Provider at a glance
- Category
- Cross-Chain Swaps
- Entity
- All 2 Bungee products
- Official website
- bungee.exchange
Independent rankingchecked How it works
Details
Scored 60 out of 100 under methodology 2026.10.18, from the evidence read on file.
Bungee / Socket
Bridge aggregator and solver marketplace
Cross-Chain Swaps
#7 Overall
Ranked #7 of 7 cross-chain swaps in the published ranking
60
ChainChoice Score
The ChainChoice Score, shown against 100: published scores run from 41 to 99.- Medium evidence confidence
Is Bungee / Socket right for you?
Look elsewhere if these come first
- Measured all-in cost5/10 here; Squid scores 6
- Trust model and exploit record3/10 here; deBridge scores 7
- Published price versus observed price4/10 here; deBridge scores 8
- Chains actually served4/10 here; Squid scores 9
Not yet tested for your country. Markets it lists: Global.
to test where you can use it.
The rank above is the published one, the same for every reader. Find my best cross-chain swap route shows where it lands for you.
What will Bungee / Socket cost you?
Not priced on this basis
- Your monthly volume
- $1k
How safe is Bungee / Socket?
- Evidence: partial3 of 4 criteria rest on quoted, sourced receipts.
- LicenceMiCA (EU): no register record on file here.
Alternatives to Bungee / Socket
Compare all 4- 4Squid6 points above · stronger on route coverage (9 against 4)66
- 5Rango Exchange6 points above · stronger on bridge security model (5 against 3)66
- 6deBridge4 points above · stronger on bridge security model (7 against 3)64
For your setup
Find out if Bungee / Socket fits you
The rank above is the published one — the same for every visitor. Answer the category's questions and this section shows where Bungee / Socket lands for you, which criteria your answers weight up, and which stated needs the record does or does not meet. The published rank stays beside it.
- A few questions
- No account required
- Ranking-blind: no commercial input
- Personalised in under 60 seconds
Find my best cross-chain swap routeNothing is inferred from clicks, popularity or commercial value.
Why this rank
Why Bungee / Socket ranks #7
Each strength is read from evidence on a 0–10 ladder and weighted as the published methodology states. The 32 objective points these produce (13.0 here) sit inside the score; availability, friction, trust record and measured data add the rest.
4 published criteria · Σ weight 100
CriterionWeightStrength · 0–10ScoreContrib.MedianBestRankEvidence
355+5.606.08#5/7Loading evidence…
303+2.885.08#6/7Loading evidence…
204+2.564.08#4/7Loading evidence…
154+1.926.09#5/7Loading evidence…
Hairline = best in this ranking · tick = its median · a missing bar is "not scored", never zero
Margin−4behind deBridge, #6
RobustnessHoldsacross a one-point change to each of its 4 criterion scores, the re-run scores 58–62 and stays #7
Evidence4 of 4 scored3 quoted, 3 with a source link
What would move the rank
Each line is the ranking run again with one of Bungee / Socket’s criterion scores changed and every other value held: the smallest whole-point change on that criterion that moves its rank, and where the re-run puts it. Up to 4 climbs and 3 falls are listed, smallest change first. Nothing here is a forecast.
Measured all-in cost 5 → 7 on its ladder · passes deBridge+264#7 → #6
Trust model and exploit record 3 → 6 on its ladder · passes deBridge+366#7 → #5
Published price versus observed price 4 → 8 on its ladder · passes deBridge+465#7 → #6
Chains actually served 4 → 9 on its ladder · passes deBridge+565#7 → #6
Smallest climb: measured all-in cost 5 → 7 passes deBridge, #6.
Strengths
0 from the score dataWhere it leads
No scored criterion is at or within one point of the category best, so no strength can be stated from the data.
Tradeoffs
4 from the score dataWhere it trails
Not for readers who put first
- Measured all-in cost — 5/10 against a category best of 8/10
- Trust model and exploit record — 3/10 against a category best of 8/10
- Published price versus observed price — 4/10 against a category best of 8/10
- Chains actually served — 4/10 against a category best of 9/10
Record watch-outs
- Its best price comes from the legacy Socket v2 API, which now needs an API key (HTTP 401 without one), not from the flagship path: the Bungee Auto endpoint returns HTTP 410 ("Bungee API has been deprecated, migrate to Socket V3 APIs"), and the no-auth Socket V3 endpoint imposes feeBps 20 on every route (about 20 bps against the legacy path's roughly 1 bp) and rejects overrides: "Fee params (feeBps / feeTakerAddress) are not allowed on the public API". Meanwhile Socket has repositioned as a money-movement routing network spanning on-ramps and payments, so bridge aggregation is no longer the centre of the product.
- The route count depends on the endpoint and the query parameters and should not be read as a fixed number: on 2026-09-14 the legacy Socket v2 aggregator returned 6 routes with zero integrator fee (Across 999.892866 and stargate-v2 999.899999 among them) and the public Socket V3 endpoint returned 9, every one carrying feeBps 20 to the same fee taker.
Competitive position
Where Bungee / Socket leads and where it trails
Rank on every objective dimension among the rows scored on it. A criterion in the top third of its pool is listed as a lead, the bottom third as a trail; the middle is neither. Popularity, size and commercial terms are not dimensions.
Availability#1 / 714.0 of 20 · constant here
Published criteria#7 / 79.7 of 30 · best 17.4
Friction#1 / 72.7 of 10 · constant here
Trust record#1 / 73.2 of 8 · constant here
Measured data#1 / 78.3 of 18 · constant here
Where Bungee / Socket leadsNo criterion in the top third of its pool.
Where it trails
- Measured all-in cost#5 / 7
- Trust model and exploit record#6 / 7
- Chains actually served#5 / 7
Closest alternatives
The 3 nearest rows by score
Nearest by published score in either direction. Each card states the criteria on which the two rows differ and the cost difference under the same scenario inputs; the compare arithmetic below shows why the higher one ranks higher.
deBridge#6 of 7 · score 64 · 4.0 points ahead
Bungee / Socket leads on
- Measured all-in cost5 vs 2
- Chains actually served4 vs 2
deBridge leads on
- Trust model and exploit record7 vs 3
- Published price versus observed price8 vs 4
Largest single reason deBridge is ahead: published criteria (+4.2 display points).Scenario cost: deBridge has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Rango Exchange#5 of 7 · score 66 · 6.0 points ahead
Bungee / Socket leads onNo scored criterion
Rango Exchange leads on
- Trust model and exploit record5 vs 3
- Chains actually served6 vs 4
Largest single reason Rango Exchange is ahead: published criteria (+5.7 display points).Scenario cost: Rango Exchange has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Squid#4 of 7 · score 66 · 6.0 points ahead
Bungee / Socket leads on
- Published price versus observed price4 vs 2
Squid leads on
- Measured all-in cost6 vs 5
- Trust model and exploit record4 vs 3
- Chains actually served9 vs 4
Largest single reason Squid is ahead: published criteria (+6.2 display points).Scenario cost: Squid has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Against the leader
80 vs 60 · gap 20.0Why Across ranks above Bungee / Socket
The compare workspace's arithmetic applied to these two rows. Each dimension's share of the gap is its weight × the difference, on the displayed scale — it reproduces the displayed gap of 20.0 to within rounding.
DimensionThisAcrossGap share
Availability · 23% weight · constant here14.014.0same
Published criteria · 35% weight9.717.4−20.0, worse
Friction · 12% weight · constant here2.72.7same
Trust record · 9% weight · constant here3.23.2same
Measured data · 21% weight · constant here8.38.3same
Published criterionThisAcrossPoints
Measured all-in cost · w3558−3.36, worse
Trust model and exploit record · w3038−4.80, worse
Published price versus observed price · w2048−2.56, worse
Chains actually served · w1543+0.48, better
Net6080−20.0
Your scenario
Bungee / Socket is not priced for this scenario
Swap fee on your volume for a year. Excludes network gas and any withdrawal fee. Change an input and every figure recomputes from the published rate; the published rank does not move.
your cost/yr · default scenario — set your own
Your monthly volume · your input$1k
Rate read from the provider’s published pricing ↗ on 14 September 2026.
your cost/yrCost is stated as your cost/yr in USD; it is never a yield, never annualised, and it does not enter the score.
Not priced on this basis
Under the default inputs · USDCategory medianNot priced0 of 7 rows priced
Cheapest pricedNone pricedDifference not stated · availability not applied — set your country to filter
7 of 7 rows in this ranking have no verified rate for this scenario and are absent from the median, not counted as free.
Evidence
No evidence reading date recorded
One row per published criterion: the page each strength was read from, its source type by domain, the reading date and whether the file and the published table agree. Open a row for the quote and the receipt.
4 of 4 cells scored
Score evidencePartial3 of 4 criteria reconstruct from receipts
3 of 4 criteria reconstruct from a quoted, sourced receipt.Public receiptsReading…3 quoted with a source URL
The receipt file has not been read yet.Evidence confidenceHighcoverage and corroboration, never freshness
4/4 criteria scored, with 3 dated sources quoted.RobustnessHoldsrank #7 across every one-point re-run
Whether the position holds when one criterion score is changed by one point and the ranking is run again. It is always a re-run of the ranking, never an estimate.Some criterion strengths have no observation on file, or their quote carries no source URL a reader could follow.
Reading the evidence ledger…
CriterionSourceTypeReadFreshnessStatusReceipt
Measured all-in coststrength 5 · weight 35Report an error——
Unknown
No reading date is recorded for this cell or its category.No receipt
A strength is published but no quote or source page is on file for it.Trust model and exploit recordstrength 3 · weight 30Report an error——
Unknown
No reading date is recorded for this cell or its category.No receipt
A strength is published but no quote or source page is on file for it.Published price versus observed pricestrength 4 · weight 20Report an error——
Unknown
No reading date is recorded for this cell or its category.No receipt
A strength is published but no quote or source page is on file for it.Chains actually servedstrength 4 · weight 15Report an error——
Unknown
No reading date is recorded for this cell or its category.No receipt
A strength is published but no quote or source page is on file for it.How you can lose money here, and what the ranking scores
- Verification failure (Bungee / Socket 3/10): an invalid state or transfer is accepted.Scored by Trust model and exploit record · 30%
- Execution failure (Bungee / Socket 4/10): you get a worse price, later, or nothing.Scored by Published price versus observed price · 20%
Not assessed by this ranking: Contract failure, Control failure, Regulatory failure, Exit failure. A high place says nothing about these; the Methodology tab says what each means. Also scored, as cost, quality or a summary of several families: Measured all-in cost (35%), Chains actually served (15%).
Facts
facts, not scoresWhat the record publishes
- Pricing
- Docs state: "Socket does not charge any additional fees. All onchain execution costs are covered within the quoted fees. Socket does not add any markup or hidden fees to transactions." and "Socket does not charge a fee for using the API"; integrators may add feeBps/feeTakerAddress. The legacy Bungee API now returns HTTP 410 ("Bungee API has been deprecated, migrate to Socket V3 APIs"). Measured 14 September 2026 04:08 UTC on 1000 USDC Ethereum to Arbitrum: the no-auth public Socket V3 endpoint (documented for "Testing and prototyping") returned 9 routes, each carrying feeBps 20 (2.000000 USDC) to fee taker 0xe3d091bcb9406ddb9a121e37f4eb1345336afbbf, and rejects fee overrides; best output 998.000000. The bungee.exchange frontend showed 999.925 USDC (suggested, 3 s, $0.38 gas) and 1,000 USDC (max output, 3 min, $0.06 gas). The legacy Socket v2 aggregator returned 6 routes with zero integrator fee, including Across at 999.892866 with $0.0137 gas.Bungee / Socket — official pricing page ↗ · 14 September 2026
- Prices published in
- USDBungee / Socket — official pricing page ↗ · 14 September 2026
- Licences held
- Not published
- Compliance level
- partial
- Regulatory note
- Not published
- Supported chains
- Multi-chain
- Markets served
- global
- Primary markets
- Not published
- Restricted markets
- Not published
- Operating limits
- Not published
- Availability note
- Socket's Terms of Use (last updated 2 March 2026) bar sanctioned persons and anyone in a Restricted Jurisdiction under Schedule 1: Afghanistan, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Myanmar, Burundi, Central African Republic, Cuba, DR Congo, Egypt, Eritrea, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Mali, Moldova, North Korea, China, Russia, Serbia, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, Ukraine (including occupied regions), Venezuela, Yemen, Zimbabwe and "the Balkans". The terms also state that Socket "does not represent that the Functionalities are appropriate or available for use in all jurisdictions, including the United States, and may restrict access where required for legal or regulatory reasons".
Legal entity on file: Bungee, placed in 2 products. Only confirmed entities are shown; nothing is inferred from the brand name.
If something goes wrong with Bungee / Socket: where to complain, and where to report a scam
Loading the routes for your country.
How this page is reviewed
Reviewed means this product in this category was read against its sources on or after that date; every ranked category is re-read at least every 45 days. Models research, extract and parse. A deterministic engine ranks. Every quote passes an adversarial refute pass.
Accountable for this review: Mathias Siemonsmeier, Founder.
How we review · Review calendar · Corrections log · How we make money
History
What the record carries
Changes to published ranks are recorded in a ledger; every step and its cause is listed on the rank-history page. The entries below begin with the current verified snapshot, then the methodology versions whose changes applied to this category, newest first.
10 methodology entries
- currentCurrent verified snapshot · methodology 2026.10.18Score 60, #7 of 7. 4 of 4 criteria scored. History starts here; earlier values are not interpolated.
- 10 October 2026
2026.10.8When nothing serves your country, the list shown for reference is the published ranking · platform-wide- fixed The reference list shown when nothing serves your country is the published order with the published scores, and a build check now fails any such list out of that order or with a score the ranking does not publish.
- fixed The explorer prints an overall rank only for a row the published ranking holds; a country entrant such as Coinbase Commerce for US merchants shows no overall rank.
- changed Published orders do not move. Country results change only where nothing serves the country: in India bill pay keeps Bitcoin Well first and now shows Strike second, as published; 35 such runs across all categories and countries now match the published list exactly.
- 10 October 2026
2026.10.6A criterion you require re-scores the rows that meet it · platform-wide- changed The explorer sends each criterion you require, at any band, as fit_required with your other answers; region, licence, chain and fact filters stay filters. On /best, a required criterion joins For you as a marked preference does, which needs your country; Overall stays the published ranking, filtered.
- added Every published criterion has a golden case as the explorer sends it (require:<criterion>), so the order a requirement gives is replayed and gated as the published order is, and a change to it needs an entry here.
- 16 September 2026
2026.09.15Dimension scores carry tenths, and eleven more categories are re-read from primary sources · platform-wide- changed Dimension scores resolve to tenths of a point (O-04b), and weightedTotal is rounded to six decimal places before the order is read. 518 published scores move across 107 categories that were not re-read; none of them moves by more than 4 points, and most move by 1.
- fixed 66 published scores change in the eleven re-read categories, against a verbatim source each. The largest moves are Reflexer RAI (−16), Beefy and Unrekt (−11), Aztec (−10) and Golem (+9) — all of them rows whose sources had moved since their last read.
- changed Published order moves in 38 of 119 categories and three #1s change: smart_contract_audits (Zellic → Certora) and travel_rule_compliance (Sumsub Travel Rule → CodeVASP) on the finer resolution, kyc_compliance (Veriff → Sumsub) on the re-read.
- added availabilitySource (O-04g): for a reader who states a country, a row whose availability in that country rests on a region tag its record gives no source for sorts below every sourced row. It is inert in every order published here, which states no country.
Methodology 2026.10.18, the same published run every visitor sees · receipt cross_chain_swaps:bungee_socket:2026.10.18:d00a64c75a3b
Are you Bungee / Socket? Reply to this verdict, or send evidence, ask for a correction or claim the listing. Every message gets a public ticket number; none of it changes a rank unless a public page or a signed statement supports it.