Ranked & Reviewed · 10 services
Best Crypto Trading Tools
Ten crypto trading bots, terminals and Telegram bots ranked on published pricing, the exchange access they demand, venue coverage, security controls and who runs them. Checked November 2026.
At a glance
| # | Service | Score | Best for |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |  Bitsgap | 8.8 | Refusing API keys that can withdraw, across 16 named exchanges |
| 2 |  3Commas | 8.4 | Published pricing and non-custodial, trade-only API keys |
| 3 |  Altrady | 8.4 | API-only bots across 19 named exchanges from a named Dutch firm |
| 4 |  Cryptohopper | 8.4 | No-withdrawal custody with plan prices and refund terms in full |
| 5 |  Coinrule | 8.0 | Trade-only API keys written into its terms, with a named UK operator |
| 6 |  TradingView | 7.8 | Charting with full plan pricing and refund rules, no custody |
| 7 |  Gunbot | 7.6 | Self-hosted bot that keeps exchange keys on your own machine |
| 8 |  BonkBot | 6.8 | Documented key security and a named Swiss operator on Solana |
| 9 |  Trojan | 5.2 | Solana trading in Telegram with a stated 1% fee and named operator |
| 10 |  Banana Gun | 5.0 | A published percentage fee across eight chains |
Best Crypto Trading Tools, ranked by score
Bitsgap scores 8.8 in crypto trading tools on desk research of its public pages: it rejects withdrawal-enabled keys, names its exchanges and its Dubai operator, and publishes every tier. No security audit is named, which keeps security at 8.
Pros
- Custody & API safety (10): rejects any API key with withdrawal access enabled
- Security posture (8): RSA-2048 key encryption in the browser, IP locking and one-time-code login
- Venue coverage (9): 16 exchanges named, from Binance and Kraken to Hyperliquid
- Pricing transparency (9): free plan plus three tiers published monthly and annually
- Entity transparency (8): Bitsgap Software Solutions FZCO with registration and licence numbers
Cons
- No security audit, certification or bug bounty is named
- The app's seller is a different company, Bitsgap Holding OÜ, with no stated link
- The terms say Bitsgap holds no UAE virtual asset or financial services licence
- Monthly prices run $29 to $149; the lower quoted figures need annual billing
3Commas scores 8.4 in crypto trading tools on desk research of its public pages: prices are published, the operator is named and keys are meant to be trade-only. Its auditors are unnamed and it confirmed a 2022 API key disclosure, which keeps security at 8.
Pros
- Pricing (9): three tiers published as figures, $20 to $140 a month or $15 to $105 billed annually
- Custody & API safety (9): non-custodial, with trade-only, withdrawal-disabled keys in the setup guide
- Security posture (8): isolated Sign Center for keys, IP allowlisting and a published incident notice
- Entity transparency (8): 3C Trade Tech Ltd., registration number and BVI address on the about page
- Venue coverage (8): 14 exchange integrations named on the security page
Cons
- Third-party auditors are mentioned but not named, and no report or bug bounty is linked
- Users' API keys, secrets and passphrases were disclosed by a third party in December 2022
- Exchange lists disagree: nine per plan on the pricing page, 14 on the security page
- No free plan; the cheapest tier is spot-only on one exchange
Altrady scores 8.4 in crypto trading tools on desk research of its public pages: API-only access without withdrawal rights, 19 named exchanges and a registered Dutch operator. Security is held at 7 because the key-encryption method is unnamed and no audit is published, and its refund terms contradict the pricing page.
Pros
- Custody & API safety (9): API-only, funds stay on the exchange, withdrawal permissions never requested
- Venue coverage (9): 19 exchanges named, each marked spot, futures or both
- Entity transparency (8): Altrady B.V., Dutch company no. 77469607, The Hague, named in the terms
- Pricing transparency (9): three euro tiers and two add-ons published, monthly and yearly
- Security posture (7): IP whitelisting, two-factor login and read-only keys stated
Cons
- Security posture (7): no audit, certification or bug bounty is published, and the encryption method is not named
- Refunds: a 30-day guarantee on the pricing page, but the terms say refunds are never offered
- Exchange access is tiered: 3 exchanges on Basic, 5 on Essential, unlimited only on Premium
- The terms page that names the operator carries no date
Cryptohopper scores 8.4 in trading tools. It never asks for withdrawal rights, publishes every plan price with a 14-day exit, discloses four security controls and names a registered Dutch company. It is spot-only on 11 exchanges and does not say how stored API keys are protected. Desk research checked November 6, 2026.
Pros
- Custody 9: funds stay on the exchange and Cryptohopper says it never asks for withdrawal rights
- Pricing 9: $29, $69 and $129 a month, annual rates, plan limits and VAT treatment published
- Security 9: 2FA, IP whitelisting, a published bug bounty and a disclosed 2022 incident
- Entity 8: Cryptohopper B.V., KvK 70270481, Edam, under Dutch law
Cons
- No statement on how stored API keys are encrypted, and no independent audit
- A June 2022 SQL-injection incident exposed user emails and encrypted passwords (API keys not obtained, per notice)
- Coverage 7: 11 named exchanges, spot only; futures are not offered
- Liability capped at $1,000 or six months of fees, whichever is lower
Coinrule scores 8.0 in trading tools. Its terms forbid withdrawal permissions on connected keys and name a registered UK company, and it names its key encryption. Its own pages disagree on the Pro price, the 0.02% volume fee and refunds. Desk research checked November 6, 2026.
Pros
- Custody 9: terms say users must not grant withdrawal or transfer permissions on keys
- Entity 8: Coinrule Limited, England and Wales no. 11265766, active at Companies House
- Security 8: per-user AES-256 key encryption, IP-restricted keys and account 2FA documented
- Coverage 8: 13 crypto exchanges, Binance and KuCoin futures, and five stock brokers named
Cons
- Pricing 7: Pro is $449.99 on the homepage but $749.00 on the pricing page
- Plan cards show a 0.02% volume fee, while the terms say only subscription fees apply
- Refund window is 14 days on the homepage but 7 days in the terms
- Security 8: no independent security audit, penetration test or bug bounty is published
- Not available in the EU or EEA; on-chain trading is still a closed beta
TradingView scores 7.8 in trading tools. It publishes every plan price and its refund rules, holds no funds, and shows SOC 2 compliance, a paid bug bounty and required 2FA for webhooks. Only seven crypto exchanges can be traded from its charts, and no SOC 2 report is public. Desk research checked November 6, 2026.
Pros
- Pricing 9: four paid tiers, annual savings, plan limits and separately sold data fees published
- Refunds within 14 days of payment and cancellation rules stated in the terms
- Custody 8: interface only; funds stay with the connected broker or exchange
- Security 8: SOC 2 and GDPR compliance shown, bug bounty up to $5,000, 2FA required for webhooks
Cons
- Coverage 7: only 7 of the 16 listed brokers are crypto exchanges
- No SOC 2 report or scope summary could be opened; key-token storage not described
- Entity 7: no state of incorporation or registration number stated, which the 8 requires
- No no-withdrawal statement covering every broker connection
- Monthly-billing prices are not shown directly on the pricing page
Gunbot scores 7.6 in trading tools. Its trading core runs on your own hardware, keeps API keys local and never needs withdrawal access, across 20+ named spot and futures venues. The publisher gives no address, jurisdiction or terms, and the new subscription has no stated refund policy. Desk research checked November 6, 2026.
Pros
- Custody 10: API credentials stay on your machine; withdrawal access is never needed
- Coverage 9: spot and futures on 20+ named exchanges, plus DeFi and MetaTrader/NinjaTrader
- Security 7: self-hosted core, so no bot provider holds your exchange secrets
- Single Unlimited plan with all features and no per-trade software charge
Cons
- Entity 4: publisher named, but no address, jurisdiction, registration number or terms page
- Pricing 8: no trial or refund policy stated; monthly in euros, prepaid in dollars
- Lifetime licenses are no longer sold to new buyers; the earlier one-time prices no longer apply
- Security 7: you secure the machine that runs the bot; no 2FA, bug bounty or audit published
BonkBot scores 6.8 in crypto trading tools on desk research of its terms and documentation: a 1% published fee, documented key-management hardware and 2FA, and a named, registered Swiss operator. It trades Solana only, which keeps venue coverage at 3.
Pros
- Entity transparency (8): Triple Spice AG, Zug, confirmed active in the Swiss UID register
- Pricing transparency (8): 1% on each successful swap; failed swaps not charged
- Custody (8): terms say the company is not a custodian; staff cannot view or extract keys, per docs
- Security posture (7): TPM 2.0 servers, secure boot, RAM encryption and 2FA on withdrawals and key exports
Cons
- Venue coverage (3): Solana only
- Security posture (7): no external audit, penetration test or bug bounty is named
- The signing key is held on BonkBot's servers, so the bot wallet is a hot wallet
- The fee can be changed at the company's discretion once a new schedule is published
Trojan scores 5.2 in trading tools. It now states a 1% fee per successful trade and names Odyssia Labs under Hong Kong law. Its bot terms allow an encrypted copy of wallet keys on third-party servers, and the terms say fees are not shown before a trade. Desk research checked November 6, 2026.
Pros
- Pricing 7: 1% per successful trade stated, with a 10% referral discount and rank-based cashback
- Entity 5: terms name Odyssia Labs, Hong Kong law and Hong Kong courts or HKIAC arbitration
- Private keys can be exported from the bot to a wallet you control
- Secure Action Password required for key exports and withdrawals; MEV protection optional
Cons
- Bot terms allow an encrypted copy of wallet keys on unnamed third-party servers
- Terms say users are not told the fee before a transaction
- Security 4: credential security disclaimed, no audit, services not licensed by any regulator
- Coverage 4: Solana tokens plus Hyperliquid perpetuals on the Terminal only
- No legal form, address, registration number or named people for Odyssia Labs
Banana Gun scores 5.0 in crypto trading tools on desk research of its public pages. Its 0.5% and 1% fees are published and it names eight chains, but no operator is identified, key storage is undocumented and user wallets were drained in 2024.
Pros
- Pricing transparency (8): 0.5% on manual trades, 1% on snipes, successful trades only, no subscription
- Venue coverage (6): eight chains named, from Ethereum and Solana to HyperEVM and MegaETH
- Custody (6): terms describe user-controlled wallets with the private key shown to the user once
- Security PIN on Banana Pro with an 8-hour delay on changes and a 7-day reset
Cons
- Entity transparency (2): the terms name no company, address or team
- Security posture (3): no audit published and no statement on how the bot stores keys
- About $3 million left user wallets in a September 2024 oracle exploit, per QuillAudits
- Fees may change without notice, and Banana Pro and Predict carry no stated fee
Best crypto trading tools by use case
- You want a hosted bot that cannot be given withdrawal rights: Bitsgap. It is the only hosted tool here whose security page says it rejects any API key with withdrawal access enabled, which is why it holds the category's only hosted 10 for custody and API safety. Read the Bitsgap review.
- You would rather no company held your exchange keys at all: Gunbot. Its trading core runs on your own computer or server and keeps API credentials there (custody 10). The trade-off is the weakest operator disclosure among the exchange bots: a publisher name with no address, jurisdiction or terms page (entity 4).
- You want the most disclosed security controls: Cryptohopper scores 9 for security posture, the highest mark in the category, for IP whitelisting, 2FA, a published bug bounty and a public notice of its June 2022 incident. It does not say how stored API keys are encrypted, and it is spot-only on 11 exchanges (venue 7).
- You want many named exchanges from a registered company: Altrady names 19 exchanges (venue 9) and is operated by Altrady B.V., Dutch company no. 77469607 (entity 8). Basic and Essential plans connect only 3 and 5 of them.
- You chart first and trade second: TradingView is a charting platform, not a bot. It holds no funds, publishes every plan price and its refund rule (pricing 9), but only seven of its 16 listed brokers are crypto exchanges (venue 7).
- You trade Solana tokens from Telegram: BonkBot, at 6.8, has the strongest record of the three on-chain bots: a 1% fee per successful swap, documented key-management hardware, and a named Swiss operator, Triple Spice AG (entity 8). It trades Solana only (venue 3), and the signing key sits on its servers.
How the ranking works
Ten tools are ranked: hosted exchange bots (Bitsgap, 3Commas, Altrady, Cryptohopper, Coinrule), a self-hosted bot (Gunbot), a charting platform with broker trading (TradingView) and three on-chain Telegram bots (BonkBot, Trojan, Banana Gun). Each is marked 0 to 10 on five criteria from its own public pages, terms and documentation. The basis is desk research checked on November 6, 2026: no account was funded, no key was connected and no trade was placed.
- Pricing transparency: subscription tiers or a percentage fee published as figures, with refund terms that agree across the tool's own pages. Contradictions cost marks: Coinrule is at 7 because its homepage and pricing page give different Pro prices.
- Custody & API safety: whether the tool takes custody and whether keys can be kept from withdrawing. A server-held, trade-only key scores 9. A 10 is reserved for a tool that technically rejects withdrawal-enabled keys (Bitsgap) or never holds a key (Gunbot). On-chain bots that keep a signing key on their own servers score lower.
- Venue coverage: named exchanges or chains, not a bare count. For exchange tools, 16 or more named venues score 9, 12 to 15 score 8, and 7 to 11 score 7. Single-chain bots score low by definition.
- Security posture: counted, not judged on tone. The controls counted are a named key-protection method, an IP lock, 2FA or a second credential, a published bug bounty, an independent attestation, and a breach the operator disclosed and handled. One control scores 4, two score 7, three score 8 and four score 9. Unnamed audits are not counted.
- Entity transparency: an 8 needs a company name, a registration number and a jurisdiction. A name with a jurisdiction but no number scores lower, and an unnamed operator scores near the bottom.
The overall score is the plain average of the five marks, each weighted equally, rounded to one decimal. Ties are listed alphabetically, which is why 3Commas, Altrady and Cryptohopper appear in that order at 8.4. Every mark and its source is set out in the individual review, and any change to a mark is logged there with the reason. The full method is on our ratings methodology page.
The security, custody, venue and entity ladders above were applied to all ten files in a consistency pass on November 6, 2026. Before it, similar disclosures had drawn different marks in different reviews; the pass moved several marks up and down so that the same evidence earns the same number.
What changed in this update
The previous check was July 24, 2026. Most tools now publish more than they did then, and the consistency pass reset marks that had drifted apart.
| Tool | November 6 | July 24 | Main reason |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bitsgap | 8.8 | 8.0 | Security page now states withdrawal-enabled keys are rejected and names RSA-2048 key encryption |
| 3Commas | 8.4 | 6.6 | Connection guide now specifies trade-only keys; 14 integrations named; three security controls counted |
| Altrady | 8.4 | 7.4 | Terms name Altrady B.V. (entity 2 to 8); security reset 9 to 7 on two counted controls |
| Cryptohopper | 8.4 | 8.0 | Four security controls counted (9); custody reset 10 to 9 for a server-held key |
| Coinrule | 8.0 | 8.0 | Entity rose to 8 on dated terms; pricing fell to 7 on conflicting figures; custody reset to 9 |
| TradingView | 7.8 | 6.8 | SOC 2 badge, paid bug bounty and webhook 2FA (security 4 to 8) |
| Gunbot | 7.6 | 8.2 | Lifetime licenses replaced by a subscription with no refund policy; security reset 9 to 7 |
| BonkBot | 6.8 | 5.4 | Terms name Triple Spice AG, confirmed in the Swiss register (entity 2 to 8) |
| Trojan | 5.2 | 3.2 | A 1% fee is now stated (pricing 2 to 7); terms name Odyssia Labs |
| Banana Gun | 5.0 | 4.4 | Self-custody stated in terms; eight chains named; a session PIN documented |
The leader changed: Gunbot led in July and is now seventh, mainly because its pricing and security marks fell. No tool was withdrawn from the ranking in this update.
What the scores do not cover
- Whether a strategy makes money. The rubric scores disclosure and access, not returns. None of these tools was run, and a high score says nothing about a bot's results. See our guide to crypto risk management before automating any position.
- Exchange risk. Funds connected to a hosted bot stay on the exchange, so the exchange's own solvency and security still apply.
- Past incidents, beyond what the security count captures. 3Commas confirmed that users' API keys were disclosed in December 2022, and about $3 million left Banana Gun users' wallets in a September 2024 exploit, per a QuillAudits analysis. A disclosed, handled breach counts as a control; it does not erase the event.
- Hot-wallet exposure on Telegram bots. BonkBot, Trojan and Banana Gun trade from wallets whose signing keys are held or handled by the bot. Trojan's terms allow an encrypted copy of wallet keys on third-party servers. Treat these wallets as spending wallets, not storage.
- Licensing and availability. Bitsgap's terms say it holds no UAE virtual asset licence. Coinrule is not offered in the EU or EEA, and Trojan excludes the United States. A named entity is not a regulated one.
- Total cost. Subscription prices exclude exchange trading fees, and swap-bot fees exclude network and priority fees. Our explainer on maker, taker and gas fees covers the rest of the bill.
How to choose
- Decide where the keys will live: on the tool's servers with trade-only scope, on your own machine, or in a bot-generated wallet.
- Create exchange API keys with withdrawals off and an IP allowlist where the tool supports one, whatever the tool says it will reject.
- Check that your exchange is on the tool's named list and on the plan you intend to buy; several tools limit exchange counts by tier.
- Read the refund terms, not only the pricing page. Altrady and Coinrule state different refund rules in different places.
- Confirm the operator's name, jurisdiction and whether it serves your country before paying.
- For Telegram bots, fund the bot wallet with only what you are prepared to lose and export the key to a backup you control.
Is it safe to give a trading bot API keys?
It is safer when the key cannot withdraw. Every exchange bot in this ranking states it does not need withdrawal rights, but only Bitsgap says it technically rejects keys that have them, and only Gunbot keeps the key off a provider's servers. A trade-only key can still place bad trades if it is stolen, so add an IP allowlist and rotate keys you no longer use.
How we score this category
A trading tool sits between you and an exchange, and the first question is not what it promises but how much access it demands. This rubric scores whether pricing is published, whether the tool ever takes custody and can be restricted from withdrawals, how many venues it connects, and whether the operating entity is named. A bot that runs on your own API keys with withdrawals disabled is a different risk to one that holds your funds.
Every service in this ranking is scored 0–10 against the same 5 criteria, each carrying equal weight (20% apiece). The overall score is their plain average, rounded to one decimal place, and each review prints the individual numbers and the arithmetic so you can reproduce the result yourself.
What each criterion covers
- Pricing transparency20% of the score
- Whether subscription tiers or a fee on executed volume are published as figures. A stated price list scores above a tool whose cost is only revealed after signup, and a swap bot that publishes its percentage fee scores above one that does not.
- Custody & API safety20% of the score
- Whether the tool states it never takes custody, and whether it connects via API keys that can be scoped to disallow withdrawals. Non-custodial with withdrawal-disabled keys is the safest arrangement and scores highest.
- Venue coverage20% of the score
- How many exchanges or chains the tool states it connects. A named list scores above an unspecified count.
- Security posture20% of the score
- Whether the tool documents how credentials are stored, offers protections such as read-only keys, IP allowlists or local-only operation, or publishes an audit. Vague assurances score below specific measures.
- Entity transparency20% of the score
- Whether the operating company and ideally its jurisdiction are named. A tool that runs your trading strategy and holds API access should be willing to say who operates it; anonymity is scored as the gap it is.
What does not affect a score
Only the criteria above count. No provider can buy a score, a rank, or an entry in this list. Where two services finish level, they are listed alphabetically rather than ordered silently.
The process across all categories, including how often we re-check, is set out in our ratings methodology.
Frequently asked questions
How were these trading tools selected?
The ranking covers the trading tools with a current review on the site: five hosted exchange bots, one self-hosted bot, one charting platform and three Telegram trading bots. Each was rescored from its own public pages on November 6, 2026. The list is not a full survey of the market.
How is the overall score calculated?
Each tool gets a 0 to 10 mark on pricing transparency, custody and API safety, venue coverage, security posture and entity transparency. The overall score is the plain average of those five marks, rounded to one decimal, with ties listed alphabetically.
Which trading tool fits a beginner on a small budget?
Bitsgap has a free tier and Coinrule a free plan, and TradingView's Basic tier is free for charting. Cryptohopper's lowest paid plan is $29 a month, and 3Commas has no free plan. Exchange trading fees apply on top of any subscription.
What fees and country limits should I check before paying?
Check whether quoted prices need annual billing, whether the plan limits how many exchanges you can connect, and whether any volume or swap fee applies. Coinrule is not offered in the EU or EEA and Trojan excludes the United States, so confirm the terms cover your country.
How current are these scores?
All ten tools were checked on November 6, 2026; the previous check was July 24, 2026. Pricing pages and terms change often, so the date of each source is listed in the individual review.
Rankings are editorial. Nothing here is financial advice. Editorial policy · How we score · How we're funded.