| Dimension | Aurafy | TraderSync |
|---|---|---|
| Best for | Futures + prop-firm traders | Multi-asset traders who want deep mistake tagging |
| Free tier | "Trial that never expires" — 1 account, 3 playbooks, last 30 days, no card | Free starter tier with a low monthly trade cap |
| Paid (monthly) | $49 (or $19 founder — first 50 only) | Pro Basic ~$30 / Pro Premium ~$50 / Pro Elite ~$80 |
| Paid (annual) | $490 | Discounted on yearly plans |
| Native screen recording | Yes (Aurafy Recorder) | No |
| Trade replay / chart playback | Bar-replay backtester (coming soon) | Trade replay with chart at entry/exit |
| Built-in simulator | No | Yes (on higher tiers) |
| Prop-firm rule tracking (trailing DD, consistency, DLL) | Built-in for Topstep, Apex 4.0, MFFU | No — generic multi-asset journal |
| Broker imports | Tradovate, NinjaTrader, Sierra Chart, Rithmic | ~80+ brokers across stocks/options/futures/FX/crypto |
| Asset classes | Futures only | Stocks, options, futures, forex, crypto |
| Mistake / setup tagging | Structured playbooks + tags | Industry-leading granular mistake/setup library |
| UI / UX | Modern (2025+) | Dense, dashboard-heavy |
| Track record | Newer (2025–2026) | Established ~2017 |
TraderSync has three paid tiers; Aurafy has one (plus the capped founder seat). Both have a free tier you can use without a card.
At $19/mo founder, Aurafy is cheaper than every TraderSync paid tier. At standard $49/mo Aurafy and TraderSync Pro Basic ($30) compete on different dimensions: TraderSync gives you broader broker imports + mistake tagging maturity; Aurafy gives you screen recording + prop-firm rule tracking. The right answer depends entirely on what you trade.
TraderSync does not offer screen recording in any tier, including Pro Elite. If you want to capture your screen during the session you pair it with Loom (~$15/mo) or OBS (free).
Aurafy ships Aurafy Recorder as part of the product. It captures your full screen while you trade and ties the recording to each trade automatically — entries, exits, the moment you sized up after a loss, the news pop that froze you. We wrote the long version in Trade Replay vs Screen Recording: chart replay (which TraderSync does) shows what the chart did; screen recording shows what you did. Eval failures and blown funded accounts are almost always behavioral, so we built the behavioral layer first.
If your review process is purely chart-based — re-watching your setup against the bars — TraderSync's built-in chart replay is solid and you don't need a separate Loom subscription. If your bleed is behavioral (hesitation, oversizing, revenge trades, news freezes), TraderSync alone won't surface it without a sidecar recorder.
TraderSync treats every account the same — it logs trades, runs analytics, tags mistakes. It does not know what "Apex 4.0 EOD trailing drawdown" is, or that MFFU Core requires 40% consistency, or that Topstep enforces a $1K/$2K/$3K daily loss limit by account size. You log the trades; you do the prop-firm math.
Aurafy was built for prop-firm traders specifically. It tracks:
You can replicate most of this in TraderSync with tags + a spreadsheet, but if you're at Topstep / Apex / MFFU, the prop-firm focus is what Aurafy is for. If you're trading your own equities account or a forex prop firm, this difference is irrelevant.
You can also use Aurafy's free prop-firm calculators standalone (no login) alongside TraderSync: the trailing-drawdown calculator and consistency calculator work with any journal.
TraderSync is straightforwardly ahead here, and the right answer if you trade more than just futures.
Hard line: if your trading day touches anything other than futures — equities, options, FX, crypto, or any combination — Aurafy is the wrong product today and TraderSync (or TradeZella) is the right one. We're honest about that.
This is where TraderSync has built genuine product depth over years. Its mistake / setup tagging system is widely considered the most granular in the journal market — you can tag every trade with multiple "mistakes made" (chased entry, moved stop, ignored plan, oversized, etc.) and every "setup taken," then slice your P&L by any combination. The analytics screens then surface which mistakes cost you the most money. This is the loop a lot of TraderSync power users live in.
Aurafy has structured playbooks (named strategies with rules) and tags, which cover the basic version of this, but we haven't matched TraderSync's tag-library depth or the analytics permutations on it. We made a deliberate trade: spend the product budget on screen recording + prop-firm rules first because that's what futures + prop-firm traders ask for. If your single highest priority is "I want to slice my mistakes 40 ways," TraderSync today does that better.
TraderSync's higher tiers include a trade simulator — practice mode against historical data. Aurafy's bar-replay backtester is in build but not shipped yet, so today TraderSync wins this dimension clearly.
Honest note: most futures + prop-firm traders we talk to don't use simulators as their main review tool — they use real evals (cheap on Apex / Topstep / MFFU). If you specifically want a simulator inside the journal, TraderSync's is real and Aurafy's isn't, yet.
You trade Interactive Brokers stocks/options and an MT5 forex account on the side. You want one journal that catches everything and helps you find which mistakes cost you the most.
Pick TraderSync. Broader broker imports + multi-asset support + the granular mistake-tag analytics are exactly what you need. Aurafy doesn't import IBKR equities or MT5 forex tickets, so it would simply not work for you.
You're working an Apex 4.0 100K PA, intraday plan, 8–15 trades a day on NQ. You keep hitting the lock then bleeding back into trailing-DD trouble. You can't tell if it's a setup problem or a behavioral one.
Pick Aurafy. The trailing-drawdown tracker tells you in-session how much intraday DD headroom you have before the kill point; the screen recording surfaces the actual behavioral pattern (entries after a 3-tick loss, sizing up on rev-trades). TraderSync would log the trades but neither track the SB+$100 lock math nor show you the on-screen behavior — you'd still be flying blind on the "why."
Yes — it has shipped continuously since ~2017 and remains one of the "big three" journals alongside TradeZella and Tradervue. The mistake-tagging and analytics screens have been refined over many releases.
Not natively. It treats every account the same. You'd track trailing drawdown and consistency manually with tags + a sidecar spreadsheet. Aurafy is built around those rules and surfaces them in-session.
No. Its trade replay shows your entries and exits on a chart, which is useful for chart-based review but doesn't capture what you were doing on your screen (size selection, hesitation, news pop, revenge trade). For session screen recording with TraderSync you'd pair it with Loom (~$15/mo) or OBS (free).
TraderSync's mistake-tagging system is the most granular in the journal market and has more analytics permutations than Aurafy's playbook-based system today. If your single biggest goal is "slice my mistakes every way possible," TraderSync wins.
If you trade futures and prop-firm rules apply, Aurafy. If you trade across asset classes, want broader broker auto-imports, or live in mistake-tag analytics, TraderSync Pro Premium. They're not the same product even at the same price.
Not directly. If you re-import your broker history (Tradovate / NinjaTrader / Sierra / Rithmic) into Aurafy you'll get the same trades from source. TraderSync tags and journal notes don't carry over.
TraderSync. Aurafy doesn't import FX broker tickets at all today. If you're on MT4/MT5, OANDA, or a forex prop firm, Aurafy is the wrong tool.
30-day window, 1 account, 3 playbooks. No card. If you're blowing evals or can't pinpoint the leak, the screen recording usually catches what tagging alone misses.
Start free at aurafy.devOr grab a $19/mo founder seat (first 50, locked for life) at the same link.