dYdX vs Jupiter Comparison
| 0.05% taker / 0.01% maker | Fees | 4-7 bps position open/close |
Cost comparison
The basis is a Bitcoin purchase worth €1,000, including all fees and spreads.
| 0.05% taker / 0.01% maker | Fees | 4-7 bps position open/close |
Pros & Cons
- Fully decentralised order book — matching runs through validators
- Purpose-built Cosmos chain rather than a rollup dependency
- Long operating history and mature market structure
- 200+ markets
- Low network fees
- Market share has fallen sharply as liquidity moved to newer venues
- Thinner books and higher slippage in secondary markets
- No EU authorisation
- Support runs through community channels
- Near-zero network fees on Solana
- Very fast execution
- Embedded in Solana's largest trading ecosystem
- Pool model without order-book slippage
- Liquidity provision through JLP with a share of fees
- Narrow market list — essentially the major pairs
- Funding costs on open positions
- Very high leverage tiers on individual pairs raise liquidation risk
- No EU authorisation
Score Comparison
Features
- Decentralised matching at validator level
- Purpose-built Cosmos chain
- Established name in derivatives
- 200+ perpetual markets
- Network fees at a fraction of a cent
- JLP pool at billion-dollar scale
- Part of the Solana trading ecosystem
- Fee share for liquidity providers
The five areas head to head
AI AnalysisFees & Costs
Fees run around 0.01% for makers and 0.05% for takers, tiered by trading volume, plus very low network fees on the native Cosmos chain. Against the fee-free newcomers in the segment that is no longer competitive; against centralised exchanges it remains inexpensive. As of August 2026.
Opening and closing a position each cost around 0.06%, with ongoing funding costs on top. Network fees on Solana sit well below a cent per transaction and are effectively negligible. A large share of fees flows to providers of pool liquidity. As of August 2026.
Usability & User Experience
The interface is aimed squarely at professional users and assumes experience with margin and funding. Access runs through a wallet connection. As of August 2026.
The interface is among the most approachable in this comparison and navigable for newcomers. A Solana wallet is required; there is no registration step. As of August 2026.
Features & Offering
More than 200 perpetual markets run on a purpose-built Cosmos chain. The architectural distinction is that the order book is not operated centrally but by the network's validators. Market and limit orders are joined by stop-loss, stop-limit and take-profit. As of August 2026.
Perpetual trading runs against the JLP pool, which bundles several underlying assets and stablecoins. The offering concentrates on the major pairs; very high leverage tiers arrived on selected pairs in 2026. The aggregator additionally opens up spot trading across Solana. As of August 2026.
Details
| dYdX Trading Inc. | Company | Jupiter Exchange |
| United States | Headquarters | Singapore |
Verdict
In our overall rating dYdX leads with 4.3 against 4.0 for Jupiter.
For most investors dYdX is therefore the better choice.
dYdX set the standard in decentralised derivatives for years and made the most consistent architectural move in the sector with version 4: away from Ethereum, onto a purpose-built Cosmos chain where validators run the order book themselves. Matching, not just settlement, is decentralised — something most competitors still do not offer.
Market position has shifted drastically. From clear leadership in 2023, dYdX has fallen to a low single-digit share of perpetual volume while Hyperliquid and newer order-book DEXs absorbed the liquidity. For traders that mainly means thinner books in secondary markets and more noticeable slippage than at the volume leaders.
Technically the platform remains solid and fees of around 0.01% maker and 0.05% taker are reasonable. Traders who weight decentralisation highly find the most consistent implementation here; those chasing tight spreads are better served elsewhere. The platform holds no EU authorisation; perpetuals sit outside MiCA in any case, and tax reporting rests entirely with the user.
Jupiter is the central trading venue on Solana and built its perpetuals as part of a wider ecosystem. As with GMX, trades run against a liquidity pool — here the JLP pool, which bundles Solana, Ethereum, Bitcoin and stablecoins and recently stood at around 1.4 billion US dollars.
In practice Solana plays to its strengths: network fees sit at a fraction of a cent and execution is fast. Trading fees run around 0.06% on open and close, plus funding costs on open positions. Very high leverage tiers arrived on selected pairs in 2026.
The constraint is breadth: perpetual trading concentrates on the major pairs around SOL, ETH and BTC, so anyone looking for a wide altcoin perpetual list is in the wrong place. For users already active on Solana, Jupiter is the obvious route. The platform holds no EU authorisation; perpetuals sit outside MiCA in any case, and tax reporting rests entirely with the user.