Blue Guardian vs Funding Pips
Side-by-side comparison across all 16 scoring variables. Blue Guardian (75/100, Good) vs Funding Pips (76/100, Good).
| — | Blue Guardian 75 Good | Funding Pips 76 Good |
|---|---|---|
| Score Dimensions | ||
| Payout Integrity30% | 8.5 | 8.5 |
| Rules Integrity22% | 7.7 | 7.7 |
| Rules Stability8% | 9.0 | 8.5 |
| Business Viability18% | 6.0 | 5.7 |
| Platform & Execution9% | 6.5 | 6.5 |
| Cost Fairness10% | 7.0 | 8.0 |
| Specifications | ||
| Payout Split | 80% standard (scales to 85%+) | 80% standard (90% after scaling) |
| Max Funded | $200,000 | $400,000 (via scaling) |
| Payout Cap | None | None |
| Drawdown Model | Static max loss 8% from initial balance | Static max loss 8% from initial balance |
| Min Days | 3 | 3 |
| Challenge Fee | ~$500–$600 for $100K | ~$450–$550 for $100K |
| Fee Refundable | Yes — refunded with first payout | Yes — refunded with first payout |
| News Trading | Restricted on funded accounts during major events (evaluation: unrestricted) | Restricted — window around major events on funded account (evaluation: unrestricted) |
| Platforms | MT4, MT5, cTrader (select accounts) | MT4, MT5, cTrader (select accounts) |
| Payout Schedule | On demand; 1–2 business day processing | On demand; processed within 24–48 hours |
| Visit → | Visit → | |
The Verdict
Funding Pips (76/100, Good) is the higher-scoring of the two on our composite. Its standout dimensions are score 76/100 (good) — competitive challenge fees and a fast-growing community since 2022 launch.|static drawdown model with clear documentation on rule edge cases.|strong support response times reported in community pattern reviews.. Blue Guardian (75/100, Good) is still worth considering if forex traders looking for a uk-jurisdiction firm with predictable rules and a clean enforcement record. See each firm's Blue Guardian review and Funding Pips review for the full evidence.