Verdict. EverFunded is a 2026-vintage Saint Lucia simulator business selling a market-standard evaluation at market-standard prices. Its rules are clear and its FAQ is unusually candid. The gap is between shop window and contract: the site sells a “profit split” and a “Reward Guarantee”, while clause 8.5 says there are no profits to split and clause 8.1 says nothing is guaranteed. Fine for a trader who reads clause 8 first and treats the fee as spent. Not for anyone who needs the payout to be enforceable.

Key terms, as EverFunded publishes them

• Fee, $100,000 2-Step: $450, struck through from $562.50 under a permanent 20% banner marked “already applied” (pricing panel, 2 September 2026).
• Account sizes: six, from $5,000 ($35) to $200,000 ($1,000).
• Profit split: 80% base; 90% via a paid add-on; 100% “planned, not yet live” (FAQ, July 2026).
• Profit target, 2-Step: 8% then 5%. 1-Step is 10%; Flash is 5%.
• Max daily / overall loss: 5% and 10% of the initial balance; static on 2-Step and 1-Step, a trailing 5% floor on Flash.
• Minimum trading days: 3, with no time limit on the evaluation.
• Payouts: first request 14 days after the first funded position, then every 14 days; 24-hour processing target (FAQ).
• Consistency rule: none in the challenge; 35% best-day cap once funded, 20% on Flash.

The sentence that undoes the headline number

The homepage runs a panel headed “Profit Split — Up to 90%”, with a bar reading “You 90% / Firm 10%” and the caption “You keep 90%.”

Clause 1.7 of the terms, dated 1 August 2026 and labelled “Final v1.0”, defines the payment that number refers to (Terms & Conditions): “‘Reward’ means a discretionary payment the Company may, in its sole discretion, elect to make to a Trader who has met the published Objectives of an Evaluation… A Reward is not a wage, fee-for-service, profit share, or entitlement of any kind.”

Clause 8.5 removes the ambiguity: “a Reward is not a share of real trading profits (there are none)… References to ‘splits’ or percentages describe how the Company may calculate a discretionary Reward, not an ownership right in any funds.” Clause 8.9 adds that the trader holds “no ownership, fiduciary, proprietary, or equity interest in any account, in the Virtual Funds, or in any of the Company’s assets, capital, or revenue,” and that any Reward comes “from the Company’s own general revenue.”

The marketing sells 90% of a profit the contract says does not exist, in an account the contract says is not the trader’s. This desk has seen that structure at Vanta Trading and OneFunded. What is unusual is that clause 22.1 then closes the door on the marketing: each party “has not relied on, and will have no right or remedy in respect of, any statement, representation, assurance, or warranty that is not expressly set out in these Terms.” The homepage is, by the firm’s own drafting, not part of the deal.

The 90% is also not the default. Every pricing card reads “Rewards 80% · 90% add-on”, and the hero paragraph says “keep 80% of the profit” — the same paid-upgrade construction found at Sway Funded and PineX Capital.

Payouts: published, claimed, and unverified

Requests go through the dashboard, with manual review of the first and of large or flagged ones, and payment in crypto (USDT/USDC via Confirmo) or by bank transfer. The how-it-works page promises “Paid on time, every time. Or we make it right,” and a homepage tile is headed “Reward Guarantee”.

Clause 8.1 says the opposite: “The Company makes no promise, guarantee, or warranty of any kind — express or implied — as to any Reward… whether or not you pass any Evaluation.” Clause 8.2 adds that passing creates no “right, entitlement, or legitimate expectation”. Clause 8.7 lets the firm hold a payout pending due diligence including “a live verification interview”, and says one “will not be released while any such review or investigation is outstanding”. Clause 8.4 makes bank transfer conditional on “where the Company makes it available”. Zenit Funding was drafted the same way.

What could not be verified. There is no independent payout evidence for EverFunded at all. Its Trustpilot profile was claimed in August 2026 and carries zero reviews; no first-hand payout report from a named trader could be found. The firm publishes no payout total, no payout count and no pass rate of its own, citing only “industry estimates” of “the rough 5–15% range”. Its “Avg. Reward $12,234” and “Highest Reward — Sophia Bennett, $200K account, +$140,354 (140.35%)” tiles are unsourced, and that percentage matches a $100,000 balance, not the $200,000 account named beside it.

The rules that fail traders

Liquidated damages of $25,000. Clause 11.5: for fraud, collusion or “serious or repeated” prohibited practices — a category that expressly includes a chargeback the firm considers unfounded — “you agree to pay the Company liquidated damages of USD 25,000 per breach,” set off against any Reward and recoverable “as a debt due”. The how-it-works page says twice that “You can never lose more than your challenge fee,” and the about page promises “no risk of losing your own capital beyond the one-time evaluation fee”. Clause 11.5 is a $25,000 liability unrelated to trading losses.

An open-ended prohibited-practice list. Clause 11.1 bans latency and feed arbitrage, tick scalping, gap trading around scheduled news, martingale and grid strategies “used abusively”, and any “artificial-intelligence, ultra-high-speed, mass-data-entry, or automated tools that place orders faster than a human could”. Clause 11.2 then lets the firm designate unlisted conduct as prohibited; the list is “illustrative, not exhaustive”. A purchased expert advisor is banned outright.

No refund, in any direction. Clause 5.4: “Failure does not entitle you to a refund.” Clause 9.1 and the Refund & Cancellation Policy: fees are final once credentials are issued. Clause 5.7: an unactivated evaluation lapses after 30 days and six months of inactivity lets the firm terminate without refund. Liability is capped at the fee paid, claims expire after 12 months, and disputes go to the courts of Saint Lucia only.

How the rules compare

Objective	EverFunded 2-Step	FundedNext Stellar 2-Step	FTMO Challenge 1-Step
Profit target	8% then 5%	8% then 5%	10% single phase
Max daily loss	5%	5%	3%
Max overall loss	10%	10%	10%
Drawdown basis	Static, from initial balance	Static, from initial balance	Trailing, reset daily at 00:00
Minimum trading days	3	5	4
Reward share stated	80% base, 90% paid add-on	80% base, 90% scale-up, 95% add-on	90% on the FTMO Account

Sources: EverFunded’s pricing panel, FundedNext’s CFD objectives and FTMO’s objectives, read 2 September 2026. On rules EverFunded copies FundedNext closely; on the split it is the only one of the three charging extra for 90%.

What the firm says for itself

EverFunded’s FAQ pages carry a named reviewer, Operations Manager Roei Caduri, and on the 100% tier the firm declines to make the promise its competitors make. Verbatim, from “What profit split do I earn?”, updated July 2026:

“A scaling programme designed to raise the share toward 100% is on the roadmap, but the criteria — how many payouts, over what period, at what profitability — are not settled. Inventing one to sound generous is exactly the kind of promise this industry breaks, so we would rather tell you where the framework stands.”

That is a better standard than most of this sector meets. It also makes the “Reward Guarantee” tile on the same site harder to explain, not easier.

Regulatory posture, and how old this firm is

The counterparty is EverFunded Ltd., which clause 1.1 describes as “an International Business Company organised under the laws of Saint Lucia (International Business Companies Act, Cap. 12.14), company registration number 2026-00562”, at Unit 1, La Place Creole, Rodney Bay Village, Gros Islet. Saint Lucia publishes no reliable public company search, so that number is what the company states, not a fact this desk could confirm — and it is self-dated to 2026.

Clause 2.4 is explicit and, to the firm’s credit, prominent: the company “is not authorised or supervised by any financial-services regulator”. Clause 1.6 defines Virtual Funds as balances that “have no monetary value, are not deposits, do not represent your money or any client money, and cannot be withdrawn”. No compensation scheme applies. Clause 13.2 excludes residents of 46 named countries, several of them large retail trading markets: Kenya, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Vietnam, Botswana and Trinidad and Tobago.

On age, the independent record is thin but consistent. The homepage says “Modern Prop Trading — Since 2026”. WHOIS shows everfunded.com created on 19 June 2021 at GoDaddy behind Domains By Proxy privacy, the record last updated on 4 June 2026 — three months before this review. The Internet Archive holds 42 captures of the domain, the first on 7 August 2018, and every one is a redirect or an error; there is no successful capture of the prop-firm site at all, the most recent of any kind a 301 from 21 February 2025.

FAQ

Is EverFunded regulated? No. Clause 2.4 states plainly that the company is not authorised or supervised by any financial-services regulator and that the service is not a regulated financial activity. It is an unlicensed Saint Lucia IBC selling access to a simulator, with no client-money protection and no compensation scheme.

Is the 90% profit split real? The 90% is a paid add-on; the base share is 80%. More to the point, clause 8.5 says a Reward “is not a share of real trading profits (there are none)” and clause 8.1 promises no Reward at all. It notes the firm’s “established practice” is to pay, but says that practice “does not create a contractual entitlement”.

Can I lose more than the challenge fee? The marketing says no. The contract says yes: clause 11.5 provides for liquidated damages of USD 25,000 per breach in cases of fraud, collusion or serious or repeated prohibited practices, a category that includes a chargeback the firm judges unfounded, recoverable as a debt.

How fast are payouts? The published target is 24 hours from an approved request, the first available 14 days after the first funded position and every 14 days after that. Clause 8.7 lets the firm hold any payout while a verification, source-of-funds or integrity review is open, and no independent report exists to test the target against.

Are there independent reviews of EverFunded? Not yet. The Trustpilot profile was claimed in August 2026 and carries no reviews, and no first-hand payout account from a named trader could be found. Until one exists, every payout claim on the site rests on the firm’s own word.

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.