Independent Tech Provider Data & Comparisons
Match-Trader vs PropSuite
Every figure below is computed from the same normalised dataset, so the two vendors are measured on identical terms — including the ones they would rather you compared on a call.
Match-Trader vs PropSuite — the short answer
Match-Trader and PropSuite compared on deployment, integrations, risk tooling, SLA, security and contract terms. PropSuite quotes the faster route to live at ~3 days. Match-Trader names 16 integrations against 7 for PropSuite. On security, Match-Trader names ISO 27001 and PropSuite names none publicly. Across 11 directly comparable measures, Match-Trader leads on 3, PropSuite on 4 and 4 are tied; a further 21 rows carry no winner, either because the better answer depends on the firm you are running or because one side publishes nothing.
80/100 · Publishes almost everything
How much Match-Trader publishes — not how good it is
53/100 · Publishes the basics
How much PropSuite publishes — not how good it is
3
Measures where Match-Trader leads
4
Measures where PropSuite leads
4
Measures where they are level
21
Rows with no winner
Where Match-Trader wins
3- One-off setup feeNone
- Named integrations16
- Of those, shipped natively3
Where PropSuite wins
4- Risk engine capabilities3 capabilities
- Back-office capabilities4 capabilities
- Time to go live~3 days
- Security practices published3 practices
Side by side
33A value in green is more favourable to the buying firm on a measure with a defensible direction — a lower cost, a shorter lock-in, a published figure where the other side publishes none. Rows where the better choice depends on how you intend to run the firm, such as deployment model or hosting region, are left plain.
Cost
Publishes a price at all
A vendor that will not quote a number in public cannot be shortlisted on cost, only on a call.
Yes
Yes
Estimated first-year cost
Twelve normalised months on the cheapest recurring tier, plus any published setup fee. Excludes per-account and revenue-share components, which depend on your own volume.
$30,000
Not published
Cheapest recurring tier, per month
Quarterly and annual tiers are divided down so the two vendors are on the same basis.
$2,500
Not published
One-off setup fee
None
$2,749
Revenue share taken
Not taken or not published
50%
Costs the headline price excludes
Data feeds, liquidity, premium support tiers — the parts of the bill that arrive later.
Not published
Transaction fee of 5% of gross challenge sales, deducted before the 50/50 profit split, Account fee of $5 per challenge sale, deducted before the 50/50 profit split
Product
Services offered
Trading platform, Risk engine, CRM, Back office, Payments +4 more
Risk engine, CRM, Back office, Payments, KYC +2 more
Module categories covered
How much of the stack one contract covers. Fewer categories is not worse — a focused risk engine may beat a suite.
Trading Platform, CRM, Other, Liquidity
Other, CRM, Payments, Affiliate, Analytics
Risk engine capabilities
2 capabilities
3 capabilities
Drawdown types it can enforce
Trailing
Not published
Back-office capabilities
3 capabilities
4 capabilities
White label
Yes
Yes
Branding control
Logo, Full CSS/theme, White-labelled mobile apps
Logo, Colours, Custom domain +2 more
Integrations & reach
Platforms supported
Match-Trader, MT5, TradingView
MT4, cTrader, Match-Trader, TradeLocker, DXtrade
Trader terminals
Match-Trader, MT5, TradingView
MT4, cTrader, Match-Trader, TradeLocker +1 more
Asset classes
Forex
Not published
Named integrations
Counts what the vendor names publicly, whether it ships natively, is a supported partner, or is something you build against their API.
16
7
Of those, shipped natively
"Ships it" and "connects to it" are different purchases. Only the first needs no work from you.
3
0
API surface
REST, WebSocket
Not published
Running it
Time to go live
The vendor’s own figure. Where they quote a range, the upper bound is used.
~7 days
~3 days
Deployment models
SaaS, white label, self-hosted and on-premise are different products with different obligations — neither column wins by default.
SaaS, White Label, Self Hosted +1 more
SaaS, White Label
Public status page
The cheapest available check on whether a vendor is honest about its own incidents.
Yes
Not published
Support channels
Live chat, Email
Support hours
24/7
Business hours
Dedicated account manager
Yes
Yes
Migration support off an incumbent
Yes
Not published
Security & track record
Security certifications
Only named, checkable certifications are recorded. "Bank-grade security" is not SOC 2.
ISO 27001
Not published
Security practices published
2 practices
3 practices
Prop firms currently powered
A vendor-reported figure. Scale is evidence of durability, not of fit for your firm.
Not published
50
Named client firms
Only firms one side or the other names publicly. Confidential clients are excluded by design.
E8, Crypto Fund Trader, FundingPips +6 more
Not published
Headquarters
Warsaw, Poland
Dubai, United Arab Emirates
Prop Tech Pal verification
Verified
Verified
Contract & exit
Disclosure grade
Prop Tech Pal’s own measure of how much of the diligence surface the vendor publishes. It grades transparency, never product quality.
A (80/100)
C (53/100)
Money figures are normalised: twelve months on the cheapest recurring tier plus any published setup fee, excluding per-account and revenue-share components, which depend on your own volume. Prop Tech Pal does not sell placement in this comparison — how every figure here is computed is set out in full on the methodology page.
Ask on the first call
7Everything below is missing from the public record, so this comparison cannot settle it. A vendor not publishing something is not evidence of anything — it is a question you have to ask rather than look up.
Contract length and notice period
Match-Trader
Data ownership and export on exit
Match-Trader
Contract length and notice period
PropSuite
Data ownership and export on exit
PropSuite
Named security certifications
PropSuite
An uptime figure or status page
PropSuite
A public API surface
PropSuite
Frequently asked questions
6Only one of the two publishes enough to price. Match-Trader works out at roughly $30,000 in year one; PropSuite does not publish a comparable figure, so the honest answer is that you cannot compare them on cost without a quote.
Match-Trader quotes ~7 days to go live and PropSuite quotes ~3 days. Both are vendor-stated and both assume you arrive with your entity, banking, KYC provider and rule set already decided — in practice the vendor is rarely the long pole. On migration off an incumbent, Match-Trader offers support and PropSuite publishes none.
Match-Trader names 16 integrations, 3 of them native and supports Match-Trader, MT5, TradingView. PropSuite names 7 and supports MT4, cTrader, Match-Trader, TradeLocker, DXtrade. Check the type as well as the count: something that ships natively costs you nothing to turn on, a partner integration usually costs a second contract, and an API-only integration is engineering work you own.
Neither we nor anyone else can answer that from public data — what we can tell you is what each publishes. Match-Trader names ISO 27001 and publishes 2 security practices; PropSuite names none and publishes 3. Match-Trader runs a public status page, which is the cheapest available signal that a vendor reports its own incidents. Ask both for the current report, not the badge.
Match-Trader scores 80/100 on our disclosure grade (A — publishes almost everything) and PropSuite scores 53/100 (C). Match-Trader does not publish: contract length and notice period; data ownership and export on exit. PropSuite does not publish: contract length and notice period; data ownership and export on exit; named security certifications; an uptime figure or status page; a public api surface. The grade measures transparency, not quality — a strong vendor with a sales-led motion can score badly. Use the gaps as the agenda for the first call.
On the 11 directly comparable measures on this page, Match-Trader leads on 3 and PropSuite on 4, with 4 tied, and 21 carrying no winner at all. Which of those matters depends on the firm you are running: cost dominates before you have volume and stops dominating after, integration depth decides how much engineering you own, and contract terms decide how expensive it is to be wrong. Prop Tech Pal does not recommend one vendor over another and does not sell placement in this comparison.
Stay Ahead in Prop Firm Tech
Compare verified providers, track new integrations, and get vendor pricing updates as they land.
Resources
All information provided on this site is intended solely for educational and informational purposes related to prop firm technology and does not serve in any way as a specific procurement recommendation, business recommendation, investment opportunity analysis, or similar general recommendation.
Prop Tech Pal provides comparison, review, and educational resources only. We do not operate as a proprietary trading firm, technology vendor, broker, or custodian, do not offer simulated trading accounts or evaluations, and do not provide execution or custody of funds.
The information on this site is not directed at residents in any country or jurisdiction where such distribution or use would be contrary to local laws or regulations.
Prop Tech Pal does not act as a broker and does not accept any deposits.
Data, tools, and third-party references on this site are provided for informational purposes; availability and accuracy may depend on third-party sources outside our control.
© 2026 Prop Tech Pal. All rights reserved.