PropScorer Logo
PropScorer
Comparación cara a cara

DayTraders vs Legends Trading

Dos prop firms de futuros comparadas en precio, reglas del challenge, condiciones funded y confianza, usando datos en vivo de PropScorer.

DayTraders vs Legends Trading es una comparación de alta intención. Con los datos actuales de PropScorer, DayTraders es la mejor opción general, Legends Trading es la forma más barata de empezar y Legends Trading tiene el mejor ángulo de reglas para algunos traders.

Last updated: April 8, 2026, data refreshed daily

DayTraders logo
DayTraders
Est. 2023 · Rithmic
74
PropScore
Trustpilot 4.5 · Health 65
85% off with CIEORXAA
View full profile →
VS
Legends Trading logo
Legends Trading
Est. 2026 · Tradovate · Rithmic
69
PropScore
Trustpilot 3.7 · Health 48
35% off with LTG
View full profile →
DayTraders leads overall with a PropScore of 74/100. The starting-cost gap on the reference plan is $26.76. DayTraders wins on the broad data set, but category winners below show where Legends Trading still has an edge.
Best on price
🏆 Legends Trading

Legends Trading has the lower start cost on the reference 50K Apprentice.

Best for scaling
🏆 DayTraders

DayTraders allows more simultaneous accounts, which matters if you stack evaluations or funded accounts.

Best trust profile
🏆 DayTraders

Higher Health Score plus current review data gives DayTraders the edge on reliability.

Best payout entry
🏆 DayTraders

Lower minimum payout threshold makes DayTraders easier to monetize earlier.

Pricing, 50K-style plans

MetricDayTradersLegends Trading
50K plan price$34.11$38.35
Activation fee$130$99
Cost to start$164.11$137.35
Best promo85% off (CIEORXAA)35% off (LTG)

Challenge rules

MetricDayTradersLegends Trading
Profit target$3,000N/A
Max drawdown$2,500N/A
Drawdown typeTrailingEnd-of-Day
Min trading days01
One-day passNoNo
Max accounts155
PlatformsRithmicTradovate · Rithmic

Funded-account terms

MetricDayTradersLegends Trading
Profit split100%90%
Min payout$500N/A
Max early payout$2,000N/A
Daily loss limit ruleNoNo
Max total funded$4,500,000$750,000

Trust and reputation

MetricDayTradersLegends Trading
PropScore74/10069/100
Health Score65/10048/100
Trustpilot4.5/53.7/5
Founded20232026

Nuestra opinión

DayTraders is the better default choice on PropScorer right now because it offers the stronger overall mix of price, rules, trust, and trader value.

DayTraders is strongest for traders who care most about its pricing structure, multi-account scaling, and a current PropScore of 74/100.

Legends Trading is strongest for traders who care most about end-of-day drawdown structure, fewer funded-account restrictions, and a current PropScore of 69/100.

In plain English, pick DayTraders if you want the stronger overall package today. Pick the other one only if its specific rule advantage matches your exact trading style better than the raw overall score does.

Veredicto rápido

Best on price
Legends Trading
Best for scaling
DayTraders
Best trust profile
DayTraders
Mejor opción por defecto
DayTraders

Preguntas frecuentes

Which is cheaper, DayTraders or Legends Trading?

DayTraders starts at $34.11 plus a $130 activation fee, while Legends Trading starts at $38.35 plus a $99 activation fee.

Which firm has the higher PropScore?

DayTraders currently leads with a PropScore of 74/100.

Which firm is better for scaling multiple accounts?

DayTraders allows more accounts (15 vs 5).

¿Qué trader debería elegir cada firma?

Mejor opción general
DayTraders

Elige DayTraders si quieres la mejor mezcla global de puntuación, fiabilidad y valor para el trader.

Mejor opción barata
Legends Trading

Elige Legends Trading si tu prioridad es reducir al máximo el coste inicial.

Mejor ángulo de reglas
Legends Trading

Elige Legends Trading si la estructura de cuenta y las reglas funded se adaptan mejor a tu estilo.

DayTraders
85% off with CIEORXAA
View full profile →
Legends Trading
35% off with LTG
View full profile →

Más comparaciones

Sigue comparando alternativas cercanas si todavía dudas entre DayTraders, Legends Trading y firmas similares.