Cryptohopper vs Freqtrade Freqtrade leads by 17 points.
Freqtrade scores 17 points above Cryptohopper, led by custody, true cost, and capability. Cryptohopper ranks #3 and Freqtrade #1 of 9 published trading bots. Every term of the gap is on the ledger below; the inputs are on the audit receipt.
Cryptohopper67
vs
Freqtrade84
Scores are out of 100; published scores fall within 41–99 · ranks #3 and #1 of 9
Published gapAfter score rounding and bounds — see the note below8467+17.0
Weight is in points of the 86-point weighted total. Points are score points of the gap between the two.
FreqtradeScore 84Open-source Python bot that ships tooling to invalidate its own backtestsStrength: Python-literate self-hostersWatch-out: No company behind it — no support desk, no SLA, nobody to reimburse a strategy bugCryptohopperScore 67Cloud-based trading bot with strategy marketplace and signal subscriptionsStrength: Strategy-marketplace followersWatch-out: Marketplace strategy quality varies — many published strategies underperform vs buy-and-hold
Quick facts
At a glance
FactCryptohopperFreqtrade
PricingSnapshotExplorer $29/mo, Adventurer $69/mo, Hero $129/mo at monthly billing; annual billing is 17% off ($24.16 / $57.50 / $107.50 a month, billed yearly). There is no free tier — only a 3-day Explorer trial that starts at sign-up. Copy Bot is priced separately, $9.99 to $99.99/mo, and marketplace strategies are extra. Re-read 2026-09-09: every tier had risen (Explorer 19 → 29, Adventurer 49 → 69, Hero 99 → 129), the annual discount was 17% and not the ~30% recorded, and the record’s claim of a paper-trading free tier was wrong — paper trading sits inside the paid Explorer package.Free and open source under GPL-3.0: no subscription, commission or licence key, and the FAQ states Freqtrade has no crypto token. Real total cost: a machine running 24/7 (the docs recommend a Linux cloud instance with at least 2GB RAM, 1GB disk and 2 vCPU), exchange trading fees, and the Python competence to build and maintain a strategy. Re-read 14 September 2026.
Asset coverageEditorialAny pair tradable on connected exchangesSpot and futures algorithmic trading via your own exchange accounts
Region fitSnapshotus, europe, globalglobal
From the published criteria
Which should you pick?
Cryptohopper
67#3 of 9
Pick it when
Cryptohopper leads on no published criterion; its edge is friction (2.7 vs 0.7 points). Pick it if that term is what you are buying.
Strength
Strategy-marketplace followers
Tradeoff
Marketplace strategy quality varies — many published strategies underperform vs buy-and-hold
Freqtrade
84#1 of 9
Leads
Pick it when
Pick Freqtrade if custody matters most — it scores 10/10 to Cryptohopper's 5/10 there (weight 30).
Strength
Python-literate self-hosters
Tradeoff
No company behind it — no support desk, no SLA, nobody to reimburse a strategy bug
Self-identify in 10 seconds
Which one is actually for you?
Cryptohopper
Cryptohopper leads Freqtrade on no published criterion
Choose it only if something outside the published criteria decides for you — your country, a funding rail, or custody.
CryptohopperScore 67Cloud-based trading bot with strategy marketplace and signal subscriptionsStrength: Strategy-marketplace followersWatch-out: Marketplace strategy quality varies — many published strategies underperform vs buy-and-hold
FreqtradeLeads
Choose Freqtrade if custody matters most
Custody: 10/10 against 5/10 for Cryptohopper (weight 30)
True cost: 10/10 against 6/10 for Cryptohopper (weight 26)
Capability: 10/10 against 6/10 for Cryptohopper (weight 24)
FreqtradeScore 84Open-source Python bot that ships tooling to invalidate its own backtestsStrength: Python-literate self-hostersWatch-out: No company behind it — no support desk, no SLA, nobody to reimburse a strategy bug
Criterion by criterion
Scorecard
Published criteria · weight in points of 868 of 8 cells scored. Strength is read from the evidence file; the weight is the published one. Methodology
Custody
by 5 of 10weight 7.2 of 86Freqtrade leads
Cryptohopper5/10 out of 10
Freqtrade10/10 out of 10
True cost
by 4 of 10weight 6.2 of 86Freqtrade leads
Cryptohopper6/10 out of 10
Freqtrade10/10 out of 10
Capability
by 4 of 10weight 5.8 of 86Freqtrade leads
Cryptohopper6/10 out of 10
Freqtrade10/10 out of 10
Reliability
weight 4.8 of 86Tie
Cryptohopper6/10 out of 10
Freqtrade6/10 out of 10
Score dimensions
weights sum to 86
The published score is five dimensions, each weighted for the category. "Published criteria" is the criteria block above; the other four are the engine's own terms — availability, friction, trust record, measured data. Each bar is one side's points out of that dimension's maximum; the weight beside the name is its points of the 86-point weighted total. The published criteria above can fill 24 of the block’s 30.
Availabilityweight 20 of 86
Cryptohopper20/20Freqtrade20/20
Tie
Published criteriaweight 30 of 86
Cryptohopper13.7/30Freqtrade22.1/30
Freqtrade leads
Frictionweight 10 of 86
Cryptohopper2.7/10Freqtrade0.7/10
Cryptohopper leads
Trust recordweight 8 of 86
Cryptohopper3.2/8Freqtrade3.2/8
Tie
Measured dataweight 18 of 86
Cryptohopper8.3/18Freqtrade8.3/18
Tie
Decision rulePublished order
Choose Freqtrade unless the term Cryptohopper leads on is the one you are buying.
Cryptohopper leads on no published criterion; its edge is friction (2.7 vs 0.7 points). Pick it if that term is what you are buying.
The published order weighs every criterion the same way for everyone. To weigh them your way, run .
From the published order
Next best action
If this isn't your case
Other matchups worth comparing
How you can lose money here, and what the ranking scores
Liveness failure: the operator stops, censors you or loses data.
Scored by Operational reliability · 20% (Cryptohopper 6/10, Freqtrade 6/10)
Custody failure: whoever holds the assets loses or withholds them.
Also scored, as cost, quality or a summary of several families: True cost of operation (26%), Strategy capability (24%).
Questions
Frequently asked questions
Freqtrade scores 17 points above Cryptohopper, led by custody, true cost, and capability. Published scores, out of 100: Cryptohopper 67 (rank 3 of 9 trading bots), Freqtrade 84 (rank 1 of 9).
ReviewedRe-read due since The published cadence is 45 days; this page's next read was due on 29 October 2026.Methodology v2026.10.18
How this page is reviewed
Reviewed means both products compared here was read against its sources on or after that date; every ranked category is re-read at least every 45 days. Models research, extract and parse. A deterministic engine ranks. Every quote passes an adversarial refute pass.
Answer a few quick questions and get one clear recommendation based on how you actually plan to use crypto — with rationale, tradeoffs, and a path to monitor the decision.
No signup·Free first pass · Private·No spam · No account
Not financial advice · Independent · Always do your own research
Not financial advice · For informational purposes only · Always do your own research
