2025-12-28 10:23:57

Regarding the choice of trading BOTs, I’ve recently had some thoughts I want to discuss. There are indeed many BOT projects on the market, but I’m not interested in most of them—honestly, I’ve even rejected those promoters who approached me.

What is the core issue? Security. This is really not an empty statement.

I’ve looked at some analyses, and why are top-tier, well-known BOT projects more worth using? It’s because of a solid security foundation. Comparing historical incidents of thefts and problems with BOT projects, the difference is very clear. Choosing more BOTs is not better; instead, it should be about being refined and specialized—finding those products recognized by the industry, with rigorous security audits, and ongoing maintenance.

Trading tools involve real money, so I have to weigh even new projects with low barriers to entry carefully. Rather than obsessing over the number of BOTs and feature stacking, it’s better to focus on identifying which projects are truly reliable and which can withstand testing. That’s what traders should care about.

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

13 Likes

Reward
13
6
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

StakeHouseDirector

· 8h ago

That's right, safety really can't be compromised, after all, the money is in their hands. I've seen many new projects rely solely on marketing, and what happens in the end? Either they run away or get hacked. It's better to choose those with a proven track record and fewer issues.

View OriginalReply0

OnlyUpOnly

· 22h ago

That's right, you really need to be careful with small-cap coin BOTs; I've seen quite a few collapse. The idea of being precise and specialized is correct; it's better to be steady than greedy. Using big-company BOTs is indeed much more reliable, and security audits are not a problem. No matter how attractive new BOTs are, I prefer to wait and see; risking real money isn't worth it. That's why I still use those few established ones—boring but dependable.

View OriginalReply0

fren_with_benefits

· 22h ago

To be honest, I only trust the top few, and I won't touch small BOTs even if they're cheap. Truly a lesson learned through blood and tears.

View OriginalReply0

DataPickledFish

· 22h ago

That's right, those small bots are really not worth touching. I've seen a few tragic incidents of them being blown up. It's better to go directly with the main ones; having a solid audit gives peace of mind.

View OriginalReply0

LiquidityWitch

· 23h ago

If it's reliable, you really need to be cautious. I don't touch any small project BOTs. --- Basically, I'm afraid of being exploited, so I stick to those who have weathered storms. --- I agree that being refined and specialized is important. What's the use of a bunch of junk features? --- Fund safety > flashy selling points. There's nothing wrong with this logic. --- I don't pay attention to those new BOT projects at all. I can't afford to gamble. --- The reason top projects are still around is because they haven't scammed people. Simple and straightforward. --- You really need to consider audits carefully; the cost of saving time is too high. --- Instead of craving features, it's better to seek peace of mind. Not many traders understand this.

View OriginalReply0

AirdropATM

· 23h ago

Still the same advice: I don't even bother with small coin bots. Anyone with a bit of sense knows where the risks are. Established brands may have fewer features, but they are stable. You can't skimp on this money.

View OriginalReply0