Extended vs MetaMask Comparison
| 0% maker / 0.025% taker | Fees | 0.114% maker / 0.143% taker (base tier, incl. MetaMask fee) |
Cost comparison
The basis is a Bitcoin purchase worth €1,000, calculated from the disclosed trading fee. A price markup in the spread is not included, because most providers do not publish it.
| 0% maker / 0.025% taker | Fees | 0.114% maker / 0.143% taker (base tier, incl. MetaMask fee) |
Not enough reviews available.
MetaMask Perps routes every order to Hyperliquid. The rates MetaMask lists in its help centre include Hyperliquid's fee and MetaMask's markup, and they apply when you open and when you close a position.
| Transaction | Cost at MetaMask Perps |
|---|---|
| Taker order, e.g. a market order | 0.1432% |
| Maker order, e.g. a limit order that does not fill immediately | 0.1144% |
| Breakdown, calculated | Hyperliquid entry tier after a 4% referral discount (0.0432% taker, 0.0144% maker) plus 0.1% MetaMask |
| Deposit, from USD 10 | no MetaMask fee; network and bridge fees depend on the chain |
| Withdrawal as USDC on Arbitrum | flat USD 1, charged by Hyperliquid |
| Example: open and close USD 1,000 with a market order | USD 2.86, directly on Hyperliquid at tier 0: USD 0.90 |
How to save: Limit orders cost 0.1144% instead of 0.1432%. If you trade larger amounts regularly, trading directly on Hyperliquid costs just under a third at the entry tier; all tiers are in our Hyperliquid review. We compare other decentralised derivatives exchanges in our perp DEX comparison.
As of 22 October 2026 according to the MetaMask help centre, How to trade perps.
Pros & Cons
- 0% maker fee, 0.025% taker
- Daily maker rebates based on maker share
- Very low network fees on Starknet
- Unified margin across several asset classes
- Self-custody
- Considerably smaller than the market leaders
- Around 50 trading pairs — a narrower list than competitors
- No EU authorisation
- Support runs through community channels
- Perpetual trading without leaving the MetaMask wallet
- Execution through the Hyperliquid order book
- Fee openly disclosed, no hidden spread
- One-click funding from various EVM chains
- Self-custody, no KYC
- 0.1% builder fee on top of the executing order book's own fee
- Trading directly on Hyperliquid is noticeably cheaper
- No EU authorisation
- Blocked in several countries including the US and the UK
Score Comparison
Features
- Fee-free on the maker side
- Team with Revolut roots
- Cross-asset collateral and unified margin
- Network costs in the cents range
- Out of beta since April 2026
- One-click funding from any EVM chain
- Transparently disclosed additional fee
- Leverage up to 40x on Bitcoin
The five areas head to head
AI AnalysisFees & Costs
Makers pay no trading fee, takers 0.025%. Depending on 30-day maker share, daily rebates of up to 2 basis points apply on top. Network fees on Starknet typically run to a few cents per transaction and barely register against the trading fee. As of August 2026.
MetaMask lists 0.1432% taker and 0.1144% maker per order for perps, charged when a position is opened and when it is closed. That rate contains Hyperliquid's fee and a 0.1% markup. MetaMask charges nothing on deposits, and Hyperliquid takes a flat USD 1 on withdrawals. Directly on Hyperliquid's order book the same order costs 0.045% taker and 0.015% maker at the entry tier. As of 22 October 2026.
Usability & User Experience
The interface is functional and aimed at users with futures experience. Access runs through a wallet connection. As of August 2026.
The main advantage is skipping account opening and bridge transfers: existing MetaMask users can start without registration. The perpetuals interface is deliberately leaner than a full futures terminal, which eases entry but limits advanced functionality. As of October 2026.
Features & Offering
Extended runs more than 50 perpetual pairs and adds spot and lending markets. Collateral can be deployed across asset classes and margin is unified at account level. Alongside standard order types there are TP/SL brackets that set target and stop together. As of August 2026.
Trading runs from the MetaMask interface and is executed through Hyperliquid. Positions can be funded in one click from various EVM chains. Alongside market, limit, stop-loss and take-profit orders, partial position closes are possible, and leverage reaches 40x on Bitcoin. All orders use isolated margin. As of October 2026.
Details
| X10 Ltd | Company | Consensys (provider: Hyperliquid) |
| Seychelles | Headquarters | United States |
Verdict
In our overall rating MetaMask leads with 4.7 against 4.4 for Extended.
For most investors MetaMask is therefore the better choice.
Extended was built by a team with a Revolut background and runs on Starknet mainnet. The product promise goes beyond plain perpetuals: collateral can be used across asset classes, margin is unified, and spot and lending markets round out the offering.
On price Extended leads: makers pay nothing, takers 0.025%, with daily maker rebates depending on maker share. Network fees on Starknet run to a few cents per transaction, so total costs stay low even for frequent trading.
Scale needs stating plainly: measured by capital locked, Extended is far smaller than Hyperliquid or Lighter, and the market list covers roughly 50 pairs. The platform holds no EU authorisation; perpetuals sit outside MiCA in any case, and tax reporting rests entirely with the user.
MetaMask brought perpetual trading into its own wallet and took it out of beta in April 2026. Execution is not handled by MetaMask but by Hyperliquid in the background, so users trade on the largest perpetual order book without leaving the wallet and without a separate account.
Convenience carries a clearly stated price: MetaMask charges an openly disclosed builder fee of 0.1% on top of Hyperliquid's own fee, which starts at 0.015% maker and 0.045% taker. Trading directly on Hyperliquid is therefore markedly cheaper; what you give up is one-click access from inside the wallet.
Access is blocked in the US, the UK, Ontario and Belgium. The platform holds no EU authorisation; perpetuals sit outside MiCA in any case, and tax reporting rests entirely with the user. The route makes sense for users already working inside MetaMask who value convenience over the last few basis points.