Verdict: OneFunded is a live, cheap evaluation shop with unusually clear rule tables — and a contract that says nothing about getting paid. Its terms run to 28 sections and use the word “payout” once, to point at a separate agreement you cannot read until you have passed and signed. Suits traders wanting a low-cost, no-deadline evaluation on published rules. Does not suit anyone who wants the profit split and withdrawal schedule binding before they pay.
Key terms, from the firm’s own published rules
- Access fee, $100,000: $499 Flash, $469 Core, $349 Value — terms and conditions, clause 14.1.
- Account sizes: $5,000 to $200,000 simulated ($5,000 to $100,000 on the Value plan).
- Profit targets: 10% single phase on Flash; 8% then 5% on Core; 8% then 6% on Value.
- Maximum drawdown: 6% on Flash, 10% on Core, 8% on Value — all fixed from the starting balance, none trailing.
- Daily loss limit: 4% on Flash and Value, 5% on Core.
- Minimum trading days: 1 on Flash below $100,000, rising to 5; 3 per phase on Core; 4 on Value.
- Consistency cap: best day limited to 50% of total simulated profit on every Flash size, 50% on Core at $100,000 and $200,000, 40% on Value at $100,000 (clause 13.15).
- Profit split and payout frequency: not stated anywhere in the terms. The homepage advertises “up to 90%” on a 14-day cycle; the contract does not.
Who you are actually contracting with
OneFunded is operated by Brynex Tech Limited, a UK private limited company. We checked the register directly: number 15918986, status Active, incorporated 27 August 2024, registered office 71–75 Shelton Street, Covent Garden, London WC2H 9JQ — a mass-registration address used by tens of thousands of companies. Last accounts were made up to 31 August 2025; the next confirmation statement is due 9 September 2026 (Companies House).
Its registered activities are 63990 — other information service activities not elsewhere classified, plus 74909 (professional and technical activities) and 85590 (other education). None is a financial classification. That is normal rather than sinister — the firm sells simulated evaluations, not financial services — but it means a UK company number tells a customer nothing about supervision.
There is one director, Anna Mohammad, Cypriot, resident in Cyprus, appointed on incorporation and holding a single appointment. Control changed hands in year one: the original controller, Oleh Sazanskyi, a Ukrainian national with 75%-plus of shares and votes and the right to appoint directors, ceased on 14 August 2025, with Mohammad notified as the 75%-plus shareholder the same day (PSC register). The chief executive named in the firm’s award publicity, Anastasiia Kaplunenko, is not an officer of the UK company.
A second entity, OneFunded Capital Ltd of Rodney Bay, Saint Lucia, appears in the footer as “responsible for the provision of certain services to specific clients who trade via the Metaquotes platform (MT5)”. Contrary to how this structure is usually summarised, the contract is not assigned offshore: clause 1.1 names Brynex Tech Limited as the Provider, and clause 27 puts the terms under “the laws of England and Wales” and disputes before “the courts of England and Wales”. Your counterparty for the challenge is the London company. Undisclosed is which entity signs the funded-trader agreement afterwards — the document containing your payout terms.
The payout section: one word in twenty-eight sections
This is the finding that matters. Across 28 numbered sections covering prohibited activities, assessment mechanics, fees, refunds, liability, termination and governing law, the word “payout” appears once — in the definition of Instant Funding, which says “all rules and conditions applicable to such account (including simulated loss limits, profit split, and payout terms) are set out in the separate service agreement”.
No profit-split percentage. No payout frequency. No minimum withdrawal. No processing window. No payment methods. The “up to 90%”, the 14-day cycle, the seven-day add-on and the one-hour payment speed all live on marketing pages — and clause 3.2 records that you have not relied on “any statements, assurances, promises, or warranties that are not explicitly detailed in the Contract”.
Nor is there audited payout data. The homepage claims “$1M+ Paid Out”, “25,000+ Traders” and “165+ Countries”; in June a thought-leadership piece marking its UF AWARDS Global 2026 win gave “$800,000+” and “160+ countries”. A consistent trajectory — but roughly $1m across a claimed 25,000 traders is about $40 a head, and none of it is independently verified. Chief executive Anastasiia Kaplunenko is quoted there: “This award belongs to every trader who chose OneFunded and came back.” The award is a commercial industry programme at iFX EXPO in Cyprus, not an audit of payments.
One live detail undercuts the rest. Checked on 21 August 2026, the homepage payout ticker renders as the literal string “Total paid to traders $” — a dollar sign with no number after it — under the caption “Paid to OneFunded traders in the last 30 days. Updated daily.” The one figure that would show the current run-rate is blank. It sits directly above the “$1M+ Paid Out” badge. This reads as a broken widget rather than concealment, but the effect is the same. As with the unverifiable trader counters we found elsewhere in this sector, a headline number no one can audit is not evidence.
What we could not verify: the profit split, the payout cycle, the minimum payout, whether the fee is refunded on a first withdrawal (third-party pages claim it is; the terms and refund policy do not), the contents of the funded-trader agreement, and which entity signs it. We found no independent, dated first-hand payout report — Trustpilot and Myfxbook both blocked retrieval, and almost every “OneFunded review” in search results is a syndicated press placement or an affiliate page carrying a discount code.
The rules that fail traders
Credit where due: drawdowns are static, not trailing, and the rule tables sit in the contract rather than a help centre. Four provisions still deserve attention.
The news rule runs the wrong way. Clause 13.14 sets a restricted period of five minutes either side of a high-impact release. You may hold through it, but you are “strictly prohibited from closing, modifying, or partially closing any positions during the restricted period”, or placing pending orders that would. Most firms stop you opening trades into news; this one stops you exiting them.
The consistency rule is a ratio, not a breach. Simulated Profit Ratio is best single UTC day divided by total simulated profit. Exceed the cap and clause 13.15.3 does not fail you — you simply cannot pass until further trading dilutes it. A trader who hits the target in one strong session must keep trading, at risk, purely to bring a percentage down.
Software and AI are prohibited. Clause 6.7.8 bars “employing software, artificial intelligence, ultra-high-speed capabilities, or mass data entry that could manipulate, exploit, or provide you with an unjust advantage”, alongside arbitrage, tick scalping, cross-account hedging and running “the same test trading strategy, alone or in combination with other Customers” — wording broad enough to cover a shared community strategy.
Approval is discretionary and final. Clause 13.11 lets the Provider “accept or refuse to recognize a participant as a OneFunded TRADER at its discretion”, with no obligation to give reasons; clause 13.12 makes that “final and not subject to appeal”; clause 13.13 rules out a refund. The refund policy, updated 25 June 2026, allows claims only within three working days and only where no trading has taken place. Discretionary approval plus an unpublished payout agreement is the gap we found in a firm whose contract contradicted its own marketing.
How the $100,000 evaluation compares
| $100,000, two phases | OneFunded Core | FTMO 2-Step | Alpha Capital Pro 8% |
|---|---|---|---|
| Phase 1 target | 8% ($8,000) | 10% ($10,000) | 8% |
| Phase 2 target | 5% ($5,000) | 5% ($5,000) | 5% |
| Daily loss limit | 5% ($5,000) | 5% ($5,000) | 4% |
| Maximum drawdown | 10% ($10,000), static | 10% (floor $90,000) | 8%, static |
| Minimum trading days | 3 per phase | 4 | 3 per phase |
| Consistency cap | 50% best day | 50% best day on 1-Step; none listed on 2-Step | 40% best day, on-demand payouts |
| Profit split in public terms | Not stated | Up to 90% | Up to 80% |
| Payout schedule in public terms | Not stated | Not stated on rules pages | Bi-weekly or on-demand |
| Minimum payout in public terms | Not stated | Not stated | $100 bi-weekly; 2% gross on-demand |
Sources: OneFunded clauses 13.5–13.7 and 13.15, FTMO trading objectives and how it works, Alpha Capital trading rules. On rules OneFunded is competitive and in places more generous; on disclosure it is the outlier. Both competitors publish a split, Alpha Capital publishes its withdrawal thresholds and cadence, and FTMO publishes a “100% refund of your initial fee with your first reward withdrawal” — the promise third-party write-ups routinely attribute to OneFunded, which does not make it in writing.
Regulatory posture
OneFunded is refreshingly direct here. Clause 28.1 states: “The Provider is not authorised or regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority (the ‘FCA’). The Services consist solely of simulated trading for educational purposes and do not constitute regulated activities under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000.” The FAQ adds that it is not a broker, holds no client funds and manages no client money, and that all trading is on demo accounts with virtual funds.
Take that at face value. Everything is simulated, before and after funding — the architecture in our review of a firm where every pre-brokerage stage was a simulation. There is no FSCS cover, no Ombudsman route and no client-money segregation, because none of those regimes covers a paid educational product. UK incorporation buys an English forum and a public register, nothing more. Note also the FCA’s wider tightening of retail distribution in CP26/23 and the UK CFD client split — and that a headline split is only as good as the document behind it, as where a 90% split turned out to be a paid add-on.
FAQ
Is OneFunded regulated? No. Its terms state plainly that Brynex Tech Limited is not authorised or regulated by the FCA and that simulated trading for education is not a regulated activity under FSMA 2000. Its SIC codes are information services, professional services and education. A Companies House registration is not a licence.
What is the profit split? Marketing says up to 90%, on a 14-day cycle or seven days as a paid add-on. None of it appears in the terms, which place profit split and payout terms in a separate agreement issued after you qualify. Treat 90% as advertised, not contractual.
How much does a challenge cost? Published fees run from $29 for a $5,000 Value account to $899 for a $200,000 Flash account; at $100,000 the routes are $499 Flash, $469 Core, $349 Value. Instant Funding costs $79, $139 and $249 for $5,000, $10,000 and $25,000. Fees are non-refundable once trading starts.
Is there a time limit? No. OneFunded markets unlimited evaluation time and the rule tables set no expiry, genuinely removing the deadline pressure that ends many challenges elsewhere. The offsetting constraint is the consistency ratio, which can force continued trading after you have hit the target.
Is the challenge fee refunded on the first payout? Several third-party pages say yes. OneFunded’s terms and refund policy do not mention it, and clause 13.13 rules out refunds on failure. Until it appears in the service agreement, treat the fee as spent.
This review is independent editorial analysis and is not financial, investment, or trading advice, and is not an endorsement or solicitation. The Industry Spread has no affiliate or referral relationship with the firms covered. Proprietary trading challenges carry a fee that is generally non-refundable, most participants do not reach a funded account, and funded capital is the firm’s capital, not the trader’s. Terms change frequently — always verify current rules directly with the firm before paying any fee.
Abdelaziz Fathi
Abdelaziz Fathi covers the intersection of forex/CFD brokerage, regulation, liquidity, fintech, and digital assets. With a B.A. in Finance and hands-on industry exposure, Aziz blends analytical rigor with clear storytelling to make complex market structure understandable for traders, brokers, and fintech professionals.
