11 Perp DEXs Compared: Fees, Custody and Trading Models

This comparison covers eleven perpetual-trading routes, from order books to pool-backed markets. The useful choice depends on the contract, account class, custody arrangement and full cost of opening, holding and closing the position.

This shortlist compares eleven routes to perpetual trading: Hyperliquid, Lighter, Aster, Extended, GRVT, Paradex, dYdX, GMX, Pacifica, Jupiter Perps and Entropy (@entropyIO). The order groups useful starting points and contrasting trading models. It isn't a live-volume league table or a claim that every venue serves every country.

Referral disclosure: W3Match may receive commissions, points or other rewards from links marked Referral. A reward doesn't determine inclusion or position in this comparison. A referral discount applies only where the venue's current terms provide one.

Trading involves leverage, liquidation and infrastructure risk. Compare the product and access terms before funding an account. The core comparison was reviewed on October 13, 2026; Entropy was added on October 14. No funded execution benchmark was performed.

The shortlist at a glance

The comparison deliberately keeps funding separate from entry fees. A short round trip and a position held through several funding periods can produce different cost rankings.

1. Hyperliquid: an order-book starting point

Hyperliquid product facts

Onboarding and withdrawal guide.

A deposit arriving on HyperCore and a transfer to a HyperEVM address are different destinations. Match the destination shown in the actual deposit flow. An accepted asset deposit also does not prove that the asset is eligible as margin for every contract.

Hyperliquid is a useful first comparison for traders wanting an order-book interface and a clearly published fee ladder. Its base validator-operated perp schedule lists 0.045% taker and 0.015% maker fees before relevant adjustments. That means a hypothetical $10,000 taker fill has a $4.50 base fee. Fee schedule.

HIP-3 markets can add deployer economics or growth-mode adjustments, so don't apply one baseline to every displayed asset. Staking, quote-asset treatment and the actual account tier can also change the rate.

The referral documentation describes a 4% trading-fee discount for the user's first $25 million in volume, with exclusions and separate reward limits. That's 4% off a fee, not four percentage points off the trade value. Referral terms.

2. Lighter: choose the account, not the slogan

Lighter / REFERRALLighterTrade with zero Standard maker and taker fees.Standard taker orders have a documented 300 ms delay. Funding and other costs can still apply.Open Lighter ↗Pawnie’s referral link

Lighter product facts

Account classes and limits.

These are execution-policy differences, not simply loyalty discounts. For an API strategy, order cancellation latency and request quotas can matter even when its orders usually rest as maker liquidity. The published latency treatment is not an independent measurement of your end-to-end fill time.

The choice is a workflow trade-off. A trader placing occasional orders may evaluate Standard differently from a bot needing another latency or rate-limit profile. Advanced-order features and other costs need their own check.

I would inspect the actual account class and order type before comparing its zero headline with a paid venue. Check current eligibility before treating a referral as a discount.

3. Aster: the contract group changes the fee

Aster product facts

Contract fee groups.

A useful Aster comparison names the contract group before the percentage. Equity, commodity and crypto references can share an interface while using different schedules. The same screen is not evidence of identical collateral, trading hours or underlying-asset rights.

Aster's current general-crypto perpetual schedule lists zero maker and 0.04% base taker fees. Group B has a different taker schedule, while RWA pairs list 0.0125%. A BTC fee quote and an equity-linked perp quote therefore answer different questions. Equity or RWA perps provide price exposure, not ownership or redemption rights over the underlying security. Aster fees.

This is a good example of why a single “exchange fee” column can mislead. Check the market group, quote asset and account tier. Product modes also have their own mechanics.

Aster has published referral materials, but campaign points and a continuing fee rebate shouldn't be treated as interchangeable income. Use the currently applicable program and confirm the reward asset. Referral policy.

4. Extended: a relatively direct fee comparison

Extended product facts

Technical architecture, account creation.

A wallet address, a trading account and withdrawable balance are separate concepts. The API documents withdrawals after initial-margin and market-specific post-withdrawal requirements. Unrealised profit is not automatically withdrawable on every market. Withdrawal and market API.

Extended's documentation lists a 0.025% taker and zero maker rate for its standard crypto schedule. RWA markets list a 0.010% taker rate. A $10,000 taker fill under the crypto schedule therefore costs $2.50 before the other costs of the position. Trading fees.

That published split makes it easier to build a like-for-like comparison, provided the market and account match. Maker rebates have separate qualification rules; a zero maker rate isn't a promise that an order will fill.

The ordinary referral program and invite-based affiliate program also differ. The documentation describes eligibility and volume limits for the ordinary referral discount. Confirm which program generated the link. Referrals and affiliates.

5. GRVT: compare perps and onboarding together

GRVT / REFERRALGRVTKeep asset movements under your SecureKey.GRVT requires your signing credential for actions that change asset ownership.Explore GRVT ↗Pawnie’s referral link

GRVT product facts

SecureKey, custody model.

Self-custody describes who authorises asset movements. It does not mean the operator has no role in sequencing or pausing the exchange. GRVT’s own custody explanation distinguishes those operational controls from control of the user’s signing key.

GRVT's current Level 1 perp schedule lists a 0.0450% taker rate and a small maker rebate. Its spot schedule has different rates, and the documentation distinguishes the fee model active after March 23, 2026 from an expired table above it. GRVT fee model.

The account and collateral workflow deserve equal attention. Multi-asset margin can add costs when an asset is converted to repay borrowed USDT. That charge is separate from a normal perp fill.

This route fits a comparison for someone willing to complete the relevant onboarding and inspect a more integrated trading account. Check supported jurisdictions, rather than assuming its DEX label removes those rules.

6. Paradex: retail and API rates are different

Paradex / REFERRALParadexZero trading fees for the retail route.Professional orders use a separate fee schedule; check how your order is classified.Open Paradex ↗Pawnie’s referral link

Paradex product facts

Retail and Pro fee rules.

For a professional integration, the order’s fee classification is a more useful field than the brand’s zero-fee slogan. Compare it with Lighter’s account classes: both require knowing how the account or order is categorised, but the classification rules are not interchangeable.

The order's classification matters. Someone trading through a retail interface and someone submitting API orders may be buying different execution treatment under the same brand.

Its referral page also includes historical token-aligned campaign dates. A campaign ending in April 2026 shouldn't be advertised as an active October offer simply because the page remains online. Referral documentation.

7. dYdX: inspect the current parameters

dYdX / REFERRALdYdXConnect trading tools through dYdX’s developer APIs.Official APIs cover order management, account data and live market feeds.Explore dYdX ↗Pawnie’s referral link

dYdX product facts

Developer documentation, current affiliate FAQ.

An integration needs a funding route and an account configuration as well as an API key. The presence of developer support does not establish that a third-party frontend offers every market or fee tier of the underlying venue.

dYdX offers an appchain order-book model. Its help documentation describes maker/taker pricing and taker tiers based on trailing 30-day volume, with parameters subject to governance. The effective schedule shown to the account is the one to compare. Trading fees.

The current affiliate FAQ describes the appchain program. A working referral URL does not authorize every marketing channel; inspect the agreement for the exact current program rather than borrowing conditions from an older Ethereum program. Current affiliate FAQ.

For a trader, check market access and the funding route. For a publisher, verify that the agreement applies to the exact program and frontend being promoted.

8. GMX: pool costs deserve a separate column

GMX / REFERRALGMXCompare a pool-backed alternative to order books.Position balance affects the fee; borrowing, funding and price impact are separate.Explore GMX ↗Pawnie’s referral link

GMX product facts

GMX fee components.

For GMX versus an order book, hold the position duration constant. A small difference in the opening charge may be overtaken by borrowing or funding. For a short round trip, pool balance and price impact deserve more attention than a long-horizon annualised funding figure.

GMX's common position fee is 0.04% when a trade improves the long/short balance and 0.06% when it worsens it, with market-specific exceptions. Funding, borrowing, price impact and network execution costs sit alongside that rate. GMX costs.

This is a different comparison from an order-book maker/taker fee. The pool's exposure and the direction of the trade influence the result. A longer holding period can make borrowing or funding more important than the entry rate.

GMX's referral program has published discounts and affiliate tiers. Verify the active code and route rather than treating a third-party interface fee as part of the protocol discount. GMX referrals.

9. Pacifica: another Solana order-book route

Pacifica product facts

Product overview, VIP program.

Pacifica and Jupiter can both fit a Solana workflow while using different execution economics. The relevant comparison is a Pacifica order-book fill versus the particular Jupiter product you selected, not two applications sharing a network.

Pacifica's official documentation describes a Solana perp trading ecosystem, APIs and a broader product range. Its own claimed volume figures aren't used here as an independent execution score. Pacifica overview.

Compare the current contract, account tier and order-book quote with the size you expect to trade. The presence of APIs or market-maker programs doesn't establish the depth of one pair at that moment.

The published referral and affiliate program provides a source for eligibility and link terms. Keep those terms separate from token or points speculation. Referral program.

10. Jupiter Perps: convenience with holding costs

A $10,000 JLP position opened and closed at equal notionals has a $12 base position-fee round trip before borrowing, price impact and other costs. Equal-notional JLP example: this arithmetic uses the reviewed 0.06% charge on each leg, not a GUM Beta fee.

Jupiter Perps product facts

JLP fee components, Beta markets.

A leverage slider does not make the borrowed portion the correct base for every charge. If two accounts hold the same position notional with different collateral amounts, the quoted JLP borrowing denominator remains the full position size.

That can suit a user already operating in the Jupiter ecosystem, but a multi-day position needs more than the entry quote. Inspect the full position size, hourly borrow rate and exit conditions.

Don't assume a referral program for Jupiter swaps automatically applies to its perp product. Check that the link and terms apply to the intended perp route.

11. Entropy: a builder-deployed market namespace on Hyperliquid

Entropy / REFERRALEntropyExplore EntropyIO’s builder-deployed markets.The io: contract namespace has market-specific leverage limits on Hyperliquid.Open Entropy ↗Pawnie’s referral link

EntropyIO is identified in Hyperliquid's public exchange metadata under the io namespace. The October 15 API snapshot returned thirteen registered market entries, with io:SBE and io:H100 explicitly flagged as delisted. That leaves eleven entries without that flag; it is not a count of markets with independently measured liquidity or recent fills.

Entropy product facts

The selected market parameters below come from an unauthenticated read of the official API, not a trading test.

The configured maximum is not a promise that an account can open any size at that leverage. Position limits, margin tiers, access restrictions and the executable book still matter. The raw identifiers are retained rather than guessing the legal rights or exact underlying from a ticker.

To reproduce the identity and market checks, query Hyperliquid's public info endpoint with {"type":"perpDexs"} and then {"type":"meta","dex":"io"}. This confirms the registered namespace and contract parameters. It does not establish a live spread, organic volume or a reader's final fee. Official information API.

That makes Entropy a more specific comparison with Hyperliquid than another independent base-layer exchange: the selected builder-deployed market and its economics are part of the trade. Do not assign the validator-operated base fee unchanged to every io: contract.

The official interface is entropy.io, distinct from older Solana and identity products with similar names. The reviewed terms identify Bursa Global Inc. and geographic restrictions. Entropy interface terms.

Additional product review: Arcus Stock Token spot and invite-only perps

Arcus / REFERRALArcusEligible users can trade Stock Tokens around the clock.Arcus advertises zero spot trading fees. Perps need eligible invite access; other costs can apply.Explore Arcus ↗Pawnie’s referral link

Arcus combines Stock Token spot trading with a separate perpetual-futures product on Robinhood Chain. The distinction matters: eligible users can access spot, while the October invite-code update describes controlled access to perps. Arcus is not a replacement name for dYdX Chain, which continues to operate. Product overview.

Spot trading and perpetuals use different mechanics

The July 1 launch article confirms a Robinhood Crypto investment, without disclosing the investment amount or valuation. It presents Stock Tokens as transferable/self-custodied assets and spot assets as future collateral for perps. That collateral feature is a roadmap statement in that source, not evidence that every stock token can already margin every contract. Arcus and Robinhood announcement.

The current spot router draws on more than one liquidity source. RFQ is one source alongside onchain AMMs. For the RFQ path, the trader signs an intent with a minimum output; makers return binding quotes, and the settlement transaction executes atomically or reverts. The server may combine more than one maker’s quote. Spot routing and RFQ.

This differs from treating every spot trade as an order-book fill. It also means an older description of an escrow wait is not enough to explain the current RFQ transaction. A claim of zero spot trading fees should not be stretched into zero spread, zero network cost or a verified zero fee on every derivative.

For perps, the September announcement describes isolated margin per position alongside cross margin. Isolation allocates collateral to that position; cross margin shares collateral across positions. Those are margin mechanics, not protection against every protocol or operational risk. Isolated-position release.

What a Stock Token actually represents

Arcus’s October Robinhood Wallet integration post describes Stock Tokens as tokenized debt securities issued by Robinhood Assets (Jersey) Limited. They provide economic exposure without legal or beneficial ownership rights in the underlying securities. The integration lets eligible Robinhood Wallet spot swaps execute through Arcus; it does not make every wallet swap an Arcus fill. Wallet integration and issuer disclosure.

How access, invites and Points now work

The October 1 invite update supersedes a simple manual-whitelist description. Codes are single use, and a referral link does not grant access by itself. The owner can enable automatic invite distribution, in which case a new eligible referral uses an available code. The update describes a 30-day activation window after code redemption; spot trading alone does not count as perps activation. Current invite rules.

The October Points announcement states a fixed 250,000-point weekly distribution, with releases on Wednesdays at 3 p.m. Eastern Time. Trading, market making, retained collateral and referrals can contribute; RWA and outside-hours activities have described boosts. These are discretionary participation points, not a confirmed token allocation or cash return. The current program terms and boosts can change. Arcus Points.

The practical access check is therefore specific: does the account have perps permission, and does the referral route actually include an available invite? Do not deposit or trade merely to chase an assumed token reward.

Who operates the interface, and where is it restricted?

The reviewed terms distinguish Pocket Protector Labs Inc., the Delaware interface operator, from the Arcus protocol relationship. They restrict users in the US, UK, Canada and other specified categories, and do not describe the interface as a regulated broker or exchange. A Robinhood partnership does not transfer a financial-services licence to every Arcus product. Interface terms.

Early-access watch: Derpetual

Derpetual / EARLY ACCESSDerpetualJoin Derpetual’s early-access waitlist.The current page offers waitlist registration. Production trading and rewards are not guaranteed.Join the waitlist ↗Pawnie’s referral link · Early access

Derpetual's official page currently describes early access, a waitlist and a status card. It is outside the main eleven-route comparison because a waitlist is not evidence of production trading. Joining does not guarantee an airdrop or a particular release date. Official early-access page.

Compare a trade you can actually make

Use the same market, notional, order type and holding period. Add entry and exit fees, funding or borrowing, price impact, network costs and any interface charge. Then apply only a discount that your account is eligible to receive.

That gives a trader a usable shortlist: order-book routes, account-class choices and pool-backed alternatives. For unleveraged token purchases, use the memecoin platform comparison. For European fiat-to-crypto spot access, use the MiCA platform comparison.

Questions this comparison answers

Is a zero-fee perp DEX always cheaper?

No. Lighter Standard and Paradex retail publish zero trading-fee treatment for their respective scopes. Funding, price impact, order handling and other applicable costs can still determine the complete position cost.

Does a perp on a company give me its shares?

A derivative referencing a company is not automatically an ownership claim on that company. Read the contract and collateral terms; a tokenized spot security has a different legal structure from a perpetual.

Research scope and dates

Product fact tables and additional operational details reviewed October 15, 2026. Earlier regulatory snapshots and saved referral observations retain the dates stated beside them. The comparison uses primary documentation, not a funded execution test; a missing verified value is left unassigned rather than inferred from another platform.

A $4 fee advantage can disappear during the hold

Using the standard crypto taker rates cited above, a $10,000 opening fill and $10,000 closing fill cost $9 at Hyperliquid's 0.045% base rate and $5 at Extended's 0.025% rate. That isolates a $4 difference before discounts, funding, price impact and other costs. It does not apply unchanged to every HIP-3 or RWA market.

An additional 0.04% of cumulative net holding cost on the same $10,000 notional would consume that entire $4 advantage. This is a sensitivity calculation, not an observed funding-rate difference or a recommendation. Compare actual funding direction, position duration and executable quotes. Hyperliquid fees, Extended fees.