State of Prop Trading: A $19.4 Billion Industry Defined by a Great Profit Split Divide — Week of July 5, 2026

This week in numbers

ProprietaryTrading.com's latest data snapshot, covering a sample of 40 leading firms, reveals an industry that continues its aggressive growth trajectory. The estimated total industry revenue now stands at $19.4 billion, a 33.8% increase from $14.5 billion at this time in 2025. The number of active funded traders has reached 720,000, up from 565,000 one year ago, representing a 27.4% year-over-year increase.

Across our firm sample, the median profit split offered to traders is 50%. However, the average profit split is significantly higher at 64.4%, indicating a market pulled upward by firms offering exceptionally high payout percentages. In terms of asset access, stocks remain the most commonly supported instrument, with 33 of the 40 firms in our sample offering them. This is followed by futures, supported by 22 firms, and options, available at 21 of the firms.

Industry growth

The proprietary trading sector's expansion shows no signs of slowing in 2026. The number of active funded traders, a key metric for the online prop firm ecosystem, has swelled to an estimated 720,000. This figure represents a more than 22-fold increase from the 32,000 traders estimated to be active in 2020. This explosive growth in participation has been mirrored by a surge in industry revenue, which has climbed from $1.2 billion in 2020 to $19.4 billion today.

This growth narrative, however, primarily belongs to the newer, online-centric firms that utilize evaluation and instant funding models. These firms, accessible to a global retail audience, have fundamentally changed the landscape. While traditional proprietary trading houses like Susquehanna International Group (SIG) and Hudson River Trading have been established for decades, their growth is measured by different standards—primarily headcount, assets under management, and trading revenues, rather than the sheer volume of funded accounts. The data suggests that the majority of the recent participant growth is concentrated in the evaluation-based segment, which has a lower barrier to entry for individual traders.

This rapid scaling has profound implications, creating a larger and more diverse talent pool but also increasing competition. As the industry matures, the sustainability of this growth rate will be a key topic of observation. Traders looking for opportunities can browse a comprehensive list of these firms on our proprietary firm /directory.

Where the firms cluster

Our analysis of 40 top firms reveals a distinct bifurcation in the market, most clearly illustrated by the profit split metric. The median profit split is exactly 50%. This figure is not an arbitrary middle ground; it is the standard and dominant model for an entire segment of the industry: the traditional proprietary trading firm.

Firms such as Citadel Securities, Jane Street, DRW, Optiver, and an extensive list of other "firm capital model" entities all operate on a structure that typically involves a salary and a performance-based annual bonus, which is represented in our data as a 50% profit share. This model is predicated on a rigorous, highly selective hiring process and is aimed at traders who become full-time employees of the firm. There are no evaluation fees; the firm invests significant capital in training and infrastructure for its traders.

The other cluster forms at the opposite end of the spectrum. The average profit split of 64.4% is heavily skewed by the online, evaluation-based firms that offer payouts of 80%, 90%, or even 100%. Firms like FTMO, Topstep, and The Funded Trader are leaders in this space, promising high reward-sharing in exchange for traders passing a multi-stage evaluation challenge. This model requires traders to pay an upfront or recurring fee to attempt the challenge. For a detailed breakdown of these two distinct approaches, traders can consult our /article/prop-firm-funding-models-evaluation-vs-instant-funding analysis.

This clustering creates a two-tiered market. Below is a table illustrating this divide using a sample of firms from our database:

In terms of asset classes, firms also cluster around market demand. Stocks are supported by 82.5% of firms in our sample (33 out of 40), making it the most accessible market. This is closely followed by futures at 55% (22 firms) and options at 52.5% (21 firms). Multi-asset firms like FTMO provide access to forex, crypto, stocks, and futures, whereas specialists like Apex Trader Funding focus squarely on the futures market. This distribution indicates that traders have broad access to major asset classes, though options and futures specialists are less common than stock and forex providers. For direct comparisons, users can utilize our /vs/ftmo-vs-topstep tool to see how offerings differ.

Outliers worth a second look

While the market shows clear clustering, several firms distinguish themselves by operating outside the norms. These outliers often compete by offering unique terms on one or more key variables.

On profit split, the most significant outliers are the firms offering 100% of the profits to the trader. Our sample includes Apex Trader Funding, FundingPips, Funded Trading Plus, and The 5%ers in this category. This model is typically sustained by the evaluation fee structure, where the firm's primary revenue comes from challenge fees rather than a share of trading profits. It is an attractive headline figure, but requires traders to assess the total cost of participation, including the non-refundable evaluation fees.

Maximum allocation size is another area with notable outliers. While many firms cap their funding in the low-to-mid six figures, The 5%ers stands apart with a scaling plan that reaches a maximum allocation of $4,000,000, the highest in our data set. Following behind is Funded Trading Plus, which offers up to $2,500,000. These large headline numbers are part of scaling plans, meaning a trader must demonstrate consistent profitability over an extended period to reach them. They contrast with the unstated, but institutionally massive, buying power available to traders at firms like Jump Trading or Tower Research Capital.

In funding models, only three firms in our sample of 40 offer instant funding: E8 Markets, Funded Trading Plus, and The 5%ers. This model allows traders to bypass the typical multi-phase evaluation process and begin trading a funded account immediately, albeit for a higher upfront cost and often with more restrictive trading parameters. This niche offering appeals to experienced traders confident in their ability to be immediately profitable.

Finally, some firms are outliers by their very specialization. Among the traditional firms, which are largely multi-asset, Wintermute carves a niche by focusing exclusively on the crypto markets. This specialization allows it to build deep expertise and infrastructure tailored to a single asset class, a different strategy from the broad diversification of a firm like Virtu Financial, which trades across stocks, futures, options, forex, and crypto.

What this means for traders

The data confirms that the term "proprietary trading" now encompasses two fundamentally different career paths. The first is the traditional route: securing a highly competitive position at a firm like Belvedere Trading or PEAK6, which involves a salary and bonus structure. The second is the online evaluation route: paying a fee to a firm like My Funded Futures or Take Profit Trader to prove your skill and earn a funded account with a high profit split.

For the individual trader, this choice is pivotal. The decision tree should not be based solely on headline numbers like a 90% or 100% profit split. The underlying details are critical. For example, a 100% split from Apex Trader Funding comes with a monthly subscription fee and specific rules around futures trading, while a 90% split from FTMO is paired with a one-time, refundable fee and broad multi-asset access. Traders must use tools like our /compare page to weigh these factors against their own trading style, risk tolerance, and starting capital.

The increasing number of firms—viewable on our firm /directory—also means heightened competition for traders' business. This has led to innovations like faster payouts, with firms like Hola Prime advertising same-day withdrawals, and more flexible evaluation rules. However, it also necessitates greater due diligence. Traders should be methodical in their selection process, leveraging comparison tools and data analysis to find a firm that aligns with their long-term goals. The ProprietaryTrading.com /match tool can assist in filtering firms based on criteria like instruments traded, funding model, and server location.

Ultimately, the data shows a vibrant, expanding industry, but one that places the onus of research squarely on the trader. The path you choose—be it the rigorous employment model of a firm like Two Sigma Securities or the entrepreneurial challenge of an evaluation firm—will have more impact on your career than any single trade.

Key takeaways

This week's data roundup highlights several core trends shaping the proprietary trading industry in 2026.

First, industry growth remains robust, with estimated revenue hitting $19.4 billion and the number of funded traders reaching 720,000. This demonstrates a sustained global interest in alternative paths to professional trading.

Second, the market is defined by a great divide in its business models. Traditional firms like Maven Securities and IMC Trading form a large cluster around a 50% profit split (via salary/bonus), representing a stable, employment-based path. In contrast, the high-growth online sector, populated by firms like FundedNext and E8 Markets, attracts traders with profit splits ranging from 80% to 100%, creating a distinct, fee-based ecosystem.

Third, while headline figures like profit split and maximum allocation are powerful marketing tools, traders must look deeper. Factors such as payout frequency, evaluation costs, and specific trading rules are often more consequential to a trader's net earnings and career longevity. A comprehensive analysis is not just recommended; it is required.

As the industry continues to evolve, staying informed is the trader's greatest edge. For further independent research, visit our /data page for industry-wide statistics and our /education section for foundational trading concepts.