Provider at a glance
- Category
- Perp House Vaults
- Entity
- All 2 GMX products
- Official website
- docs.gmx.io
Independent rankingchecked How it works
Details
Scored 81 out of 100 under methodology 2026.10.18, from the evidence read in September 2026.
GMX GM / GLV pools
Per-market liquidity pools on GMX
Perp House Vaults
#1 Overall
Ranked #1 of 9 perp house vaults in the published ranking
81
ChainChoice Score
The ChainChoice Score, shown against 100: published scores run from 41 to 99.- High evidence confidence
Is GMX GM / GLV pools right for you?
Right for you if these matter most
- How much has this vault already lost when a trader won — and can I check that number myself, today, for free?8/10, the category best
- When one trader's win is bigger than the pool, who pulls the plug — a rule I can read, or a vote I'll never hear?9/10, the category best
- Is the number they advertise what I actually earned, or does it quietly leave out what the traders took from me?9/10, the category best
Look elsewhere if these come first
- Who eats the loss before I do — and if I try to leave first, how much do they take?6/10 here; Avantis avUSDC scores 9
Not yet tested for your country. Markets it lists: Europe, Global. Restricted: United States.
to test where you can use it.
The rank above is the published one, the same for every reader. Find my best perp house vault shows where it lands for you.
What will GMX GM / GLV pools cost you?
Not priced on this basis
- Your stake
- $32k
- Expected gross yield
- 5%
How safe is GMX GM / GLV pools?
- Evidence: verified4 of 4 criteria rest on quoted, sourced receipts. Read September 2026.
- LicenceMiCA (EU): no register record on file here.
Alternatives to GMX GM / GLV pools
Compare all 4- 2Avantis avUSDC7 points below · stronger on loss waterfall and exit price (9 against 6)74
- 3Ostium OLP11 points below · weaker on verifiable loss of record (7 against 8)70
- 4Velocity Insurance Fund15 points below · weaker on verifiable loss of record (5 against 8)66
For your setup
Find out if GMX GM / GLV pools fits you
The rank above is the published one — the same for every visitor. Answer the category's questions and this section shows where GMX GM / GLV pools 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 perp house vaultNothing is inferred from clicks, popularity or commercial value.
Why it leads
Why GMX GM / GLV pools ranks #1
Each strength is read from evidence on a 0–10 ladder and weighted as the published methodology states. The 32 objective points these produce (25.5 here) sit inside the score; availability, friction, trust record and measured data add the rest. Best in this ranking on 3 of 4.
4 published criteria · Σ weight 100
CriterionWeightStrength · 0–10ScoreContrib.MedianBestRankEvidence
328+8.196.08#1/9Loading evidence…
289+8.067.09#1/9Loading evidence…
246+4.615.09#2/9Loading evidence…
169+4.616.09#1/9Loading evidence…
Hairline = best in this ranking · tick = its median · a missing bar is "not scored", never zero
Margin+7over Avantis avUSDC, #2
RobustnessHoldsacross a one-point change to each of its 4 criterion scores, the re-run scores 81 and stays #1
Evidence4 of 4 scored4 quoted, 4 with a source link
What would move the rank
Each line is the ranking run again with one of GMX GM / GLV pools’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.
How much has this vault already lost when a trader won — and can I check that number myself, today, for free? 8 → 4 on its ladder · Avantis avUSDC passes it−479#1 → #2
When one trader's win is bigger than the pool, who pulls the plug — a rule I can read, or a vote I'll never hear? 9 → 5 on its ladder · Avantis avUSDC passes it−480#1 → #2
Who eats the loss before I do — and if I try to leave first, how much do they take? 6 → 1 on its ladder · Avantis avUSDC passes it−579#1 → #2
Strengths
3 from the score dataWhere it leads
Best for readers who weight
- How much has this vault already lost when a trader won — and can I check that number myself, today, for free? — 8/10, the category best
- When one trader's win is bigger than the pool, who pulls the plug — a rule I can read, or a vote I'll never hear? — 9/10, the category best
- Is the number they advertise what I actually earned, or does it quietly leave out what the traders took from me? — 9/10, the category best
Tradeoffs
1 from the score dataWhere it trails
Not for readers who put first
- Who eats the loss before I do — and if I try to leave first, how much do they take? — 6/10 against a category best of 9/10
Record watch-outs
- The record you need exists and is free, but most convenient routes to it are closed and the one number GMX advertises can flatter you. GM tokens — the thing you actually hold — have no ticker on the public price API (2 of 127 tokens are GLV, none are GM), the keyless GLV candle series reaches back only 267 days when the same endpoint serves 1,758 days for ETH, and of GMX's own fee-versus-PnL breakdown endpoints, the fee-only marketsAprByPeriod still returned 'not allowed' to an outside caller on 2026-09-28, while marketsPnlAprByPeriod now answers without a key. So checking what your pool has lost to winning traders means writing GraphQL against a 135-market indexer in 10^30 fixed point with an undocumented sign convention. Meanwhile the advertised 'Performance APY' is excess return over a geometric-mean benchmark, not a plain return: a pool can advertise positive annualised performance in a quarter when your position lost USD value, because the 50/50 benchmark fell further. And when the protection finally fires it fires on the trader, not for you — ADL closes someone's winning position without warning, which is what keeps you solvent, but there is no page anywhere in 126 that tells you the last time it had to.
Competitive position
Where GMX GM / GLV pools 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 / 914.0 of 20 · pool best
Published criteria#1 / 919.1 of 30 · pool best
Friction#1 / 92.7 of 10 · constant here
Trust record#1 / 93.2 of 8 · constant here
Measured data#1 / 98.3 of 18 · constant here
Where GMX GM / GLV pools leads
- How much has this vault already lost when a trader won — and can I check that number myself, today, for free?#1 / 9
- When one trader's win is bigger than the pool, who pulls the plug — a rule I can read, or a vote I'll never hear?#1 / 9
- Who eats the loss before I do — and if I try to leave first, how much do they take?#2 / 9
- Is the number they advertise what I actually earned, or does it quietly leave out what the traders took from me?#1 / 9
Where it trailsNo criterion in the bottom third of its pool.
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.
Avantis avUSDC#2 of 9 · score 74 · 7.0 points behind
GMX GM / GLV pools leads on
- How much has this vault already lost when a trader won — and can I check that number myself, today, for free?8 vs 6
- Is the number they advertise what I actually earned, or does it quietly leave out what the traders took from me?9 vs 7
Avantis avUSDC leads on
- Who eats the loss before I do — and if I try to leave first, how much do they take?9 vs 6
Largest single reason GMX GM / GLV pools is ahead: availability (+5.2 display points).Scenario cost: Avantis avUSDC has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Ostium OLP#3 of 9 · score 70 · 11.0 points behind
GMX GM / GLV pools leads on
- How much has this vault already lost when a trader won — and can I check that number myself, today, for free?8 vs 7
- When one trader's win is bigger than the pool, who pulls the plug — a rule I can read, or a vote I'll never hear?9 vs 8
- Who eats the loss before I do — and if I try to leave first, how much do they take?6 vs 5
Ostium OLP leads onNo scored criterion
Largest single reason GMX GM / GLV pools is ahead: published criteria (+6.2 display points).Scenario cost: Ostium OLP has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Velocity Insurance Fund#4 of 9 · score 66 · 15.0 points behind
GMX GM / GLV pools leads on
- How much has this vault already lost when a trader won — and can I check that number myself, today, for free?8 vs 5
- When one trader's win is bigger than the pool, who pulls the plug — a rule I can read, or a vote I'll never hear?9 vs 8
- Who eats the loss before I do — and if I try to leave first, how much do they take?6 vs 3
Velocity Insurance Fund leads onNo scored criterion
Largest single reason GMX GM / GLV pools is ahead: published criteria (+15.3 display points).Scenario cost: Velocity Insurance Fund has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Against #2
81 vs 74 · gap 7.0Why GMX GM / GLV pools ranks above Avantis avUSDC
DimensionThisAvantis avUSDCGap share
Availability · 23% weight14.012.0+5.2, better
Published criteria · 35% weight19.118.5+1.6, better
Friction · 12% weight · constant here2.72.7same
Trust record · 9% weight · constant here3.23.2same
Measured data · 21% weight · constant here8.38.3same
Published criterionThisAvantis avUSDCPoints
How much has this vault already lost when a trader won — and can I check that number myself, today, for free? · w3286+2.05, better
Who eats the loss before I do — and if I try to leave first, how much do they take? · w2469−2.30, worse
Is the number they advertise what I actually earned, or does it quietly leave out what the traders took from me? · w1697+1.02, better
Net8174+7.0
Your scenario
GMX GM / GLV pools is not priced for this scenario
The operator's cut of the rewards your stake earns — not a fee on the stake itself. Gross yield is your assumption, not ours. Change an input and every figure recomputes from the published rate; the published rank does not move.
commission/yr · default scenario — set your own
Your stake · your input$32k
Expected gross yield · your input5%
Rate read from the provider’s published pricing ↗ on 28 September 2026.
commission/yrCost is stated as commission/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 9 rows priced
Cheapest pricedNone pricedDifference not stated · availability not applied — set your country to filter
9 of 9 rows in this ranking have no verified rate for this scenario and are absent from the median, not counted as free.
Evidence
Evidence read 28 September 2026
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 evidenceVerified4 of 4 criteria reconstruct from receipts
4 of 4 criteria reconstruct from a quoted, sourced receipt equal to the published strength.Public receiptsReading…4 quoted with a source URL
The receipt file has not been read yet.Evidence confidenceHighcoverage and corroboration, never freshness
4/4 criteria scored, with 4 dated sources quoted.RobustnessHoldsrank #1 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.The newest evidence read on the platform is 3 November 2026; this category's reading is older. The scores stand as read on 28 September 2026.
Reading the evidence ledger…
CriterionSourceTypeReadFreshnessStatusReceipt
How much has this vault already lost when a trader won — and can I check that number myself, today, for free?strength 8 · weight 32Report an error—28 September 2026*
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.When one trader's win is bigger than the pool, who pulls the plug — a rule I can read, or a vote I'll never hear?strength 9 · weight 28Report an error—28 September 2026*
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.Who eats the loss before I do — and if I try to leave first, how much do they take?strength 6 · weight 24Report an error—28 September 2026*
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.Is the number they advertise what I actually earned, or does it quietly leave out what the traders took from me?strength 9 · weight 16Report an error—28 September 2026*
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
- Control failure (GMX GM / GLV pools 9/10): a key or vote changes the rules, freezes or mints.Scored by When one trader's win is bigger than the pool, who pulls the plug — a rule I can read, or a vote I'll never hear? · 28%
- Insolvency failure: the firm or issuer that owes you cannot pay.Scored by How much has this vault already lost when a trader won — and can I check that number myself, today, for free? · 32% (GMX GM / GLV pools 8/10)Scored by Who eats the loss before I do — and if I try to leave first, how much do they take? · 24% (GMX GM / GLV pools 6/10)
Not assessed by this ranking: Contract failure, Oracle failure, Regulatory failure, Execution 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: Is the number they advertise what I actually earned, or does it quietly leave out what the traders took from me? (16%).
Facts
facts, not scoresWhat the record publishes
- Pricing
- From https://
docs .gmx .io /docs /providing-liquidity .md, fetched 2026-09-28: "liquidity providers earn the majority of the fees generated from trading, liquidations, borrow fees, and swaps (63% on Arbitrum and Avalanche)" and "On Arbitrum and Avalanche, 63% of collected fees go to the pool and 37% go to the protocol." The borrow-fee split is repeated on https:// docs .gmx .io /docs /trading /fees .md the same day: "Of the borrow fee collected, 63% goes to the pool (accruing to liquidity providers) and 37% goes to the protocol fee receiver." Fees are not claimed separately: "There is no separate claim or distribution step — holding GM tokens is enough to earn fees." Neither page prints a management or performance fee, and neither prints a buy or sell fee rate for GM tokens, though providing-liquidity.md confirms such fees exist: shifting between pools with the same backing tokens lets you "move liquidity without incurring buy or sell fees", and on a buy "a large purchase may result in a significant negative price impact".GMX GM / GLV pools — official pricing page ↗ · 28 September 2026 - Prices published in
- USDGMX GM / GLV pools — official pricing page ↗ · 28 September 2026
- Licences held
- Not published
- Compliance level
- partial
- Regulatory note
- Not published
- Supported chains
- Arbitrum, Avalanche, MegaETH
- Markets served
- europe, global
- Primary markets
- Not published
- Restricted markets
- United States
- Operating limits
- Not published
- Availability note
- GMX terms and conditions (last modified 20 August 2026, rendered and read 13 September 2026, https://
gmx .io /terms-and-conditions) govern gmx.io and app.gmx.io, "the Interface" through which GM and GLV pools are bought; section 1.1 makes it a condition of use that "1.1.3. You are not a U.S. Person;". The research pass of 17 August 2026 searched the 126 documentation pages and found no terms there, and could not render a terms page behind the single-page app; that page now renders and carries the restriction. The GMX Protocol contracts themselves are permissionless.
Legal entity on file: GMX, placed in 2 products. Only confirmed entities are shown; nothing is inferred from the brand name.
If something goes wrong with GMX GM / GLV pools: 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.
12 methodology entries
- 28 September 2026Current verified snapshot · methodology 2026.10.18Score 81, #1 of 9. 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
2026.10.7Forty-one more products are offered only where their own quoted terms serve- fixed 141 country exclusions on 31 rows, each the name of a country the row's own quoted terms exclude: for example Mercuryo Hungary, China, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Chile, Colombia and Morocco; Gemini Custody the United Kingdom, Australia and the EU after its wind-down; Backed xStocks the US, Canada, the UK, Australia, Nigeria, the Philippines and Venezuela.
- changed Thirteen rows list the only countries their terms serve: Coins.ph the Philippines, Spritz bill pay, Brex, Unchained, WisdomTree, Franklin BENJI and AnchorWatch the United States (with its territories for AnchorWatch), PRYPCO Mint the UAE, N26 crypto seven EU countries, Gemini Tokenized Stocks the EU, XNET the US, Canada and the UK, Coldbit Steel and MetaMask Card the countries they list.
- changed Published (no-country) orders do not move. Country results change: in India six categories each lose one row (bill pay, cards, off-ramps, P2P, seed backup, tokenised real estate), and bill pay there has no row confirmed available, so it shows the published order marked as such; country pages list 23 fewer rows (24,357 to 24,334). The grounding test now matches full country names in any case, which shows seven earlier exclusions were quoted all along: the named debt of unquoted exclusions falls from 40 to 33 pairs.
- 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.
Methodology 2026.10.18, the same published run every visitor sees · receipt perp_house_vaults:gmx_gm_pools:2026.10.18:cb4c5a285099
Are you GMX GM / GLV pools? 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.