Hummingbot vs Gunbot Hummingbot leads by 5 points.
Hummingbot scores 5 points above Gunbot, led by custody, true cost, and capability. Hummingbot ranks #5 and Gunbot #8 of 9 published trading bots. Every term of the gap is on the ledger below; the inputs are on the audit receipt.
HUHummingbot61
vs
Gunbot56
Scores are out of 100; published scores fall within 41–99 · ranks #5 and #8 of 9
Hummingbot scores 5 points above Gunbot, led by custody, true cost, and capability.
HUHummingbot #5 of 961
Gunbot #8 of 956
Scores are out of 100; published scores fall within 41–99; a bar is empty at 41 and full at 99.
Why, term by termHummingbot leads on 4 of 4 published criteria; Gunbot on 0. The terms sum to the gap.
TermHummingbotGunbotWeightPoints
Custody9/108/107.2+1.9for Hummingbot+1.0 of 32
True cost9/101/106.2+13.0for Hummingbot+6.7 of 32
Capability8/105/105.8+4.5for Hummingbot+2.3 of 32
Reliability5/103/104.8+2.5for Hummingbot+1.3 of 32
AvailabilityScore dimension142020−15.6for Gunbot
FrictionScore dimension0.71.310−1.6for Gunbot
Net of the terms+4.7
Reproduced gap+4.7
Published gapAfter score rounding and bounds — see the note below6156+5.0
Weight is in points of the 86-point weighted total. Points are score points of the gap between the two.
HummingbotScore 61Open-source market-making framework with the widest connector surfaceStrength: Market making and liquidity provisionWatch-out: Community-maintained connectors can silently rot on thinner venues — broken cancellation is worse than broken placementGunbotScore 56Self-hosted lifetime licence — validated against the GUNTHY token count of your walletStrength: Self-hosters preferring one-time licences over subscriptionsWatch-out: The “lifetime” licence links to a wallet address and its GUNTHY token count, so it depends on that wallet and on the token-based validation system
Quick facts
At a glance
1 of 3 rows read the same for both.
FactHummingbotGunbot
PricingSnapshotFree and open source under Apache 2.0 — no subscription, licence or token purchase. The economics to understand: the Foundation is funded partly by exchange fee-share on order flow routed through its connectors (disclosed in its FAQ), so your trading indirectly funds the maintainer. Direct costs are your infrastructure and exchange fees. Re-read 2026-09-09: the FAQ still states "Hummingbot is a free software, so you can download, install, and run it for free", under Apache 2.0.One-time licence with contradictory official pricing. The plans page lists Standard €199, Pro €299 and DeFi €499 under ‘Summer deals’ at €44.25, €111.75 and €186.75 lifetime (about 78%, 63% and 63% off), with no stated end date. The support FAQ quotes $599 / $899 / $1,499 lifetime plus Gunbot Unlimited at $29/month, and the Unlimited preview page prices the same subscription at €29 per month. Lifetime licences link to a self-custodied, non-exchange ERC-20 wallet address and its GUNTHY token count; subscription users skip the wallet step. No defensible single price exists; reconcile with support before buying. Re-read 14 September 2026.
Asset coverageEditorialMarket-making and algorithmic strategies across CEXs, perp DEXs and onchain marketsSelf-hosted spot (and venue-dependent futures) bot trading
Region fitSnapshotglobalglobal
From the published criteria
Which should you pick?
HU
Hummingbot
61#5 of 9
Leads
Pick it when
Pick Hummingbot if custody matters most — it scores 9/10 to Gunbot's 8/10 there (weight 30).
Strength
Market making and liquidity provision
Tradeoff
Community-maintained connectors can silently rot on thinner venues — broken cancellation is worse than broken placement
Gunbot
56#8 of 9
Pick it when
Gunbot leads on no published criterion; its edge is availability (20 vs 14 points). Pick it if that term is what you are buying.
Strength
Self-hosters preferring one-time licences over subscriptions
Tradeoff
The “lifetime” licence links to a wallet address and its GUNTHY token count, so it depends on that wallet and on the token-based validation system
Self-identify in 10 seconds
Which one is actually for you?
HUHummingbotLeads
Choose Hummingbot if custody matters most
Custody: 9/10 against 8/10 for Gunbot (weight 30)
True cost: 9/10 against 1/10 for Gunbot (weight 26)
Capability: 8/10 against 5/10 for Gunbot (weight 24)
HummingbotScore 61Open-source market-making framework with the widest connector surfaceStrength: Market making and liquidity provisionWatch-out: Community-maintained connectors can silently rot on thinner venues — broken cancellation is worse than broken placement
Gunbot
Gunbot leads Hummingbot on no published criterion
Choose it only if something outside the published criteria decides for you — your country, a funding rail, or custody.
GunbotScore 56Self-hosted lifetime licence — validated against the GUNTHY token count of your walletStrength: Self-hosters preferring one-time licences over subscriptionsWatch-out: The “lifetime” licence links to a wallet address and its GUNTHY token count, so it depends on that wallet and on the token-based validation system
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 1 of 10weight 7.2 of 86Hummingbot leads
Hummingbot9/10 out of 10
Gunbot8/10 out of 10
True cost
by 8 of 10weight 6.2 of 86Hummingbot leads
Hummingbot9/10 out of 10
Gunbot1/10 out of 10
Capability
by 3 of 10weight 5.8 of 86Hummingbot leads
Hummingbot8/10 out of 10
Gunbot5/10 out of 10
Reliability
by 2 of 10weight 4.8 of 86Hummingbot leads
Hummingbot5/10 out of 10
Gunbot3/10 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
Hummingbot14/20Gunbot20/20
Gunbot leads
Published criteriaweight 30 of 86
Hummingbot19.1/30Gunbot10.7/30
Hummingbot leads
Frictionweight 10 of 86
Hummingbot0.7/10Gunbot1.3/10
Gunbot leads
Trust recordweight 8 of 86
Hummingbot3.2/8Gunbot3.2/8
Tie
Measured dataweight 18 of 86
Hummingbot8.3/18Gunbot8.3/18
Tie
Decision rulePublished order
Choose Hummingbot unless the term Gunbot leads on is the one you are buying.
Gunbot leads on no published criterion; its edge is availability (20 vs 14 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% (Hummingbot 5/10, Gunbot 3/10)
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
Hummingbot scores 5 points above Gunbot, led by custody, true cost, and capability. Published scores, out of 100: Hummingbot 61 (rank 5 of 9 trading bots), Gunbot 56 (rank 8 of 9).
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
