Audacity Capital vs FundingPips

The short version

What actually separates them

On every field we hold for both firms, Audacity Capital and FundingPips publish the same answer. The score difference below comes from track record, reputation, and transparency rather than from the rules you trade under.

Identical on both: drawdown model, daily loss limit.

Not comparable yet: consistency rule, starting price, activation fee, minimum days to a first payout, trader profit split — at least one of the two firms has no figure on record, so we do not draw a conclusion from it. A blank here means we have not confirmed the rule, not that the firm has none.

Fig. 01 — Category winners

Who wins each category

Audacity Capital wins more categories (2–1, 1 tied, 2 not comparable), but the right pick depends on which category matters most to you.

Price

No data

Audacity Capital

$49

FundingPips

Not recorded

Audacity Capital publishes a starting price; we have none recorded for FundingPips, so there is no comparison to draw here yet.

Drawdown

Tie

Audacity Capital

static

FundingPips

static

Both use a static drawdown.

Payouts

No data

Audacity Capital

Up to 90% · 14d

FundingPips

Reward cycle chosen on the Master account - weekly 60%, bi-weekly 80%, monthly 100%, on demand 90% · days not recorded

Audacity Capital publishes a minimum number of days to a first payout; we have none recorded for FundingPips, so there is no comparison to draw here yet. Trader split is level or equally unrecorded, so nothing separates them here.

Rules

AC Audacity Capital

Audacity Capital

72/100

FundingPips

61/100

Audacity Capital has fairer rules overall (72 vs 61 on rule fairness).

Platforms

FU FundingPips

Audacity Capital

MetaTrader 5, DXtrade

FundingPips

MetaTrader 5, cTrader, Match-Trader

FundingPips supports more platforms (3 vs 2).

Overall value

AC Audacity Capital

Audacity Capital

85/100

FundingPips

70/100

Audacity Capital has the higher overall FirmFax score (85 vs 70).

A “tie” means both firms publish the same answer. “No data” means one of them has no figure on record for that category, so there is nothing to compare — it is never a point against either firm.

Buyer guide

Which one should you choose?

Fig. 02 — Score breakdown

Where each firm is stronger

A dash means the factor is unscored for that firm — the evidence it needs (a founding year, a public review sample) is not on record, so its weight moves to the factors that do have evidence rather than counting as a zero.

Fig. 03 — Same size, side by side

Compared at a $50,000 account

A bigger max drawdown gives more room; a lower profit target is easier to clear. A dash means that figure is not on record at this size, so no checkmark is awarded either way. Review the exact figures for your selected account.

Fig. 04 — The tale of the tape

Head-to-head

Checkmarks flag the objectively better value (higher score/reputation, older firm, lower price/fee) and are only awarded when both firms have that figure on record — “Not recorded” never loses a row. Rules are shown side by side without a “winner” because the best choice depends on your strategy.