Last updated: 2 October 2026 Where in the US do people search for prop firms? Google Trends interest by state for 13 prop firm search terms, US, over the past 12 months (retrieved 2 October 2026). Google Trends shows each state’s share of searches, scaled 0–100 for each term. These are not search volumes.
Florida comes top for 9 of the 13 search terms once Wyoming and Kansas are left out, including “topstep”, “tradeify”, “myfundedfutures” and “take profit trader”. Florida is in the top 5 for all 13 terms, Georgia for 9, Nevada for 8 and California for 6.
Topstep is searched more than the other four futures firms in all 51 states with data (including DC). In a five-way Google Trends comparison with Apex Trader Funding, Tradeify, MyFundedFutures and Take Profit Trader, Topstep’s median share is 60%, against 13% for Apex.
FTMO leads its comparison group in 46 states. FundedNext leads in Maine and ties FTMO in Louisiana. 3 states had too few searches to report.
Wyoming scores 100 on 8 of 13 terms, even very different brands, and Kansas is in the top 3 for 7 of them. That suggests where Google places the searches, such as VPN traffic or default locations, rather than where traders live. So we rank the other states without them. This is our reading; Google doesn’t publish an explanation.
Map: “prop firm” interest by state
11
6
10
11
19
11
7
8
15
17
11
15
21
12
19
14
26
100*
9
10
12
12
15
20
15
23
20
20
12
13
11
9
19
31
21
20
15
32*
11
15
17
15
22
17
20
14
16
24
20
21
29
Shade relative to the highest state, leaving out WY and KS (* grey, see methodology). – = too few searches for Google Trends to report.
Map: “topstep” interest by state
37
17
20
29
31
28
14
34
37
46
28
31
44
44
36
25
57
59*
25
25
31
27
29
54
41
54
35
35
39
33
26
20
39
42
38
48
39
35*
34
36
42
38
29
33
38
34
36
67
62
60
100
Shade relative to the highest state, leaving out WY and KS (* grey, see methodology). – = too few searches for Google Trends to report.
Top 5 states for each term (leaving out WY and KS)
| Search term | Top 5 states (Google Trends 0–100) | States with data | WY / KS |
|---|---|---|---|
| prop firm | Maryland 31, Florida 29, Nevada 26, Georgia 24, California 23 | 51 | 100 / 32 |
| futures prop firm | District of Columbia 41, Florida 32, Utah 30, Nevada 30, Maryland 30 | 38 | 100 / 23 |
| funded trader | Florida 37, Georgia 33, District of Columbia 33, New Jersey 30, California 30 | 46 | 100 / 33 |
| topstep | Florida 100, Georgia 67, Hawaii 62, Texas 60, Nevada 57 | 51 | 59 / 35 |
| apex trader funding | Florida 65, Georgia 45, Nevada 44, Hawaii 38, Maryland 37 | 49 | 100 / 29 |
| tradeify | Florida 100, Nevada 89, Hawaii 84, Georgia 81, Texas 69 | 50 | 81 / 68 |
| myfundedfutures | Florida 100, Nevada 83, Hawaii 83, Georgia 70, Maryland 66 | 42 | 75 / 45 |
| take profit trader | Florida 100, Georgia 75, Arizona 71, Nevada 61, Texas 58 | 49 | 65 / 60 |
| ftmo | Florida 30, New York 23, Nevada 23, Utah 22, District of Columbia 22 | 50 | 100 / 27 |
| fundednext | Florida 32, Georgia 24, New York 24, California 23, District of Columbia 22 | 45 | 100 / 31 |
| the5ers | District of Columbia 18, Mississippi 16, Utah 14, Florida 12, California 12 | 34 | 100 / 24 |
| fundingpips | Florida 10, Virginia 10, Massachusetts 10, California 10, Washington 8 | 32 | 100 / 14 |
| goat funded trader | Georgia 83, Florida 66, New Jersey 66, California 50, Michigan 50 | 28 | – / 100 |
Head-to-head: futures firms
Share of searches among the five terms in each state (Google Trends comparison). Topstep leads in every state with data, with a median share of 60%. Full per-state shares are in the CSV.
| State | topstep | apex trader funding | tradeify | myfundedfutures | take profit trader |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alaska | 77 | 9 | 14 | – | – |
| Alabama | 60 | 13 | 15 | 3 | 9 |
| Arkansas | 64 | 10 | 11 | 5 | 10 |
| Arizona | 57 | 12 | 13 | 5 | 13 |
| California | 60 | 13 | 14 | 4 | 9 |
| Colorado | 56 | 14 | 14 | 3 | 13 |
| Connecticut | 63 | 11 | 14 | 2 | 10 |
| District of Columbia | 51 | 22 | 13 | 5 | 9 |
| Delaware | 61 | 14 | 14 | – | 11 |
| Florida | 63 | 13 | 10 | 4 | 10 |
| Georgia | 61 | 12 | 12 | 4 | 11 |
| Hawaii | 60 | 12 | 15 | 4 | 9 |
| Iowa | 58 | 13 | 15 | 2 | 12 |
| Idaho | 57 | 14 | 15 | 3 | 11 |
| Illinois | 62 | 12 | 13 | 4 | 9 |
| Indiana | 60 | 13 | 15 | 3 | 9 |
| Kansas | 52 | 13 | 17 | 4 | 14 |
| Kentucky | 57 | 13 | 14 | 3 | 13 |
| Louisiana | 57 | 13 | 12 | 6 | 12 |
| Massachusetts | 57 | 15 | 14 | 4 | 10 |
| Maryland | 56 | 15 | 13 | 5 | 11 |
| Maine | 54 | 8 | 18 | 6 | 14 |
| Michigan | 58 | 13 | 15 | 4 | 10 |
| Minnesota | 60 | 13 | 13 | 4 | 10 |
| Missouri | 61 | 13 | 13 | 2 | 11 |
| Mississippi | 60 | 11 | 14 | 4 | 11 |
| Montana | 65 | 15 | 20 | – | – |
| North Carolina | 60 | 11 | 13 | 4 | 12 |
| North Dakota | 58 | 14 | 18 | – | 10 |
| Nebraska | 62 | 11 | 13 | 3 | 11 |
| New Hampshire | 69 | 11 | 12 | – | 8 |
| New Jersey | 59 | 13 | 14 | 4 | 10 |
| New Mexico | 65 | 10 | 11 | 3 | 11 |
| Nevada | 56 | 14 | 16 | 5 | 9 |
| New York | 60 | 13 | 13 | 4 | 10 |
| Ohio | 57 | 13 | 15 | 4 | 11 |
| Oklahoma | 58 | 13 | 13 | 5 | 11 |
| Oregon | 54 | 16 | 16 | 5 | 9 |
| Pennsylvania | 56 | 14 | 14 | 5 | 11 |
| Rhode Island | 73 | 10 | 8 | – | 9 |
| South Carolina | 60 | 11 | 14 | 4 | 11 |
| South Dakota | 67 | 10 | 9 | – | 14 |
| Tennessee | 60 | 12 | 14 | 3 | 11 |
| Texas | 62 | 11 | 13 | 4 | 10 |
| Utah | 53 | 15 | 16 | 5 | 11 |
| Virginia | 58 | 12 | 15 | 4 | 11 |
| Vermont | 83 | – | – | – | 17 |
| Washington | 53 | 16 | 15 | 5 | 11 |
| Wisconsin | 62 | 12 | 13 | 4 | 9 |
| West Virginia | 60 | 8 | 13 | 6 | 13 |
| Wyoming | 51 | 26 | 12 | 3 | 8 |
Head-to-head: CFD/forex firms
| State | ftmo | fundednext | the5ers | fundingpips | goat funded trader |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alabama | 57 | 32 | 5 | 6 | – |
| Arkansas | 51 | 49 | – | – | – |
| Arizona | 47 | 34 | 7 | 6 | 6 |
| California | 46 | 32 | 9 | 8 | 5 |
| Colorado | 52 | 27 | 7 | 8 | 6 |
| Connecticut | 52 | 28 | 8 | 7 | 5 |
| District of Columbia | 64 | 36 | – | – | – |
| Delaware | 63 | 37 | – | – | – |
| Florida | 51 | 31 | 7 | 7 | 4 |
| Georgia | 49 | 31 | 6 | 7 | 7 |
| Hawaii | 56 | 44 | – | – | – |
| Iowa | 60 | 40 | – | – | – |
| Idaho | 68 | 32 | – | – | – |
| Illinois | 48 | 31 | 7 | 9 | 5 |
| Indiana | 51 | 30 | 6 | 7 | 6 |
| Kansas | 47 | 28 | 11 | 8 | 6 |
| Kentucky | 49 | 23 | 17 | 11 | – |
| Louisiana | 39 | 39 | 8 | 9 | 5 |
| Massachusetts | 49 | 29 | 9 | 9 | 4 |
| Maryland | 51 | 30 | 7 | 8 | 4 |
| Maine | 44 | 56 | – | – | – |
| Michigan | 47 | 30 | 7 | 8 | 8 |
| Minnesota | 48 | 31 | 6 | 11 | 4 |
| Missouri | 52 | 31 | 11 | 6 | – |
| Mississippi | 49 | 36 | 15 | – | – |
| North Carolina | 50 | 31 | 7 | 7 | 5 |
| North Dakota | 100 | – | – | – | – |
| Nebraska | 58 | 42 | – | – | – |
| New Hampshire | 56 | 44 | – | – | – |
| New Jersey | 52 | 30 | 6 | 6 | 6 |
| New Mexico | 70 | 30 | – | – | – |
| Nevada | 55 | 28 | 9 | 4 | 4 |
| New York | 51 | 31 | 7 | 7 | 4 |
| Ohio | 47 | 33 | 8 | 8 | 4 |
| Oklahoma | 47 | 39 | 14 | – | – |
| Oregon | 45 | 31 | 9 | 10 | 5 |
| Pennsylvania | 50 | 32 | 7 | 7 | 4 |
| Rhode Island | 72 | 28 | – | – | – |
| South Carolina | 50 | 31 | 8 | 5 | 6 |
| Tennessee | 51 | 30 | 6 | 7 | 6 |
| Texas | 48 | 34 | 7 | 6 | 5 |
| Utah | 53 | 27 | 12 | 5 | 3 |
| Virginia | 47 | 30 | 8 | 10 | 5 |
| Vermont | 100 | – | – | – | – |
| Washington | 50 | 31 | 7 | 9 | 3 |
| Wisconsin | 50 | 31 | 7 | 7 | 5 |
| West Virginia | 65 | 35 | – | – | – |
| Wyoming | 45 | 25 | 14 | 16 | – |
Methodology
We pulled Google Trends “interest by subregion” through the DataForSEO Google Trends API (13 single-term requests and 2 five-term comparisons; US, web search, past 12 months; retrieved 2026-10-02 11:20 UTC). Each single-term value is Google’s 0–100 index: 100 is the state where the term makes up the largest share of all searches. In the comparisons, each state’s numbers are the five terms’ shares of searches. A blank means Google had too little data. “funded trader” is also a generic phrase, so it may pick up searches that aren’t about any firm. Google Trends samples its data, so values can shift a few points between pulls. You can recheck any term: for example, the futures comparison on Google Trends.
Related: Prop Firm Popularity Index, State of Prop Firms: October 2026, US availability.
How to cite this
Prop Data Lab, “Prop Firm Search Interest by State”, updated 2 October 2026, https://propdatalab.com/prop-firm-search-interest-by-state/
The table and the CSV are free to reuse under CC BY 4.0: copy, chart or republish them, commercial use included, as long as you link back to this page.
Common questions
Which US state searches for prop firms the most?
On Google Trends (past 12 months, retrieved 2 October 2026), Wyoming scores 100 for 'prop firm', but it scores 100 on most terms, which points to a data artifact. Leaving out Wyoming and Kansas, the top states for 'prop firm' are Maryland, Florida, Nevada.
Is Topstep or Apex searched more in the US?
In a Google Trends comparison, Topstep is searched more than Apex Trader Funding, Tradeify, MyFundedFutures and Take Profit Trader in every state with data. Topstep's median state share is 60%, against 13% for Apex.
Does this show how many people search?
No. Google Trends shows relative interest (a share of all searches, scaled 0-100), not absolute search volume.