TickWise Funding Pricing and Plans at a Glance

Before we get into trader profiles, here’s the structural overview. Three plans, same logic — only the size and contract count scale. Notice that every plan keeps the same contract count from evaluation through funded trading, which is a deliberate design choice from TickWise. Same contracts in both phases means same trading power once you’re cleared: no nasty surprise where a firm cuts your size in half on day one of the live account.

Read this table carefully — the ratios stay consistent across the ladder. A profit target equal to 10% of the evaluation account, a contract count scaled to the buying power, and a funded allocation that mirrors what you proved you could do. That symmetry is the point of the real capital vs simulated funding debate: with TickWise, you graduate to actual allocated capital, not a phantom number, which makes the $190/$290/$490 ticket a value-for-price decision rather than a lottery ticket.

Two more things to flag before we move on. First, there are no monthly subscription fees: pay once, keep the evaluation, and trade. Second, the daily and trailing risk parameters scale predictably with the plan — they’re not random gotchas hidden three menus deep in the dashboard.

The Decision Tree: TickWise $190 Plan, $290 Plan, or $490 Plan?

This is the question most readers really came for. Forget the brochure language — answer three honest questions about yourself and a plan will fall out the bottom.

Question 1 — How often do you actually trade?

If you sit at the screen one or two evenings a week and you’re still building consistency, you want the $190 Starter. Three contracts is plenty for someone running 1–2 micros at a time, and the $1,500 trailing drawdown is forgiving enough to absorb the learning bumps. Putting $490 on the table when you only trade four sessions a month is over-paying for unused size.

Question 2 — Are you on micros, minis, or a mix?

Micros only? Stay on Starter. Minis with the occasional micro? The $290 Pro gives you 6 contracts, which is the sweet spot for a part-time futures trader who occasionally goes for two minis on a clean setup. Full minis with scalping size and you want the $490 Expert — 10 contracts unlocks legitimate position management, including pyramiding and partial scaling.

Question 3 — What’s your average risk per trade?

If you risk $50–$100 per trade, Starter’s $500 daily loss limit is fine. If you risk $150–$250 per trade, Pro keeps you comfortably above the loss-limit floor. If you risk $300+ per trade and want two stops of breathing room, only Expert offers enough cushion in the drawdown structure. This is also where the differences between how profit splits actually pay out become tangible — a bigger funded balance compounds the same percentage gain into a meaningfully bigger payout.

No Rules Once Funded — What « No Rules » Actually Means

Most prop firm marketing pages bury the funded-account rule sheet. TickWise leads with it: once you’re funded, there is no daily loss limit, no consistency rule, no minimum trading days, and no scaling plan you have to grind through. The single constraint is the account-level drawdown — don’t blow through it and you keep trading.

That’s not marketing fluff. Compare it to firms that impose a « 30% consistency rule » (your biggest day can’t exceed 30% of total profits) or a scaling plan that drips out contract increases over weeks. Those rules are designed to slow your payouts, not protect the firm. TickWise’s bet is the opposite: get profitable traders paid faster, keep them happy, retain them long-term. To understand why this works for the trader, you need to grasp the drawdown mechanics that affect each tier — they’re the only real constraint, and they’re transparent.

This is why the TickWise account sizes question matters less than the funded-account rule set. You can have a $200K account elsewhere and never see a payout because the rule sheet is rigged. You can have a $5K TickWise funded account and withdraw monthly because the rules are designed for traders to actually win.

CFDs vs Futures: Why a $490 Funded Account Beats a $5K CFD Deposit

If you’re comparing TickWise to depositing your own money into a CFD broker, you’re comparing two completely different cost-of-capital structures. Let’s break the math down honestly.

The framing flips when you look at the per-dollar leverage. The $490 buys you exposure to a regulated futures market with proper order-book execution, no overnight cost of carry, and only $490 of your own capital actually at risk. The $5,000 CFD deposit puts ten times more of your money in play, with worse execution, financing drag, and tax treatment that’s significantly less favourable in most EU jurisdictions. That’s why prop-firm futures accounts have become the dominant entry path for serious retail traders in 2026.

Cost of Failure: Break-Even Math Across the TickWise Tiers

Nobody enjoys discussing failure modes, but pretending they don’t exist is what marketing pages do. Here’s the honest breakdown: across $190, $290, and $490, what does it actually take to recoup the plan price once funded?

Read that chart carefully: the higher tier actually requires a smaller percentage return on your funded balance to pay back the entry fee. That’s a counter-intuitive but important point — Expert has the highest absolute price tag, but the lowest effective break-even percentage. If your edge is consistent, the Expert plan compounds capital faster relative to its sunk cost.

Where this gets interesting is the reset scenario. If you fail an evaluation, you start over with a new ticket. Across three attempts: $570 on Starter, $870 on Pro, $1,470 on Expert. That’s the true cost-of-acquisition for a funded seat, and it should factor into the plan you pick — if you’re an unproven trader, blowing through three Expert evals before you find your footing is genuinely painful. If you’re proven, the math swings the other way. When you’re ready, you can walk through the onboarding flow to lock in your plan and start the evaluation.

View Live Plan Details →

Fiscal Treatment for French & EU Traders (PFU vs BNC)

This section will not appear on most English-language prop firm pages, and it’s where many EU traders make a quiet but expensive mistake. The fiscal treatment of CFD trading gains versus prop firm payouts is not the same in France, and it matters for net take-home.

CFD gains in France are taxed at the 30% PFU (prélèvement forfaitaire unique) — a flat tax on financial gains. Straightforward but rarely optimal. Prop firm payouts are typically structured as service revenue and treated as BNC (bénéfices non commerciaux) for self-employed traders, or in some cases BIC for those operating through a micro-entreprise structure. The effective rate after social charges can land meaningfully below 30% PFU for many trader profiles, especially under the micro-BNC abatement régime for revenues under the threshold.

Couple this with the elimination of overnight financing charges on futures versus CFDs, and the combined picture (lower effective tax + lower cost of carry + better execution) shifts the long-term math heavily in favour of the prop-firm-futures path for European traders. It’s a quiet structural advantage of the TickWise futures prop firm cost model that no SERP competitor seems willing to walk through.

Quick FAQ on TickWise Plans