Perpetual venues price differently at different times: funding on one venue can be several times another's for the same exposure. MUX turns that dispersion into a product, routing positions to whichever underlying protocol is cheapest at the moment of opening.
How aggregation works
The router evaluates fees, funding and available liquidity across integrated venues — historically GMX, Gains and others — and opens the position there, or falls back to MUX's own liquidity pool if external routing is unattractive. From the user's perspective it is one interface and one position; underneath, the exposure may sit on a venue you did not choose.
The cost of the extra layer
You now hold risk in two places: the underlying venue's contracts and MUX's routing and pool contracts. Neither has been exploited, but the combination is strictly more surface than trading directly. There is also an information cost — knowing which venue holds your position matters when that venue has an incident, and aggregation makes that less immediate.
Liquidity and coverage
MUX operates across several chains including Arbitrum, Optimism, BNB Chain and Avalanche. Its own pool is shallow relative to the venues it routes into, so when external routing is unavailable the fallback is materially worse. Fees run roughly 0.04% to 0.08% plus borrowing on the underlying position.
Who should use MUX
Cost-sensitive traders who hold positions long enough for funding differentials to matter, and who understand that aggregation adds a layer rather than removing one. Traders who want to know exactly which contracts hold their collateral should go direct to a single venue.