading permitted with no restrictions on timing or position holding
• The5ers: news trading generally permitted — confirm current terms per programme
• FTMO: EAs permitted on funded accounts, but prohibited strategy types (latency arb, tick scalping) must be avoided
• The5ers: EAs supported including during challenge evaluation — more permissive for algorithmic traders
• Both firms are ahead of the market majority on news trading; The5ers leads on EA flexibility

Which Firm Suits Which Trader Type

FTMO is the correct choice for: traders who are new to prop firm challenges and want the most documented, most-discussed evaluation structure in the market; traders whose strategy is discretionary and benefits from unrestricted news trading; traders who prioritise operational safety above marginal product features; and traders who plan to scale to the $400,000 aggregate cap via multiple accounts over time. FTMO's 10-year operational history, Czech corporate registration, and the Czech National Bank's review of its business model provide a layer of structural transparency that most competitors cannot match.

The5ers is the correct choice for: algorithmic traders who need EA support during the challenge phase itself; swing traders who want the Bootcamp model's slow-burn capital scaling without a pass/fail cliff; traders who want bi-weekly payouts rather than monthly cycles; and experienced traders who have already verified The5ers' payout record independently and are comfortable with the scaling profit split model. The5ers' range of programmes means it can accommodate more trading styles than FTMO's single evaluation path.

The one scenario where The5ers has a clear structural edge over FTMO is for algorithmic traders: if your strategy is fully automated, The5ers' explicit EA support throughout the challenge removes a meaningful operational constraint. For everyone else — particularly traders who are new to funded trading or who are selecting a firm primarily on safety grounds following the MFF collapse — FTMO's track record is the decisive factor.

• Choose FTMO if: first-time prop firm trader, discretionary news trader, safety-first mandate, scaling via multiple accounts to $400k cap
• Choose The5ers if: algorithmic / EA trader, swing trader wanting gradual capital scaling, bi-weekly payout preference, experienced trader who has verified payout history independently
• FTMO's 10-year operational history is the clearest safety signal available in the retail prop space
• The5ers' EA support during challenge evaluation is a genuine structural advantage for systematic traders
• Neither firm has been subject to regulatory enforcement action post-MFF — both pass the minimum safety filter