Audacity Capital vs Finotive Funding

Proprietary Firm Overview

When retail traders seek to scale their trading careers, they often turn to proprietary trading firms that can provide both capital and structure. In this comparative review, we deep dive into two such solutions: Audacity Capital, a well-established entity in the space, and the newer but robust Finotive Funding. Both firms grant traders access to significant capital, differing primarily in their approach to funding, rules, and the support they offer traders.

Audacity Capital - A Prelude to Practical Funding

Audacity Capital carves its niche by offering direct funding to traders without the need for evaluation. The substantial initial capital of up to $500,000 and the robust Trustpilot rating of 4.7/5 reflect its commitment to customer satisfaction. Its scaling plan is particularly appealing, providing flexibility with a 10% fixed drawdown and allowing for overnight positions during weekdays. The firm emphasizes the ability of traders to double the account upon hitting a 10% profit, alongside providing a supportive safety net with its free retake and 14-day extension policies for the Ability Challenge. However, Audacity limits some trading freedoms, such as prohibiting weekend holding and news trading.

Finotive Funding - Embracing Trading Innovation

Finotive Funding sets itself apart with its generous leverage of up to 1:400 and a 95% profit split—an impressive offering that aligns well with the interests of profit-driven traders. The company has a comprehensive array of trading tools and allows for a wide spectrum of trading styles, including the use of expert advisors (EAs)/bots, as well as trading over the weekend and during news events. Their scaling option, which leads to a potential account size of $3,200,000, is ambitious and caters to those aiming for aggressive growth. Finotive Funding's multiple deposit and withdrawal options in various currencies demonstrate its effort to accommodate a global trading audience. The newer incorporation date suggests a modern approach to trading and the potential for embracing emerging market trends.

Pros and Cons at a Glance

Breaking down the advantages and disadvantages, Audacity Capital's no-evaluation funding offers immediate entry to the markets, complemented by its customer service excellence. Traders, however, need to reconcile with the 50% profit split and the absence of a free trial—a probable detraction for cautious investors. Finotive Funding's weaknesses are few but notable. While the 95% profit split is attractive, it can be reduced if specific rules are violated, and similar to Audacity, there is no free trial available to test their offerings.

Comparable Trading Rules

Both firms enforce a maximum loss policy and set profit targets that traders must adhere to. Audacity Capital, however, places more constraints such as lot size limits, no news trading, and maximum trading days—rules that may not sit well with highly adaptable traders. Finotive combats a 'no gambling mentality' and appears less restrictive, potentially appealing to a wider range of trading styles.

Funding and Profit Retention

When it comes to capital infusion and profit retention, traders must select the firm that aligns with their trading strategy and profit expectations. Audacity Capital offers a consistent capital foundation but divides profits down the middle. In contrast, Finotive Funding incentivizes trading skill with its high-profit split, albeit with a caveat upon violation of their trading rules.

In Conclusion

Choosing between Audacity Capital and Finotive Funding hinges on individual preferences and trading styles. Audacity Capital's strength lies in its established reputation and direct funding approach, tailored for traders seeking a straightforward entry with decent capital. Finotive Funding, however, shines for those who appreciate high leverage, diverse instrument offerings, and the lure of a higher profit split, despite its youthfulness in the market. Potential users must weigh the firm's trading constraints, customer service experience, and financial flexibility against their risk appetite and trading discipline. Ultimately, success with either firm requires a meshing of the trader's strategy with the firm's policy framework to cultivate a profitable and long-term partnership.