Bitcoin Perp Venue Comparison (2026)
Short answer: This list uses an editorial venue-level liquidity score, with the recorded taker fee as a tiebreaker. It does not measure BTC order-book depth.
Bitcoin Perp Venue Comparison — ranked by editorial venue liquidity score
| # | Protocol | Editorial venue liquidity score | Fee model | Max lev | Rating |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Hyperliquid | 9.5/10 | 0.015% / 0.045% | 40x | 9.2/10 |
| 2 | dYdX | 9/10 | 0.01% / 0.05% | 50x | 9/10 |
| 3 | tradeXYZ | 8.5/10 | 0.03% / 0.09% | 50x | 7/10 |
| 4 | GMX | 8.5/10 | 0.04% or 0.06% when opening and again when closing; rate depends on whether the action improves or worsens pool imbalance | 100x | 8.5/10 |
| 5 | Orderly Network | 8/10 | 0% / 0.03% | 50x | 7.8/10 |
| 6 | Jupiter Perps | 8/10 | 0.06% when opening and again when closing; base position fee; price impact, borrowing, swap, and network costs are separate | 250x | 8.3/10 |
| 7 | Lighter | 7.5/10 | 0% / 0% | 50x | 7.5/10 |
| 8 | Bluefin | 7.5/10 | 0.01% / 0.035% | 50x | 8/10 |
| 9 | Apex Omni | 7.5/10 | 0.02% / 0.05% | 100x | 8/10 |
| 10 | Paradex | 7/10 | 0% / 0% | 50x | 7.5/10 |
| 11 | Variational | 7/10 | 0% / 0% | 50x | 7.5/10 |
| 12 | SynFutures | 7/10 | 0.01% / 0.02% | 100x | 7.8/10 |
Ranked from the PerpFinder venue registry. Open a venue review for its recorded review date. For order-book venues, the cost comparison tool estimates the trading fee, half-spread, and slippage. Funding costs are separate. Check funding rates for the market and holding period.
What the Bitcoin comparison measures
The table sorts venues by PerpFinder's editorial venue-level liquidity score, then uses the recorded taker fee as a tiebreaker. These are venue-level inputs. The table does not measure BTC depth or establish which venue gives the cheapest Bitcoin fill.
The Bitcoin and Ethereum tables use the same venue scores and ordering. Use the cost comparison tool with BTC selected to compare a Bitcoin order. Check BTC funding rates separately for the intended position direction and holding period.
Compare the same Bitcoin trade
Select BTC, the intended order size, and the buy or sell side in the cost tool. Check the market type and fee scenario. Compare observations from the same period because order books can change between measurements.
For order-book venues, the entry estimate adds the trading fee, half-spread, and slippage beyond the best quote. A partial fill or missing book data limits the comparison. Read the cost methodology before interpreting those rows.
Pool-based venues use their own position-fee and price-impact models. Check the selected market and direction rather than treating every fee as a maker or taker charge.
An illustrative BTC fee calculation
Assume a $100,000 BTC position pays a 5-basis-point fee on entry and the same fee on exit. Each fee is $50, for $100 in total. This example assumes unchanged notional and excludes spread, slippage, funding, and other charges.
A 4-6 bps position fee on each side of an unchanged $100,000 position implies $80-$120 round-trip in position fees. GMX selects its fee from the market balance for each action. The example excludes price impact, borrowing, funding, and network charges.
A fee-only comparison cannot establish the full cost of that position. Use measured entry costs and a separate funding estimate for the proposed holding period.
Read the score with its review
The venue review explains the recorded editorial rating and any available review date. That rating supplies context about the venue as a whole. It does not establish a measured BTC liquidity advantage over another venue.
Check available BTC markets, contract terms, collateral, and leverage limits before depositing. A venue-wide leverage maximum does not establish the limit for every Bitcoin position.