GMX vs MetaMask Comparison

GMX
GMX
4.2of 5
Go to GMX
vs
MetaMask
MetaMask
Winner
4.7of 5
Go to MetaMask
0.04% maker / 0.06% taker (V2)FeesDepends on integrated perp provider (avg 0.02–0.06%)

Cost comparison

The basis is a Bitcoin purchase worth €1,000, including all fees and spreads.

GMXMetaMask
0.04% maker / 0.06% taker (V2)FeesDepends on integrated perp provider (avg 0.02–0.06%)

Pros & Cons

GMX
GMX
Pros
  • 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
Cons
  • 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
GMX Reviews
MetaMask
MetaMask
Pros
  • 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
Cons
  • 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
MetaMask Reviews

Score Comparison

4.3Usability4.4
4.0Features4.0
3.8Fees3.8
4.4Stability4.5
3.5Support3.6

Features

GMX
GMXHighlights
  • Pool-based model instead of an order book
  • No conventional slippage
  • Leverage up to 100x
  • Established protocol on Arbitrum
MetaMask
MetaMaskHighlights
  • Out of beta since April 2026
  • One-click funding from any EVM chain
  • Transparently disclosed additional fee
  • Leverage up to 50x

The five areas head to head

AI Analysis

Fees & Costs

GMX
GMX

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.

MetaMask
MetaMask

On top of the executing order book's fee — 0.015% maker and 0.045% taker at entry tier — sits a builder fee of 0.1% that MetaMask discloses openly. No additional swap markup applies on deposit. In total the wallet route is considerably more expensive than trading directly on the order book. As of August 2026.

Usability & User Experience

GMX
GMX

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.

MetaMask
MetaMask

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 August 2026.

Features & Offering

GMX
GMX

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.

MetaMask
MetaMask

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 50x. As of August 2026.

Details

GMXMetaMask
GMX ProtocolCompanyConsensys + integrated partners
Decentralised, no registered officeHeadquartersUnited States

Verdict

In our overall rating MetaMask leads with 4.7 against 4.2 for GMX.

For most investors MetaMask is therefore the better choice.

GMXOur Opinion

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.

MetaMaskOur Opinion

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.