Aster vs GMX Comparison
| 0% maker / 0.04% taker (USDT perps) | Fees | 0.04% maker / 0.06% taker (V2) |
Cost comparison
The basis is a Bitcoin purchase worth €1,000, including all fees and spreads.
| 0% maker / 0.04% taker (USDT perps) | Fees | 0.04% maker / 0.06% taker (V2) |
Pros & Cons
- 0% maker fee on perpetuals
- Four chains — BNB Chain, Ethereum, Solana and Arbitrum — from one interface
- Collateral can keep earning yield while positions stay open
- Non-custodial with on-chain settlement
- No KYC for on-chain trading
- No EU authorisation
- 1001x leverage marketing sets an unrealistic anchor
- Liquidity thinner than the volume leaders in smaller markets
- Tax reporting rests entirely with the user
- Trading against a liquidity pool — no order-book slippage
- Oracle-based pricing
- 100+ perpetual contracts at up to 100x leverage
- Live on several chains, centred on Arbitrum
- Long operating history in DeFi
- More expensive than fee-free order-book competitors
- Ongoing funding costs weigh on longer holding periods
- Dependence on oracle pricing as a structural risk factor
- No EU authorisation
Score Comparison
Features
- Maker fee at 0% since February 2026
- Four chains in one trading interface
- Yield-bearing collateral
- CEX-grade order-book experience
- Pool-based model instead of an order book
- No conventional slippage
- Leverage up to 100x
- Established protocol on Arbitrum
The five areas head to head
AI AnalysisFees & Costs
Since February 2026 no maker fees apply on perpetual contracts; takers pay 0.04% on USDT-margined perpetuals and considerably less on USD1 perpetuals. Perpetuals on tokenised equities carry no trading fee. Network fees of the chain in use apply on top and vary by chain. As of August 2026.
In version 2, trading fees run around 0.04% for makers and 0.06% for takers. Ongoing funding costs apply to open positions, plus swap fees when collateral is exchanged. Network fees on Arbitrum sit in the range of a few cents. Anyone holding positions for days should price in funding costs above all. As of August 2026.
Usability & User Experience
The interface follows centralised exchange conventions and is quick to navigate for anyone with futures experience. Access is by wallet connection without registration. Traders using several chains need to watch collateral and gas conditions on each. As of August 2026.
The interface is deliberately simple and one of the more approachable entries in the segment — position size, leverage and collateral are set in a few steps. Anyone unfamiliar with the pool model should read up on funding costs and oracle pricing first. As of August 2026.
Features & Offering
Aster combines perpetuals on cryptocurrencies with perpetuals on tokenised equities and metals. Alongside market, limit, stop-loss and take-profit orders it offers hidden orders and grid trading. A distinguishing feature is yield-bearing collateral: posted capital can continue to earn while a position stays open. As of August 2026.
More than 100 perpetual contracts trade against a liquidity pool, with WETH, USDC or GMX serving as collateral. Pricing comes from oracle feeds rather than an order book. Beyond trading, users can supply liquidity; the protocol's fees flow predominantly to those providers. As of August 2026.
Details
| Aster (merger of Astherus & APX Finance) | Company | GMX Protocol |
| Seychelles | Headquarters | Decentralised, no registered office |
Verdict
In our overall rating Aster leads with 4.7 against 4.2 for GMX.
For most investors Aster is therefore the better choice.
Aster emerged from the merger of Astherus and APX Finance and positions itself as the multi-chain alternative to single-chain perpetual DEXs. Trading spans BNB Chain, Ethereum, Solana and Arbitrum, settlement stays on-chain and custody stays with the user.
On pricing, Aster moved in February 2026: makers pay 0% on perpetuals, takers 0.04% on USDT-margined perpetuals, and perpetuals on tokenised equities carry no trading fee at all. Collateral posted in certain forms continues to earn yield while a position is open.
The advertised 1001x leverage is mainly a marketing signal and is barely usable in practice — liquidation thresholds at that level are extremely tight. The platform holds no EU authorisation; perpetuals sit outside MiCA in any case, and tax reporting rests entirely with the user. Aster is worth a look for experienced traders who want several chains from one interface.
GMX takes a different route from order-book DEXs: trades run against a liquidity pool and prices come from oracle feeds. That has a practical benefit — even larger positions execute without the slippage a thin order book would produce. The counterweight is that liquidity providers carry the risk and are compensated through fees.
In version 2, trading fees run around 0.04% for makers and 0.06% for takers, plus ongoing funding costs on open positions. That makes GMX more expensive than the fee-free order-book competitors, particularly for positions held over longer periods.
The centre of gravity remains Arbitrum, with the protocol also live on Avalanche and further chains. More than 100 perpetual contracts trade at up to 100x leverage. GMX suits traders building larger positions who want to avoid order-book slippage and who price in funding costs. The platform holds no EU authorisation; perpetuals sit outside MiCA in any case, and tax reporting rests entirely with the user.