Post-Only or Allow Taker: Which Order Type Fits Your Trading Strategy Best?

Understanding post only vs allow taker is essential for traders who want precise control over execution costs and order behavior. These two order settings determine whether your order adds liquidity to the order book or is allowed to match immediately with existing orders. While the difference may seem technical, it directly affects fees, execution speed, and strategy efficiency, especially in active crypto markets.

In the post only vs allow taker comparison, a post-only order is designed strictly to add liquidity. If the order would execute immediately against an existing order, it is automatically canceled or rejected by the exchange. This guarantees that the trader acts as a maker, often benefiting from lower maker fees or rebates. Post-only orders are commonly used in market-making, grid strategies, or when traders want to avoid slippage and taker fees entirely.

Allow taker orders operate differently. When allow taker is enabled, your order may execute instantly if the price crosses the order book, making you a taker. In the post only vs allow taker framework, this option prioritizes execution certainty over fee optimization. Traders who value speed—such as during breakouts or high-volatility conditions—often prefer allow taker, accepting higher fees in exchange for immediate fills.

Choosing between post only vs allow taker depends on your trading objectives. If your strategy focuses on cost efficiency, controlled entries, and liquidity provision, post-only is typically the better choice. If fast execution and guaranteed fills are more important than fees, allow taker becomes more practical. In short, post only vs allow taker is not about which is better universally, but which aligns with your risk tolerance, timing needs, and overall trading approach.

Create Answer