AI coding assistants are everywhere now. ChatGPT can write code. Cursor can edit entire files. Claude can explain complex logic. But when it comes to Pine Script for TradingView, most of these tools fall short in specific ways.
I've tested all the major AI coding tools for Pine Script development. Some are great for learning concepts but terrible at generating working code. Others are powerful for general programming but don't understand TradingView's specific requirements. Here's what actually works, what doesn't, and when to use each tool.
What We're Comparing
This comparison focuses on practical coding features, not trading performance. We're evaluating these tools as developer productivity aids, looking at how well they help you write syntactically correct Pine Script code. Whether your strategies are profitable depends on your trading logic and market conditions, not the tool you use to write the code.
The key factors we're comparing are Pine Script v6 syntax accuracy, error detection capabilities, turnaround time for generating or fixing code, and overall ease of use for TradingView development. Cost matters too, especially since several of these tools are priced similarly at around $20 per month.
1. PineScripter: The Specialized Tool
PineScripter is built specifically for Pine Script development. It's not a general purpose AI coding assistant. It does one thing: generate and fix Pine Script code for TradingView.
The main advantage is automatic error detection. When you generate code, PineScripter can see TradingView compilation errors directly and iterates up to 10 times to fix them automatically. You don't copy-paste error messages back and forth. The AI sees the errors and handles the debugging cycle for you.
The tool has the complete Pine Script v5 and v6 user manuals loaded as context, which means it knows the exact function signatures and type requirements. It generates v6 compliant code by default and understands TradingView specific constraints that generic AI models miss.
When you ask for changes, PineScripter edits specific lines instead of regenerating your entire script. If you have a 500 line strategy and want to change one condition, it modifies just that section. This is faster and preserves your existing logic.
The downside is obvious: it only does Pine Script. If you're working on Python backtests, JavaScript web apps, or any other language, PineScripter won't help. It's a specialized tool for a specific job.
Cost is $19.99 per month for unlimited generations. Best for traders and developers who spend significant time writing Pine Script and want to eliminate the debugging cycle.
2. Cursor: The General Purpose Powerhouse
Cursor is an AI powered code editor built on VS Code. It's excellent for general software development and supports dozens of programming languages. For Pine Script specifically, the experience is more manual.
Cursor doesn't natively recognize Pine Script as a file type. You can work around this by creating a text file and asking Cursor to write Pine Script code in it. The AI understands what Pine Script is and can generate reasonable code, but it doesn't have the specialized knowledge that comes from training specifically on TradingView documentation.
The workflow looks like this: you ask Cursor to write Pine Script in a text document, copy the code to TradingView, see if it compiles, copy any error messages back to Cursor, and ask it to fix the issues. This is the same copy-paste cycle you'd have with ChatGPT, just in a nicer editor interface.
Where Cursor shines is multi-language projects. If you're building a trading system that includes Pine Script indicators, Python backtesting scripts, and a JavaScript dashboard, Cursor handles all of it in one environment. You can ask it to refactor code across multiple files, understand your entire project structure, and make coordinated changes.
Cursor costs $20 per month, the same as PineScripter. The question is whether you need a general purpose coding assistant or a Pine Script specialist. If you code in multiple languages regularly, Cursor makes sense. If you primarily write Pine Script, the manual error handling becomes tedious.
3. ChatGPT: The Concept Explainer
ChatGPT is the tool most people try first. It's accessible, well known, and can generate Pine Script code when you ask. The problem is that it often generates code that doesn't compile in TradingView's current environment.
ChatGPT was trained on a massive dataset that includes Pine Script v4 and v5 examples from across the internet. Pine Script v6 introduced significant syntax changes in 2023, and much of ChatGPT's training data predates these changes. When you ask for a strategy, you frequently get v5 syntax that won't work in modern TradingView.
The other issue is hallucinated functions. ChatGPT sometimes invents Pine Script functions that sound plausible but don't exist. You won't know until you paste the code and TradingView tells you the function is undefined.
Where ChatGPT excels is explaining concepts. If you want to understand how RSI divergence works, or learn about different types of moving averages, or think through the logic of a trading strategy, ChatGPT is excellent. It can break down complex ideas into plain English and help you understand the theory behind indicators.
The workflow is: use ChatGPT to learn and brainstorm, then use a specialized tool to generate the actual working code. ChatGPT helps you think, but you'll spend hours debugging if you try to use its code directly.
ChatGPT Plus costs $20 per month. Free tier works but has usage limits and slower response times.
4. Claude: Similar to ChatGPT with Better Context
Claude is Anthropic's AI assistant, similar to ChatGPT but with some differences in how it handles context and longer conversations. For Pine Script specifically, it has the same core limitations as ChatGPT.
Claude can generate Pine Script code and often provides thoughtful explanations of what the code does. It's good at understanding complex requirements and breaking them down into logical steps. Like ChatGPT, it struggles with v6 syntax accuracy and can't see TradingView compilation errors.
The advantage Claude has over ChatGPT is better handling of long conversations and larger context windows. If you're iterating on a complex strategy over multiple messages, Claude tends to maintain context better and remember earlier parts of the conversation.
The debugging cycle is the same as ChatGPT: generate code, paste to TradingView, copy errors back, ask for fixes, repeat. You're manually bridging the gap between the AI and TradingView.
Claude Pro costs $20 per month. Like ChatGPT, it's best used for learning concepts and thinking through strategy logic rather than generating production ready code.
5. Replit: The Learning Environment
Replit is an online coding environment with AI assistance built in. It's designed for learning to code and building projects directly in the browser. For Pine Script, it's the least practical option on this list.
Replit doesn't have native Pine Script support, so you're writing code in text files without syntax highlighting or TradingView specific features. The AI can generate Pine Script when asked, but you still need to copy everything to TradingView to actually test it.
Where Replit shines is as a learning platform. If you're new to programming in general and want to understand coding concepts before diving into Pine Script specifically, Replit provides a gentle introduction. The AI can explain code line by line and help you understand programming fundamentals.
For experienced developers who just want to write Pine Script efficiently, Replit adds extra steps without providing Pine Script specific benefits. You're better off with a tool that understands TradingView's environment.
Replit has a free tier with limitations and paid plans starting around $20 per month for more features and faster AI responses.
The Comparison Table
| Tool | Pine Script Support | Error Detection | v6 Syntax | Cost | Best For |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PineScripter | Native | Automatic | Yes | $19.99/mo | TradingView developers |
| Cursor | Via text files | Manual copy-paste | Hit or miss | $20/mo | Multi-language projects |
| ChatGPT | Generic | Manual copy-paste | Often v5 | $20/mo | Learning concepts |
| Claude | Generic | Manual copy-paste | Often v5 | $20/mo | Learning concepts |
| Replit | Via text files | Manual | Hit or miss | Free/Paid | Learning to code |
Which Tool Should You Use?
The honest answer depends on what you're actually building and how you work. There's no single best tool for everyone.
If you primarily write Pine Script and want to eliminate the debugging cycle, PineScripter is the most efficient choice. The automatic error detection and v6 syntax accuracy mean you spend less time fixing compilation errors and more time testing your actual trading logic. You're paying for specialization.
If you work across multiple programming languages and want one tool for everything, Cursor makes more sense. Yes, you'll manually copy-paste Pine Script errors, but you get a powerful general purpose coding assistant that handles Python, JavaScript, and everything else you work on. The trade off is worth it if Pine Script is just one part of your development work.
If you're learning Pine Script and want to understand concepts before writing code, start with ChatGPT or Claude. They're excellent teachers and can explain complex ideas in plain English. Just don't expect the generated code to work without significant debugging. Use them for learning, not production code.
If you're new to programming entirely and want a gentle introduction, Replit provides a good learning environment. But once you're comfortable with basic coding concepts, you'll want to move to a more specialized tool for actual Pine Script development.
The Real Cost Comparison
Most of these tools cost around $20 per month, which makes the decision less about price and more about workflow efficiency. The question isn't which is cheapest, but which saves you the most time.
If you spend four hours every weekend debugging Pine Script, a tool that cuts that to 30 minutes pays for itself immediately. Your time has value. Calculate how many hours per month you spend on Pine Script development, multiply by what your time is worth, and the tool cost becomes trivial.
The free tiers of ChatGPT and Replit are worth trying if you're just exploring, but the usage limits and slower responses make them frustrating for regular development work. If you're serious about building strategies, the paid tier of whichever tool you choose is worth it.
My Recommendation
For Pine Script specifically, PineScripter is the most efficient tool. The automatic error detection and v6 syntax accuracy eliminate the most time consuming part of Pine Script development, which is the debugging cycle. You describe what you want, get working code, and move on to testing your strategy logic.
That said, Cursor is excellent if you need a general purpose coding assistant and don't mind the manual error handling for Pine Script. The ability to work across multiple languages in one environment is valuable for complex projects.
ChatGPT and Claude are best used alongside a specialized tool. Use them to brainstorm ideas and understand concepts, then use PineScripter or Cursor to generate the actual working code. They're complementary tools, not direct alternatives.
The worst approach is trying to use ChatGPT or Claude alone for Pine Script development. You'll spend hours in the copy-paste debugging cycle, which defeats the purpose of using AI to save time. Either use a specialized tool or accept that you're using a general AI for learning rather than production code generation.
Disclaimer: These tools help you write code faster, but they don't guarantee profitable trading strategies. Code quality and trading performance are separate concerns. Always backtest thoroughly and understand the risks before live trading.