Funded Trading Plus Puts 30% Off Every Program Behind FUNDED30, and Its $100K Instant Funding Costs 8 Times the Evaluation Routes
Funded Trading Plus has put 30% off every program and every account size behind the code FUNDED30, which the firm publishes in the promotional bar at the top of its own site. The detail that matters most to buyers is the one the promotion itself buries: Funded Trading Plus sells four separate routes to a simulated funded account, and at the $100,000 size three of them cost $549 while the fourth costs $4,499. A percentage discount does nothing to close a gap that wide, and the choice of route decides far more about a trader’s outcome than the saving does. The firm has not published a closing date for the offer anywhere on its site.
What FUNDED30 Covers and What the Firm Has Not Published
The banner reads, in visible text, “NEW 30% OFF EVERY PROGRAM. EVERY ACCOUNT SIZE” above “Use Code: FUNDED30”. It renders on both the home page and the challenge comparison page, so the scope is unambiguous.
What is missing is the deadline. No end date, time or time zone appears anywhere on either page. Funded Trading Plus is not alone in this, but it is worth repeating why it matters. A promotion with no published closing date can be withdrawn at any moment, and a trader who defers a purchase on the assumption that a month long campaign is running has no written basis for it. The current set of live October codes across the market is tracked on our prop trading discounts page.
The firm also does not publish a profit split percentage on its comparison page. The closest it comes is the line “Keep a majority of the simulated profits you generate, with scaling opportunities for consistent traders.” That is a range, not a number, and it is the single most consequential figure in any funded account. Traders should establish it at checkout or in the help centre before buying, and our explainer on profit split sets out why the percentage alone is still not the whole answer.
The Four Routes at $100,000, Side by Side
Funded Trading Plus publishes a comparison table that puts its programs against each other at a single account size, which makes the trade-offs unusually easy to read. At $100,000, before FUNDED30 is applied, the firm lists the following.
Instant Funding costs $4,499. It has zero evaluation steps and no simulated profit target at all. Its daily drawdown is 6% and its maximum drawdown is 6% trailing. Its reward cycle is 7 days. It is the only one of the four programs that does not permit weekend holding.
1-Step Express costs $549. It has one step, a 10% simulated profit target, a 4% daily drawdown and a 6% trailing maximum drawdown. Its reward cycle is 7 days and weekend holding is allowed.
2-Step Classic also costs $549. It runs two steps with a 7% target in each, a 4% daily drawdown and an 8% static maximum drawdown. Its reward cycle is 10 days and weekend holding is allowed.
Pass Now Pay Later, which the firm labels new, is listed at $549 as well. It is a single step with a 2% simulated profit target, a 4% daily drawdown and a 6% static maximum drawdown. Its reward cycle is marked not applicable, and weekend holding is allowed.
All four permit news trading and none charges swap fees. All four connect to MT5 and Match-Trader.
The Rules That Change Between Programs, and Why They Matter More Than the Price
Three differences in that table do more to decide a trader’s experience than any discount.
The first is static against trailing. 2-Step Classic uses an 8% static maximum drawdown and Pass Now Pay Later a 6% static one, which means the loss limit is fixed to the starting balance and does not move as the account grows. 1-Step Express and Instant Funding both use 6% trailing, which means the limit follows gains upward and a profitable account can be breached by giving back a portion of profit it has already made. On paper the 8% static limit on the 2-Step is the most forgiving number in the table, even though it sits on the route with two phases to clear. Our guide to trailing drawdown explains why the distinction catches out more traders than any other rule.
The second is the target. 1-Step Express asks for 10% in one phase. 2-Step Classic asks for 7% and then 7%, which is 14% in total but split across two lower bars. Which is easier depends on whether a strategy produces returns in concentrated bursts or steadily, and the firm does not pretend otherwise: it frames the 2-Step as the entry route and the 1-Step as the scaling tool once a strategy is settled.
The third is the reward cycle. 7 days on Instant Funding and 1-Step Express against 10 days on 2-Step Classic. For a trader who needs regular withdrawals that is a meaningful operational difference, and it is one of the few places where the expensive Instant Funding route buys something concrete.
Which brings the price gap back into view. At $100,000, Instant Funding costs 8.2 times what the three evaluation routes cost. What a buyer gets for that is no evaluation to pass, no profit target, and a looser 6% daily drawdown. What they give up is the ability to hold over a weekend and the 8% static limit available on the cheapest two-phase route. A 30% discount takes the Instant Funding price from $4,499 to roughly $3,149, which is still more than five times the discounted cost of an evaluation. Traders new to this decision will find it set out across firms in our 2026 prop firm comparison.
Pass Now Pay Later Arrives at the Same Time
The more interesting thing on the Funded Trading Plus home page this week is not the discount. It is a product the firm flags as new and headlines as “PASS NOW. PAY LATER.”
The firm sets out a four step mechanic in its own words. Choose an account of $25,000, $50,000 or $100,000. Pay $4 and start, which the page states is all you pay today. Pass the challenge, described as one phase with a 2% target. Then buy the funded account, and only at that point do you pay the rest. The comparison table confirms the 2% target, the 4% daily drawdown and the 6% static maximum drawdown, and lists the program at $549 at the $100,000 size.
What the firm has not published is the arithmetic that decides whether this is good value. If the listed $549 is the full price and $4 is paid up front, the balance due on passing is $545, and a trader who fails has lost $4 rather than $549. If instead the $549 is the funded account price on top of the entry fee, the total exceeds the equivalent one-step route. The page does not say which, nor whether FUNDED30 applies to the $4 entry, the balance or both. A 2% target for $4 looks like the lowest risk entry point any firm here currently advertises, which is exactly why the unstated terms need settling first.
What This Means for the Broader Prop Industry
Funded Trading Plus is not a new entrant. The firm reports more than $19.5 million in total trader rewards between 2021 and 2026, a highest single reward of $189,083, top cumulative trader totals of $223,433, $173,597 and $106,320, more than 211,000 accounts issued, more than 60,000 active traders across 180 countries and a Discord community of over 50,000. It trades as Funded Trading Plus under Acello Ltd, a company incorporated in England and Wales with company number 12696083, registered at 30 Old Bailey, London.
Those numbers put the pricing question in context. A firm five years into operation with six figure individual payouts on record is not using an 8.2 times price gap carelessly. The gap is the business model: evaluations sell in volume to traders who mostly do not pass, while instant funding is priced for the exposure the firm carries from the first trade. That is why the discount lands on both and changes neither decision.
The wider shift visible here is deferred payment as a competitive front. Pay later, pay on passing, activation fees charged only after a phase is cleared and split fee structures have spread quickly through this market in 2026, and they solve a real problem: the biggest barrier to a first evaluation is paying several hundred dollars for something a trader is statistically likely to fail. Lowering entry to $4 removes that barrier almost entirely, and it moves the firm’s revenue to the point where the trader has demonstrated something, which beats selling resets. The opposite risk is that a very low fee encourages volume buying of evaluations nobody has a plan for passing, and no firm running these structures has yet published pass rates that would show which effect dominates. Traders can at least read the rules first, and our prop firm challenge explainer is the place to start.
Read Our Funded Trading Plus Review →
Frequently Asked Questions About This Story
Enjoyed this article? Add JoinProp as a preferred source on Google.
