This is the comparison the numbers people ask for. GT Funded advertises the single most aggressive figure in the entire on-chain prop firm category: a profit split of up to 92%, on accounts as large as $300K. Propr.xyz — the firm I run my own challenges and my own bot on — pays a flat 80%. On paper that looks like a 12-point loss for Propr. After months of funded trading, I can tell you the headline split is the least useful number for picking a prop firm. Here's the honest head-to-head.
The short answer
Chasing the maximum split and the biggest account, trading manually? GT Funded's numbers are unmatched — up to 92% and $300K is the most aggressive offer on the board, and on-chain settlement makes payouts verifiable. Want documented rules, published payout speed, and the right to run a bot or copy trading? Propr wins, clearly. GT Funded publishes far less about its drawdown mechanics, fees and automation policy; Propr documents all of it in a public rulebook and ships an official API. I trade where I can model my risk — that's Propr.
Two on-chain firms, two strategies
GT Funded competes on raw numbers. The up-to-92% split is the highest advertised in the on-chain category, and the $300K maximum account is bigger than anything Propr offers. Settlement happens on-chain, which means payouts are verifiable by design rather than by trust. That's a real, structural advantage over centralized firms. What it doesn't yet have is depth of documentation: the public track record is shorter than the category leaders', and the conditions to actually unlock that 92% top tier — plus the exact drawdown mechanics and the automation policy — take real digging to pin down. My full GT Funded review goes through what's published and what isn't.
Propr.xyz competes on completeness. It's a SwissBorg-backed firm built directly on Hyperliquid, with five account sizes (5K / 10K / 25K / 50K / 100K), published fees ($60–$999 for 1-Step, $50–$749 for 2-Step), and a rulebook (v1.0.2) that spells out every limit: 1-Step with a 10% target, 3% fixed daily loss and 6% static drawdown; 2-Step with 5% then 10% targets, 5% fixed daily loss and 8% trailing drawdown. Payouts are USDC on-chain — $50 minimum, processed within 24 hours, about 5 hours on average per the public transparency page. Bots and copy trading are explicitly allowed, the REST API with Python/JS SDKs is official, KYC only kicks in at funded, and the funded cap is $200K.
Head to head: the numbers
- Profit split: GT Funded — up to 92% (conditions to verify) · Propr — flat 80% from the first payout.
- Max account: GT Funded — $300K · Propr — $100K challenges, $200K funded cap.
- Settlement: both on-chain — verifiable payouts on each side.
- Payout terms: Propr — USDC on Hyperliquid, $50 minimum, under 24h (~5h average, published) · GT Funded — on-chain, but no equivalent published track record.
- Rules transparency: Propr — full public rulebook v1.0.2, every limit specified · GT Funded — thinner public documentation; verify before paying.
- Fees: Propr — $60/$110/$275/$495/$999 (1-Step), $50/$100/$250/$450/$749 (2-Step) · GT Funded — check current pricing on their site.
- Automation: Propr — public REST API, Python/JS SDKs, bots and copy trading explicitly allowed · GT Funded — less documented; no equivalent public API story.
- Backing & track record: Propr — SwissBorg-backed, public transparency page · GT Funded — shorter public history.
What GT Funded genuinely gets right
An honest comparison gives the challenger its due, and GT Funded earns three real points. First, the split ceiling: 92% is the highest advertised number in the on-chain category, period. If you're consistently profitable and you confirm the unlock conditions, more of every winning month stays in your pocket. Second, account size: $300K is half again Propr's funded cap — for a manual trader who scales, that ceiling matters. Third, on-chain settlement: like Propr, GT Funded puts payouts where you can verify them, which is exactly the property that makes this category worth trading in at all — I break down why in my decentralized prop firm ranking.
The caveats are the mirror image. The 92% is an up to — you need to confirm what tier you actually start at and what it takes to climb. The public track record is shorter than the leaders'. And the documentation gap is real: when I can't find the exact drawdown mechanics or the automation policy in a published rulebook, I can't model my risk of breaching — and modeling breach risk is most of what passing a challenge is.
The split math nobody does
Twelve points of split sounds enormous. Run the actual numbers and it shrinks fast. On a $1,000 payout, 92% pays $920 and 80% pays $800 — a $120 difference. Meaningful, but it only exists if you get paid. Your expected value as a challenge trader is roughly: probability of passing × probability of payout reliability × split. The split is the last and smallest multiplier. The first two are driven by things GT Funded under-documents and Propr publishes: exact drawdown rules you can model, fixed fees, a payout history with timestamps. I'd rather take 80% of a system I can verify than 92% of one I have to take on faith — and I've explained how the payout machinery works in my Propr payout guide.
Where Propr wins: you can automate it
The dividing line in this category isn't split — it's whether the firm treats automation as a feature or a gray area. Propr's rulebook explicitly allows bots and copy trading, and its public API with official SDKs is documented infrastructure. That's what lets Bubbles run a disciplined DCA strategy with hard guardrails on my accounts — non-custodial, inside the rules, with the 3% daily-loss math enforced by code instead of willpower. GT Funded has no equivalent public automation story today. If a bot is part of your plan, that settles the comparison on its own.
The verdict
Pick GT Funded if you trade manually, want the most aggressive split and account ceiling in the on-chain category, and are willing to verify the unlock conditions yourself before paying. The headline numbers are real differentiators — just size in gradually while the track record builds.
Pick Propr if you want every rule documented, payouts with a published track record, and the right to automate. It's the firm I run my own money and my own bot on, and my overall #1 in the best decentralized prop firms ranking. You can create your Propr.xyz account here — through that link you get 5% USDC cashback on your challenge fee, which takes a $50 2-Step down to $47.50 net.
FAQ — Propr vs GT Funded
What's the main difference between Propr and GT Funded?+
Documentation versus headline numbers. GT Funded advertises the highest profit split in the on-chain category (up to 92%) and the biggest accounts (up to $300K). Propr.xyz advertises less — a flat 80% — but documents everything: a public rulebook (v1.0.2), exact fees per account size, drawdown mechanics, a payout transparency page and an official REST API with SDKs.
Is GT Funded's 92% profit split real?+
It's an 'up to' figure — the highest advertised in the on-chain prop firm category. The conditions to unlock the top tier need to be verified on GT Funded's site before you pay a fee. Propr's 80% is flat: you get it from your first payout with nothing to unlock.
Can I run a trading bot on GT Funded?+
Unclear — and that's the problem. GT Funded publishes far less about API access and automation policy than Propr does. Propr's rulebook explicitly allows bots and copy trading, and its public REST API with Python/JS SDKs is official infrastructure — it's what Bubbles runs on.
Who pays out faster?+
Propr publishes its numbers: USDC on-chain via Hyperliquid, $50 minimum, processed within 24 hours and about 5 hours on average per its transparency page. GT Funded settles on-chain too, which is verifiable by design, but it doesn't publish an equivalent track record yet.
Is the 92% vs 80% split difference significant?+
Less than it looks. On a $1,000 payout the gap is $120. What dominates your expected value is the probability of passing the challenge and getting paid reliably — documented rules, drawdown mechanics you can model, and payout history matter far more than 12 percentage points of headline split.
Which should I pick in 2026?+
If you're a manual trader chasing the absolute highest split and biggest account size, GT Funded's numbers are the most aggressive on the board — verify the conditions and size in gradually. If you want documented rules, proven payout speed, and the ability to automate with a bot or copy trading, Propr is the clear pick.
Trade the documented one — on autopilot.
Bubbles runs a DCA bot with hard guardrails on your own Propr account through the official API — non-custodial, set up from Telegram in 3 minutes.
Launch BubblesNot on Propr yet? Create your Propr.xyz account with 5% USDC cashback on your challenge fee.
⚠️ Trading carries risk. Propr figures come from the official rulebook (v1.0.2, April 2026); GT Funded figures are its advertised headline terms as of June 2026 — the 92% split is an "up to" and conditions must be verified on its site before paying any fee. This article is informational, contains affiliate links, and is not investment advice. Only trade what you can afford to lose.