LIVELive Market
15 services rated

Best Perpetual DEXs

On-chain derivatives venues ranked on risk engine, depth and funding costs.Every score below is the weighted mean of the rubric marks, not an editor's gut feel.

How we score this category

Full methodology →
Risk engine & liquidations
Margin model, oracle latency, insurance fund depth and behaviour of the liquidation engine under stress.
25%
Depth & slippage
Real book depth on majors and how far a size order moves the mark.
20%
Funding & fees
Taker fees, funding rate design and the cost of holding a position for days rather than minutes.
20%
Security record
Audits, exploit history, upgrade controls and how losses were socialised or covered.
20%
Transparency
Verifiability of positions and reserves, disclosure of market-maker arrangements, and honesty about centralised components.
15%
8.5
Rank 1 · Strong

The first on-chain venue that trades like a real exchange — and the one that had to socialise a nine-figure squeeze in public.

Risk engine & liquidations
8.5
Depth & slippage
9.5
Funding & fees
9.0
Security record
7.5
Transparency
8.0
~0.025%/0.045% maker/taker, tieredSince 2023Read full review →
8.4
Rank 2 · Strong

The oldest serious perps protocol, now on its own chain, with no exploit in eight years of operation.

Risk engine & liquidations
8.5
Depth & slippage
7.5
Funding & fees
8.5
Security record
9.0
Transparency
8.5
~0.02%/0.05% maker/takerSince 2017Read full review →
7.6
Rank 3 · Solid

Solana's most-used perps product: three markets, deep pooled liquidity, and borrow costs that add up fast.

Risk engine & liquidations
7.5
Depth & slippage
8.0
Funding & fees
7.0
Security record
8.0
Transparency
7.5
~0.06% open/close plus hourly borrowSince 2023Read full review →
7.5
Rank 4 · Solid

A hybrid book-and-AMM design with proper cross-margin, rebuilt from scratch after its 2022 shutdown.

Risk engine & liquidations
7.5
Depth & slippage
7.0
Funding & fees
8.0
Security record
7.0
Transparency
8.0
~0.02%/0.05% maker/takerSince 2021Read full review →
7.4
Rank 5 · Solid

Among the cheapest venues to trade, with a hybrid order book that works better than its market share suggests.

Risk engine & liquidations
7.0
Depth & slippage
6.5
Funding & fees
9.0
Security record
7.5
Transparency
7.0
~0%/0.02% maker/takerSince 2023Read full review →
7.3
Rank 6 · Solid

The most credible on-chain options venue, running an off-chain book that it is refreshingly upfront about.

Risk engine & liquidations
7.5
Depth & slippage
6.5
Funding & fees
7.5
Security record
8.0
Transparency
6.5
~0.03%/0.05% maker/takerSince 2023Read full review →
7.2
Rank 7 · Solid

Paradigm's spin-out built its own Starknet appchain and priced itself for professionals; the depth is still arriving.

Risk engine & liquidations
7.0
Depth & slippage
6.0
Funding & fees
8.5
Security record
7.5
Transparency
7.0
~0.01%/0.03% maker/takerSince 2023Read full review →
7.1
Rank 8 · Solid

The pool-as-counterparty model that defined a generation of perp DEXs, now carrying both a design flaw and an exploit on its record.

Risk engine & liquidations
7.0
Depth & slippage
7.5
Funding & fees
6.5
Security record
6.5
Transparency
8.5
~0.05–0.07% open/close plus borrow rateSince 2021Read full review →
7.0
Rank 9 · Solid

Synthetic leverage on assets nobody else offers on-chain, backed by a single vault that carries all the risk.

Risk engine & liquidations
6.5
Depth & slippage
6.5
Funding & fees
7.5
Security record
7.5
Transparency
7.0
~0.03–0.08% plus spread, no funding on some pairsSince 2021Read full review →
7.0
Rank 10 · Solid

Not a venue so much as an order book other venues rent — clever infrastructure, diffuse accountability.

Risk engine & liquidations
6.5
Depth & slippage
6.5
Funding & fees
8.0
Security record
7.5
Transparency
6.5
~0.03% taker at the base tierSince 2022Read full review →
6.8
Rank 11 · Mixed

A competent second-tier venue with StarkEx settlement and no incidents, competing in a market where depth decides everything.

Risk engine & liquidations
6.5
Depth & slippage
6.0
Funding & fees
7.5
Security record
7.5
Transparency
6.5
~0.02%/0.05% maker/takerSince 2021Read full review →
6.7
Rank 12 · Mixed

A front end onto Synthetix's debt pool: no slippage by construction, and all the systemic risk of the pool behind it.

Risk engine & liquidations
6.5
Depth & slippage
6.0
Funding & fees
6.5
Security record
7.0
Transparency
7.5
~0.02–0.06% plus dynamic fundingSince 2021Read full review →
6.7
Rank 13 · Mixed

One of the original on-chain perps protocols, still running, still transparent, and largely passed by.

Risk engine & liquidations
6.5
Depth & slippage
5.5
Funding & fees
6.5
Security record
7.5
Transparency
8.0
~0.1% taker on v2 poolsSince 2020Read full review →
6.5
Rank 14 · Mixed

A leverage aggregator that routes to whichever venue is cheapest — useful, and one more layer between you and your collateral.

Risk engine & liquidations
6.0
Depth & slippage
6.0
Funding & fees
7.0
Security record
7.0
Transparency
6.5
~0.04–0.08% plus borrowingSince 2022Read full review →
6.5
Rank 15 · Mixed

Anyone can list a perp market here, which is both the entire point and the entire risk.

Risk engine & liquidations
6.0
Depth & slippage
5.5
Funding & fees
7.0
Security record
7.0
Transparency
7.0
~0.03–0.1% depending on poolSince 2021Read full review →

How OBOL rates perpetual DEXs

A perpetuals venue is a risk engine first and an exchange second. When markets gap, what matters is whether the oracle keeps up, whether the insurance fund absorbs bad debt, and whether the protocol claws back from profitable traders when it does not. That is why the risk engine carries the most weight here.

Funding is scored as a cost, not a feature. A venue with cheap taker fees and structurally expensive funding is not cheap for anyone holding longer than a session, so we mark the all-in cost of a multi-day position alongside the headline rate.

Decentralisation claims get checked

Most perp DEXs run at least one centralised component: a sequencer, an off-chain order book, a permissioned oracle set, an upgrade multisig. We do not penalise that by itself — we penalise pretending otherwise. Venues that publish their trust assumptions plainly score higher than those that hide them behind the word trustless.

What we cannot see

Open interest and volume on a perp DEX can be inflated by wash trading and points farming, and incentive programmes distort both. Where a venue's activity is visibly incentive-driven, we discount it and say so in the review.

FAQ

Are perp DEXs safe to use with leverage?
Leverage is the risk, not the venue. Even a well-built protocol will liquidate you in a fast market, and on-chain oracles can lag centralised prices during exactly those moves. Size positions on the assumption that the worst fill you have seen can happen to you.
Why does funding matter more than fees?
Because most positions are held longer than the fee is charged. On a venue with persistently high funding, a week-long long can pay several times the taker fee in carry.
Do these venues hold my collateral?
Yes, in contracts you do not control. Non-custodial means no company holds your keys; it does not mean your margin is not at risk from a bug, a bad debt event or an oracle failure.