Disclosure: Traders Fund Hub does not currently record an affiliate relationship with Crypto Fund Trader. Links to the firm open its official website without affiliate tracking. Our reviews remain independent. Learn more.
Rating suppressed by Trustpilot
Trustpilot's notice on this profile reads: “This company's rating is unavailable due to a breach of our guidelines.” The profile still carries 1,140 reviews.
Check Crypto Fund Trader on TrustpilotVerdict
Consider the 2-Phase Evaluation if your strategy needs a static loss floor.
- The standard 2-Phase and 1-Phase tables show an 80% reward share. Each initial Instant size path shows 50%, with higher shares at subsequent scale levels.
- Ascend ends with a fixed scholarship after its two phases; it is not another ongoing 80% account. Current terms list six priced tiers.
- Break has a separate activation charge after passing and review. Current terms and the shop list its three priced tiers, but one page block still says sold out.
- The 15 traded days or 30 calendar days reward conditions must not be shortened to a biweekly payment promise.
- All CFT programmes described here use simulated trading. Account size is not a deposit or cash available to withdraw.
Current capture checked September 14, 2026. The earlier version incorrectly applied an 80% share across every programme and omitted Break activation from its cost comparison. The standard 2-Phase, 1-Phase and Instant records were rechecked on September 8; current Terms and Conditions and shop pages now verify Ascend and Break fees and refresh those product dates. This is a correction to our review, not evidence that every CFT policy changed on September 14.
Quick facts
| Programmes in the live selector checked | Instant, 1 Phase and 2 Phases; 15 verified base-price tiers |
| Other programmes discussed | Ascend fixed-award evaluation and Break; 9 current fee tiers verified on 2026-09-14 |
| Standard evaluation reward share | 80% on the 1-Phase and 2-Phase final-stage tables |
| Instant starting reward share | 50%; do not substitute a later scale-level share |
| Loss limits | 2-Phase: 5% daily / 10% static overall. 1-Phase: 4% daily / 6% trailing. Instant: 4% daily / 6% overall; exact basis unverified. |
| Reward eligibility | Programme-specific conditions, approved KYC and rule compliance; not a guaranteed receipt date |
| Markets and platforms | CFT lists MetaTrader 5, Match-Trader and Bybit; instruments and leverage differ by route |
| Refund on passing | Not verified; the withdrawal-before-trading policy is a different condition |
The 24 rechecked fees below are base selections, not a universal quote for every platform, country or optional add-on. The FAQ distinguishes multi-asset instruments on MetaTrader 5 and Match-Trader from Bybit's crypto route. Our previous suggestion that CFT only offers crypto pairs was too broad. Confirm the actual symbol, commission schedule and platform for the programme you intend to use.
Challenges available
The table retains all 5 programmes previously covered. The 2-Phase and 1-Phase products each have six priced tiers; Instant has three; Ascend has six current fee tiers and Break has three current fee tiers plus tier-specific activation charges. Product dates are 2026-09-14 for the refreshed Ascend and Break records.
| Product | Phases | Account size | Base fee | Target | Daily loss | Overall loss | Reward | Product verification |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Evaluation (Standard 2-Phase) | 2 | $5,000 | $58 | 8% then 5% | 5% | 10% static | 80% | 2026-09-08 |
| Evaluation (Standard 2-Phase) | 2 | $10,000 | $110 | 8% then 5% | 5% | 10% static | 80% | 2026-09-08 |
| Evaluation (Standard 2-Phase) | 2 | $25,000 | $240 | 8% then 5% | 5% | 10% static | 80% | 2026-09-08 |
| Evaluation (Standard 2-Phase) | 2 | $50,000 | $389 | 8% then 5% | 5% | 10% static | 80% | 2026-09-08 |
| Evaluation (Standard 2-Phase) | 2 | $100,000 | $660 | 8% then 5% | 5% | 10% static | 80% | 2026-09-08 |
| Evaluation (Standard 2-Phase) | 2 | $200,000 | $1,250 | 8% then 5% | 5% | 10% static | 80% | 2026-09-08 |
| Ascend Evaluation | 2 | $5,000 | $39 | 8% then 5% | 5% | 10% static | Fixed award | 2026-09-14 |
| Ascend Evaluation | 2 | $10,000 | $78 | 8% then 5% | 5% | 10% static | Fixed award | 2026-09-14 |
| Ascend Evaluation | 2 | $25,000 | $195 | 8% then 5% | 5% | 10% static | Fixed award | 2026-09-14 |
| Ascend Evaluation | 2 | $50,000 | $390 | 8% then 5% | 5% | 10% static | Fixed award | 2026-09-14 |
| Ascend Evaluation | 2 | $100,000 | $780 | 8% then 5% | 5% | 10% static | Fixed award | 2026-09-14 |
| Ascend Evaluation | 2 | $200,000 | $1,560 | 8% then 5% | 5% | 10% static | Fixed award | 2026-09-14 |
| Accelerated (1-Phase) | 1 | $5,000 | $40 | 10% | 4% | 6% trailing | 80% | 2026-09-08 |
| Accelerated (1-Phase) | 1 | $10,000 | $80 | 10% | 4% | 6% trailing | 80% | 2026-09-08 |
| Accelerated (1-Phase) | 1 | $25,000 | $219 | 10% | 4% | 6% trailing | 80% | 2026-09-08 |
| Accelerated (1-Phase) | 1 | $50,000 | $369 | 10% | 4% | 6% trailing | 80% | 2026-09-08 |
| Accelerated (1-Phase) | 1 | $100,000 | $619 | 10% | 4% | 6% trailing | 80% | 2026-09-08 |
| Accelerated (1-Phase) | 1 | $200,000 | $1,199 | 10% | 4% | 6% trailing | 80% | 2026-09-08 |
| Instant | 0 | $2,500 | $125 | No evaluation | 4% | 6%; basis unverified | 50% initially | 2026-09-08 |
| Instant | 0 | $5,000 | $240 | No evaluation | 4% | 6%; basis unverified | 50% initially | 2026-09-08 |
| Instant | 0 | $10,000 | $475 | No evaluation | 4% | 6%; basis unverified | 50% initially | 2026-09-08 |
| Break Challenge | 1 | $25,000 | $70 | Tier-specific; see below | See rule note | Tier-specific | 80% | 2026-09-14 |
| Break Challenge | 1 | $50,000 | $140 | Tier-specific; see below | See rule note | Tier-specific | 80% | 2026-09-14 |
| Break Challenge | 1 | $100,000 | $200 | Tier-specific; see below | See rule note | Tier-specific | 80% | 2026-09-14 |
Source scope: the 2-Phase, 1-Phase and Instant selections were checked on 2026-09-08 against CFT's homepage, FAQ and terms. The 2026-09-14 refresh rechecked Ascend and Break against the current Terms and Conditions, shop and dedicated Break page. Prices remain list fees; final checkout, platform, country access and reward receipt still require direct confirmation.
Ascend is a different contract. Terms section 8.vi describes two targets followed by a fixed award and the end of the study plan. The awards run from $210 on the $5,000 size to $8,400 on the $200,000 size; the $100,000 award is $4,200. The FAQ describes a redeemable ticket after Phase 2 and approved KYC, not a continuing percentage-share account. Matching its 8%/5% targets to the standard Evaluation does not make the economic outcome identical.
Ascend's current fee ladder is $39 / $78 / $195 / $390 / $780 / $1,560 for $5,000 through $200,000 under Section 5.6.5 of the Terms and Conditions. Break's current entry fees are $70 / $140 / $200 for $25,000 / $50,000 / $100,000, and its activation fees are $138 / $198 / $328. The shop and dedicated page provide separate availability context; verify the final tier and checkout before paying.
Break activation is additional. Terms section 8.vii and the dedicated page specify $138, $198 and $328 for the $25,000, $50,000 and $100,000 tiers respectively. Passing leads to review; the activation payment option then has a stated 30-day window. The generated Break table below includes both the current entry fee and its tier activation, so the cost-to-funded figure is not an entry-only quote.
The terms also describe a 3-Phase evaluation, but the live selector checked exposed Instant, 1 Phase and 2 Phases. We have not established current 3-Phase availability and do not present this review as an exhaustive active catalogue. Absence from that selector is not a finding that Ascend, Break or 3-Phase has permanently closed.
How the rules actually work
Static and trailing loss room
On the standard 2-Phase Evaluation, a 10% static overall cap means an initial $100,000 account has a $90,000 overall floor. A profitable trade does not itself raise that fixed floor. The separate 5% daily limit still applies, so being above the overall floor does not establish that an account has survived the daily test. These are different breach conditions, not interchangeable descriptions of one stop.
The 1-Phase programme starts with a 6% trailing allowance. On a $100,000 account, that begins at $94,000 and follows the highest balance until the floor reaches the initial balance and locks there. A trader who gives back gains can therefore face a raised floor. The $619 base fee at that size is lower than the 2-Phase fee of $660, but it buys a materially different risk contract.
For Instant, the verified percentages are 4% daily and 6% overall. We have removed the unsupported “balance-based” classification rather than importing the 1-Phase trailing calculation. Before using a position-size plan based on that 6%, establish whether the operative floor is recalculated, what balance or equity reference it uses, and what happens after an upgrade. The percentage alone does not answer those questions.
The FAQ states that daily loss is referenced to the balance at 12:05 AM UTC and that equity is used for breaches. Open losses therefore matter. On the standard 2-Phase example, the 5% daily percentage and 10% overall percentage constrain different parts of the account's path. A position carried overnight must be considered against the reset and the applicable instrument's financing costs, not just its eventual closing price.
Break's stage-specific conditions
Break's dedicated page shows initial loss allowances of $1,000, $2,000 and $3,000 for its three tiers. Its FAQ describes a percentage of the highest balance, while the purchase-page presentation emphasizes dollar amounts. Those initial dollar figures do not establish a complete ongoing trailing algorithm. The page explicitly describes no daily loss limit, but its trailing condition remains a loss gate; “no daily cap” does not mean unlimited risk.
Break's 40% consistency condition is checked for final-stage reward requests, not as the same requirement during evaluation. In a hypothetical $6,000 profit total, a $2,400 best day accounts for 40%; a larger best day exceeds that proportion unless the total changes. The current dedicated page and FAQ both support 0 minimum evaluation days, so a one-day pass is not required—but the target, activation review and other rules still apply.
Holding, news and automation
The general FAQ permits overnight and weekend holding, but that does not make every instrument trade continuously or eliminate swaps and funding charges. Its MetaTrader 5 and Match-Trader discussion covers CFDs; its Bybit discussion refers to that venue's market fees and funding. The swing-trading comparison is a starting point for the permission question, not confirmation that holding a particular symbol is cost-free.
Ascend has a specific news restriction: no opening or adding risk during the two minutes before and after high-impact news or a market opening, with a separate 2% initial-balance risk condition in that window. The general news permission must not erase this exception. Check the affected event, instrument and stage before assuming that a permitted hold also permits a new trade.
CFT prohibits high-frequency trading, tick scalping and arbitrage; its EA section describes those strategies rather than granting blanket automation approval. Ascend prohibits coordinated copying. Break permits copying only between a trader's own Break evaluation accounts and prohibits it in the Final Stage. We have not verified a general copy-trading permission for the other programmes, so their data stays unknown rather than becoming an unrestricted “yes.”
The FAQ also specifies a $10,000 simulated-profit ceiling per day and/or trade, with possible trade closure and removal of excess gains. On an initial $200,000 example, that amount is 5% of the starting balance. A loss-limit backtest alone will not detect this profit-side constraint; a strategy with concentrated large winners needs to account for it separately.
True cost to break even
The tables below are generated from the corrected product records through computeTrueCost(), not hand-calculated replacements. For the standard programmes, the 80% reward share means fee divided by 0.80 gives the simulated profit needed for that share to equal the entry fee. The R-multiple compares that amount with the model's initial loss allowance. It is not a probability of passing or an estimate of expected profit. See the True-Cost methodology for the assumptions.
The “Days @ 1%/day” column is a mechanical scenario, not a realistic earnings forecast or a payout timetable. It excludes evaluation targets, losing days, KYC review and conditional withdrawal gates. A low R does not mean a challenge is easy, and a higher account size does not create withdrawable capital. No table assumes a pass refund or includes an optional paid add-on.
| Tier | Fee | Break-even profit (80% split) | R-multiple vs 10% max DD | Days @ 1%/day (5% daily cap) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| $5K | $58 | $73 | 0.14 | 2 |
| $10K | $110 | $138 | 0.14 | 2 |
| $25K | $240 | $300 | 0.12 | 2 |
| $50K | $389 | $486 | 0.10 | 1 |
| $100K | $660 | $825 | 0.08 | 1 |
| $200K | $1,250 | $1,563 | 0.08 | 1 |
At $100,000, the standard Evaluation's generated break-even is $825 and R is 0.08. Those figures use the $660 base fee, 80% share and 10% initial loss allowance. They describe fee recovery after eligibility for rewards, not the work required to pass the preceding 8% and 5% phases. Treating $825 as the evaluation target would confuse two separate stages of the purchase.
| Tier | Fee | Break-even profit (80% split) | R-multiple vs 6% trailing max DD | Days @ 1%/day (4% daily cap) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| $5K | $40 | $50 | 0.17 | 1 |
| $10K | $80 | $100 | 0.17 | 1 |
| $25K | $219 | $274 | 0.18 | 2 |
| $50K | $369 | $461 | 0.15 | 1 |
| $100K | $619 | $774 | 0.13 | 1 |
| $200K | $1,199 | $1,499 | 0.12 | 1 |
The same-size 1-Phase row has a generated break-even of $774 and R of 0.13. Its lower $619 fee does not offset the narrower 6% trailing allowance in the risk-normalized comparison. Choose between the 1-Phase and 2-Phase mechanics using your strategy's drawdown path and target requirements, not the small difference between their entry prices alone.
| Tier | Fee | Break-even profit (50% split) | R-multiple vs 6% max DD | Days @ 1%/day (4% daily cap) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| $2,500 | $125 | $250 | 1.67 | 10 |
| $5K | $240 | $480 | 1.60 | 10 |
| $10K | $475 | $950 | 1.58 | 10 |
Instant's starting-share correction changes the result materially. At $10,000, the $475 fee and 50% initial share produce $950 break-even profit and R of 1.58 in the generated model. The old $594 figure assumed 80% and no longer belongs in this review. The later scale levels do not apply retroactively to the starting account, and the 6% loss denominator is an initial numerical comparison, not a verified description of its moving floor.
Instant's 10% withdrawal-and-upgrade threshold is another constraint outside that fee-recovery calculation. Its alternative earlier-request conditions also have to be met. Neither reaching the table's break-even amount nor seeing “0 phases” means a reward is immediately withdrawable. The no-evaluation product comparison separates the evaluation count from reward conditions.
Ascend has no percentage-split True-Cost table. Its fixed completion scholarship does not fit a continuing payout-share calculation. Break does have a verified fee, tier activation and 80% reward share, so its generated table is included below; it still excludes any optional add-on, review delay or unverified reward outcome.
| Tier | Cost to funded (fee + tier activation) | Break-even profit (80% split) | Max loss | R-multiple vs tier max loss | Days @ 1%/day |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| $25K | $208 | $260 | $1,000 | 0.26 | — |
| $50K | $338 | $423 | $2,000 | 0.21 | — |
| $100K | $528 | $660 | $3,000 | 0.22 | — |
Payout speed in practice
For standard 1-Phase and 2-Phase final-stage requests, the FAQ describes 15 traded days or an alternative 30-calendar-day cycle. Fifteen traded days is not fifteen calendar days and is not a biweekly promise. A paid weekly-request add-on is described separately. The applicable number of trading days, account status and submission conditions must be satisfied before processing begins.
Instant offers a withdrawal-and-upgrade path at 10% simulated profit without a minimum trading-day requirement for that option. The FAQ and terms describe different conditions for requesting earlier. Break's on-demand request follows passing, review, activation, approved KYC and its 40% consistency test; it does not inherit Instant's 10% upgrade threshold. Ascend uses its Phase 2 completion ticket instead of a continuing payout cycle.
The FAQ lists bank transfers in EUR or USD and crypto-wallet reward routes, while the standard schedule uses 15 traded days or 30 calendar days before a request. It requires identity and address verification, the relevant contract and closed trades before a request is processed. We have not verified a complete current minimum-withdrawal and transfer-fee schedule for each route. Purchase checkout methods should not be substituted for withdrawal methods, and a listed wallet network is not confirmation that it will be available to every trader.
CFT's FAQ describes an approximate 8-hour processing average and allows up to 48 business hours for review and dispatch, followed by payment-provider timing. These are the firm's statements, not measurements from our own payouts. We hold no independently verified CFT payout sample or current Trustpilot capture for this review. Firm-hosted testimonials do not establish a typical settlement time or the likelihood that a future request will be approved.
Pros
- The standard 2-Phase programme has a 10% static overall limit, giving a clearly defined initial floor for the comparison.
- The 1-Phase and 2-Phase selector offers six sizes each, so a same-size comparison need not mix different account tiers.
- The 24 current base-price selections are supported by first-party pages rather than competitor quote tables.
- The general FAQ permits overnight and weekend holding, subject to the applicable instrument schedule and trading rules.
- The 1-Phase and 2-Phase evaluation descriptions specify no minimum trading days and no maximum completion period; reward-request timing remains separate.
Cons
- Instant starts at 50%, not the 80% that the earlier review assumed; its generated $10,000 break-even is $950.
- Ascend's fixed completion award cannot be compared as another standard 80% ongoing account, even though its six fees are now current.
- Break has current fee and activation data, but one dedicated-page block still says sold out; verify the selected tier at checkout.
- Break's $138/$198/$328 activation charges make an entry-fee-only cost comparison incomplete.
- The general 15-traded-day or 30-calendar-day request schedule is not a weekly or guaranteed receipt schedule.
- High-frequency trading, tick scalping, arbitrage and the $10,000 profit ceiling restrict strategies that may otherwise respect the loss caps.
- Instant's precise loss-floor basis and several programme/platform details remain unverified; missing data is not permission.
Who should pick Crypto Fund Trader
A trader researching a simulated crypto-capable programme with a fixed overall floor should examine the standard 2-Phase route first. At the $50,000 and $100,000 sizes, compare the 10% static allowance, 8%/5% targets and base fee with the exact competing programme. The holding permission may suit a multi-day strategy, but the instrument, financing charges, permitted automation and reward-request conditions still need to fit that strategy before purchase.
Who should avoid Crypto Fund Trader
A trader who needs immediate, unconditional withdrawals should not read Instant's 0 evaluation phases as that promise. Anyone choosing Break should budget both its current entry fee and the $138/$198/$328 activation charge; treating Ascend as interchangeable with the 80% standard evaluation is also a category error because Ascend pays a fixed scholarship. The crypto prop-firm comparison, FTMO review and FundedNext review offer alternative rule sets to investigate, not guarantees of access or profitability. Russian language, citizenship and residence are different questions: verify the chosen platform's current eligibility, KYC and payment requirements for your own circumstances.
FAQ
How much does a Crypto Fund Trader challenge cost?
The September 8 checked 1-Phase fees start at $40 for $5,000; the 2-Phase starts at $58 for that size. Instant starts at $125 for $2,500. The September 14 terms refresh adds current Ascend fees from $39 and Break fees from $70, before any Break activation charge.
What is Crypto Fund Trader's profit split?
There is no single programme-wide answer: the standard 1-Phase and 2-Phase tables show 80%, while initial Instant paths show 50%. Ascend has a fixed completion award, not that continuing percentage-share arrangement.
Is the fee refunded after passing?
A pass refund has not been verified. The published 14-day withdrawal-before-trading policy is a separate condition and does not establish a fee refund after successful evaluation.
Is Break currently available?
The current shop lists Break evaluation and activation products, while a dedicated-page block still says sold out. Confirm the selected size and final checkout availability. Its published $138/$198/$328 activation charges also mean an entry headline is not a complete cost-to-funded quote.
Does CFT pay every week?
Not as the base standard-programme schedule: the FAQ describes 15 traded days or 30 calendar days. A weekly-request add-on and the programme-specific Instant, Break and Ascend conditions must be considered separately.
Does CFT offer only cryptocurrency trading?
No: the FAQ lists multi-asset instruments for MetaTrader 5 and Match-Trader as well as a Bybit crypto route. Instant's crypto leverage is listed at 1:5 in its specific FAQ, so the generic “up to 1:100” promotion is not a universal product setting.
Are bots and weekend positions allowed?
The FAQ permits overnight and weekend holding but prohibits named strategies including high-frequency trading, tick scalping and arbitrage. EA and copy-trading compatibility must be checked for the exact programme and stage; an 80% reward share says nothing about those permissions.
Compare Crypto Fund Trader with relevant alternatives
Selected by asset and platform overlap, not partnership. Product counts use current first-party captures; open the exact matchup before choosing a product.
All 16 Crypto Fund Trader comparisons
Ordered by asset and platform overlap. Each link opens the exact product-level matchup; partnership does not affect inclusion or order.
- Crypto Fund Trader vs FundingPips10 products · 8 sources · checked Oct 14, 2026
- Crypto Fund Trader vs FundedNext9 products · 7 sources · checked Oct 14, 2026
- Crypto Fund Trader vs E8 Markets10 products · 7 sources · checked Oct 14, 2026
- Crypto Fund Trader vs Alpha Capital15 products · 9 sources · checked Oct 14, 2026
- Crypto Fund Trader vs City Traders Imperium9 products · 7 sources · checked Oct 14, 2026
- Crypto Fund Trader vs OFP Funding11 products · 4 sources · checked Oct 14, 2026
- Crypto Fund Trader vs Maven14 products · 4 sources · checked Oct 14, 2026
- Crypto Fund Trader vs FXIFY15 products · 10 sources · checked Oct 14, 2026
- Crypto Fund Trader vs FTMO7 products · 5 sources · checked Oct 14, 2026
- Crypto Fund Trader vs BrightFunded8 products · 6 sources · checked Oct 14, 2026
- Crypto Fund Trader vs TradeDay8 products · 4 sources · checked Oct 14, 2026
- Crypto Fund Trader vs Topstep7 products · 4 sources · checked Oct 14, 2026
- Crypto Fund Trader vs Tradeify9 products · 4 sources · checked Oct 14, 2026
- Crypto Fund Trader vs Lucid Trading12 products · 7 sources · checked Oct 14, 2026
- Crypto Fund Trader vs Take Profit Trader6 products · 4 sources · checked Oct 14, 2026
- Crypto Fund Trader vs My Funded Futures10 products · 8 sources · checked Oct 14, 2026