Autoview vs ProfitView
ProfitView and Autoview both let a TradingView alert land an order on an exchange, but they get there in very different ways. ProfitView is a coding platform: you write your strategy, and your webhook handler, as Python inside its browser editor. Autoview is a no-code platform: you write a plain alert message using a documented parameter syntax, and there is no code to run or host.
What "ProfitView" actually covers, split out
"ProfitView" is not one single mechanism, and lumping it into "a Python coding platform" understates how it is actually built. There are three distinct paths, and they are not equally hands-on:
- The Trading Bots editor (user-coded). Once you are on a paid plan, ProfitView's browser-based Python editor is where strategies actually run. You write the strategy yourself in Python, in a class ProfitView's docs template for you, and it reacts to market events or its internal scheduler. There is no pre-built, click-to-run bot library here; you are the one writing the trading logic.
- The built-in HTTP webhook server (user-coded receiver). ProfitView's own docs walk through writing a Python function decorated with `@http.route` to receive a TradingView POST request, then calling its order functions from inside that handler. The server is built in, but the handler that turns an incoming alert into an order is code you write and maintain.
- Third-party listings referencing a "ProfitView" browser extension. A handful of third-party download and extension-index sites describe a Chrome extension under the ProfitView name. Current documentation on profitview.net describes the browser-based Python editor and the webhook server above, not a separate extension product, so this article does not treat that listing as confirmed; if you find one, verify directly with ProfitView support before relying on it.
Every path above is user-coded once you get past sign-up. Autoview's webhook message is a set of named parameters, exchange, symbol, side, quantity, and so on, that the platform parses directly with no handler to write and no code to debug when TradingView changes its alert format.
The other gap is asset coverage. ProfitView connects to 19 named crypto exchanges and nothing else, no forex, no stocks, no futures brokers. Autoview runs the same account across OANDA and Capital.com for forex, Tradovate for futures, Alpaca, TradeStation, and Schwab for stocks, and more than a dozen crypto exchanges, all through the same alert format.
The pricing models are shaped differently
Prices below are what profitview.net/pricing showed on direct access, 2026-09-10 (unchanged from the 2026-09-03 figures originally cited here); check the live page before you commit, since a competitor's tiers can move. ProfitView's three tiers gate you by exchange count and realtime symbol count: $29 a month buys 2 exchanges and 5 symbols, $59 a month buys 5 exchanges and 15 symbols, and $299 a month removes the caps entirely and adds a self-hosted option. Autoview prices per connection instead: a flat $39.99 a month, or $399.99 a year, per exchange or broker, with no cap on symbols, trades, or strategies on that connection. A trader running two or three crypto exchanges on ProfitView's Hobbyist or Active Trader tier might pay less than the equivalent Autoview connections. A trader who also wants forex or stocks has no ProfitView option at all, only Autoview.
Maintainability and security, not just capability
Every ProfitView path above puts you in the position of maintaining your own code: your Python strategy, and in most cases your own webhook handler, keep running only as long as you keep them working, including through ProfitView's own future API or library changes. Your exchange API keys also typically live inside that code or its environment, so securing them is on you. Autoview's no-code webhook parser has no user-maintained code path for you to keep patched, and your exchange credentials are stored and used inside Autoview's platform rather than embedded in a script you wrote. That trade-off runs both ways: ProfitView's code access gives a developer control Autoview's parser does not expose, at the cost of that developer now owning its upkeep and its key security.
The honest comparison
| Feature | Autoview | ProfitView |
|---|---|---|
| Strategy authoring | No code, documented parameter syntax | Python code in a browser editor |
| Webhook receiving | Built in, no code to write | You write the handler yourself |
| Forex / OANDA | Yes, direct via OANDA and Capital.com | No, crypto only |
| Futures / stocks | Yes, Tradovate, Alpaca, TradeStation, Schwab | No, crypto only |
| Crypto exchanges | 12+ exchanges | 19 named exchanges |
| Pricing | Flat $39.99/mo (or $399.99/yr) per exchange | $29/mo (2 exchanges) to $299/mo (unlimited) |
| Free option | Unlimited paper trading on every exchange | Not stated on the pricing page |
Which one is for you
If you already write Python and want fine-grained control over crypto-only strategies and order logic, ProfitView's coding model gives you that. If you want your TradingView alert to just work, without hosting or debugging a webhook handler, and you trade anything beyond crypto, Autoview is the one built for that.
Prove it before you pay. Make a free Autoview account, connect a demo or testnet exchange, and fire a test order. Several connections are free, so you can watch the execution path work with nothing at risk.