Head-to-head comparison
Blue Guardian Futures vs Topstep
Compare FirmFax scores, account rules, reputation, fees, platforms, and current offers before choosing.
Blue Guardian Futures vs Topstep
Topstep leads by 1 FirmFax point.
Account reviewed
Standard Futures Account 77/100 account scoreAccount reviewed
Trading Combine - Standard Path 78/100 account scoreFast answer
Topstep is the clearer pick here: it scores 1 point higher on the firm score (78 vs 77) and starts $15 cheaper. Because both use end-of-day trailing drawdown, so the day-to-day risk model feels the same, the deciding factors come down to cost and track record.
Best for Blue Guardian Futures
Pick Blue Guardian Futures for Standard Futures Account, its top-scored tracked account at 77/100.
Best for Topstep
Pick Topstep for Trading Combine - Standard Path, its top-scored tracked account at 78/100, 1 point clear of Blue Guardian Futures' top-scored account.
Next step
Blue Guardian Futures
Account reviewed: Standard Futures Account. 25% off all accounts when you use code FAX.
Next step
Topstep
Account reviewed: Trading Combine - Standard Path. $10-$30 Responsible Trading Discount.
The short version
What actually separates them
2 fields on the record split Blue Guardian Futures and Topstep. Everything else either matches or is not on the record yet.
A consistency cap limits how much of your total profit one day may contribute, so a single outsized winner can delay a payout.
Entry cost for the cheapest account each firm sells, before any live discount.
Identical on both: drawdown model, trader profit split.
Not comparable yet: daily loss limit, minimum days to a first payout — 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
Topstep wins more categories (2–1, 2 tied, 1 not comparable), but the right pick depends on which category matters most to you.
Price
Topstep is cheaper to enter ($49 vs $64).
Drawdown
TieBoth use an end-of-day trailing drawdown.
Payouts
No dataTopstep publishes a minimum number of days to a first payout; we have none recorded for Blue Guardian Futures, so there is no comparison to draw here yet. Trader split is level or equally unrecorded, so nothing separates them here.
Rules
TieBoth score 72 on plan rules (drawdown model). The figures are for Reserve Futures Account and XFA Standard Payout Path, the plans whose scores are the two firms' grades.
Platforms
Blue Guardian Futures supports more platforms (4 vs 2).
Firm score
Topstep has the higher firm score (78 vs 77).
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. “No single rule” means a firm’s plans do not share one rule in our record, so there is no firm-level rule to compare.
Buyer guide
Which one should you choose?
Blue Guardian Futures is stronger when...
- Pick Blue Guardian Futures for Standard Futures Account, its top-scored tracked account at 77/100.
- Entry cost: $64 starting price.
- Risk model: end-of-day trailing drawdown, daily loss limit varies by plan. Confirm it fits how you size trades.
- Our record does not hold one consistency rule for every Blue Guardian Futures plan, so check the plan you would buy before you plan around one big day.
- Payouts: 90/10 on funded futures accounts, On-demand, weekly or bi-weekly depending on account type and add-ons.
Topstep is stronger when...
- Pick Topstep for Trading Combine - Standard Path, its top-scored tracked account at 78/100, 1 point clear of Blue Guardian Futures' top-scored account.
- Entry cost: $49 starting price.
- Risk model: end-of-day trailing drawdown, daily loss limit not recorded. Confirm it fits how you size trades.
- Our record does not hold one consistency rule for every Topstep plan, so check the plan you would buy before you plan around one big day.
- Payouts: 90/10; traders who joined the new dashboard before January 12, 2026 receive 100% of first $10k lifetime profits, XFA Standard requires five $150+ winning days; XFA Consistency requires three days and a 40% consistency target; closed Labs drops can carry separate payout-day thresholds., first withdrawal from 3 days (unit not recorded).
Before you buy
Topstep is $15 cheaper to start ($49 starting price), but weigh activation fees and any live discount before deciding.
Both firms sit at 0 logged status issues, so status issues are level in this matchup.
Payout cadence differs (Blue Guardian Futures is On-demand, weekly or bi-weekly depending on account type and add-ons, Topstep is XFA Standard requires five $150+ winning days; XFA Consistency requires three days and a 40% consistency target; closed Labs drops can carry separate payout-day thresholds.), which compounds if you withdraw often.
Freshness: Blue Guardian Futures was last reviewed 2026-09-28; Topstep on 2026-09-23.
Fig. 02 — Score breakdown
Where each firm is stronger
Each side shows the plan whose score is that firm's grade.
A dash means the factor is not scored for that plan: we have not recorded the evidence it needs, such as the firm's founding year or enough of the plan's rules. Its weight moves to the factors that are scored rather than counting as a zero.
Fig. 04 — The tale of the tape
Head-to-head
| Metric | Blue Guardian Futures | Topstep |
|---|---|---|
| FirmFax firm score | 77 | 78✓ |
| Account score | 77 (Standard Futures Account) | 78 (Trading Combine - Standard Path)✓ |
| Reputation | Positive reputation✓ | Mixed reputation |
| Founded | 2024 | 2012✓ |
| Starting price | $64 | $49✓ |
| Markets | Futures | Futures |
| Jurisdiction | UAE | USA |
| Platforms | Tradovate, TradingView, NinjaTrader, Deepcharts | TopstepX, Quantower |
| Drawdown | Trailing (end-of-day) | Trailing (end-of-day) |
| Daily loss limit | Varies by plan | Not recorded |
| Consistency rule | Varies by plan | Varies by plan |
| Profit split | 90/10 on funded futures accounts | 90/10; traders who joined the new dashboard before January 12, 2026 receive 100% of first $10k lifetime profits |
| Payout frequency | On-demand, weekly or bi-weekly depending on account type and add-ons | XFA Standard requires five $150+ winning days; XFA Consistency requires three days and a 40% consistency target; closed Labs drops can carry separate payout-day thresholds. |
| Min days to payout | Not recorded | 3 days (unit not recorded) |
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.
Current discount
25% off all accounts when you use code FAX
Official source · Last checked 2026-09-05
Current discount
$10-$30 Responsible Trading Discount
Official source · Last checked 2026-09-05
Search answers
Blue Guardian Futures vs Topstep FAQ
Is Blue Guardian Futures or Topstep better for futures traders?
Topstep's highest-scoring account has the higher FirmFax score right now. The better pick is the one whose drawdown, platforms, and fees match how you trade.
Which is cheaper, Blue Guardian Futures or Topstep?
Topstep has the lower starting price we hold, about $15 less. Discounts can change often.
How do drawdown rules compare between Blue Guardian Futures and Topstep?
They use the same model — end-of-day trailing drawdown — so drawdown mechanics are comparable and other rules should decide it.
Do Blue Guardian Futures and Topstep have a consistency rule?
Our record does not hold one consistency rule for every Blue Guardian Futures plan, and our record does not hold one consistency rule for every Topstep plan. Where a firm's plans do not share one rule in our record, check the plan you would buy on its firm page.
Does FirmFax rank Blue Guardian Futures vs Topstep using payouts?
Payout history is used as context, not as a score input. FirmFax scores each plan on plan rules, firm track record, plan transparency and plan accessibility.
More comparisons