Paradex scores 8 points above Aster on the published criteria (13.4 vs 9.8 points), which this ranking scores from the record as a whole, not criterion by criterion. Aster ranks #9 and Paradex #8 of 12 published perp DEXs. Every term of the gap is on the ledger below; the inputs are on the audit receipt.
Aster41
vs
PAParadex49
Scores are out of 100; published scores fall within 41–99 · ranks #9 and #8 of 12
Paradex scores 8 points above Aster on the published criteria (13.4 vs 9.8 points), which this ranking scores from the record as a whole, not criterion by criterion.
Aster #9 of 1241
PAParadex #8 of 1249
Scores are out of 100; published scores fall within 41–99; a bar is empty at 41 and full at 99.
Why, term by termParadex leads on 0 of 2 published criteria; Aster on 0. The terms sum to the gap.
TermParadexAsterWeightPoints
Published criteriaScore dimension13.49.830+9.4for Paradex
Net of the terms+9.4
Reproduced gap+9.4
Published gapAfter score rounding and bounds — see the note below4941+8.0
Weight is in points of the 86-point weighted total. Points are score points of the gap between the two.
This ranking scores its published criteria from the record as a whole, not criterion by criterion, so they count here as one term and no single criterion is credited.
A floor bound on one row means the criterion arithmetic does not reproduce the displayed gap exactly.
ParadexScore 49Starknet appchain perps — offchain order matching, bridged custodyStrength: Starknet-based appchain with settlement proven onchainWatch-out: A January-2026 chain rollback reversed an incident — an operational intervention and a centralisation/liveness signal to weighAsterScore 41Newer multi-chain venue — high leverage, but centralisation & wash-trading flagsStrength: Multi-chain deposits incl. BNB Chain (bridged to Aster Chain)Watch-out: DefiLlama delisted its perp volume in Oct 2025 over suspected wash trading (volumes could not be independently verified) — treat headline volume with caution
Quick facts
At a glance
2 of 5 rows read the same for both.
FactAsterParadex
Trading feeSnapshotModel: hybrid, on Aster Chain with deposits bridged from BNB/ETH/Arb/Solana/SUI. Launch year unverified (Aster brand 2025; APX Finance since 2021; Aster Chain live March 2026). Bridged custody, centralised governance. Limited audit coverage (predecessor ApolloX: about $2.15M, June 2022). Up to 1001x (BTC/USD). Fees (Aster docs "Fees", read 3 November 2026): crypto general perpetuals "Taker Fee: 0.04%" and "Maker Fee: 0 %"; Group B pairs "Taker Fee: 0.1%"; both vary by VIP tier. Live TVL shown for context (DefiLlama, dated), not scored.Model: offchain orderbook on a Starknet-based appchain (centralized sequencer matching, settlement proven onchain). Since 2024. Bridged custody; admin-controlled (the operator can block L1 deposits and limit L1 and L2 withdrawals). Audited (Cairo Security Clan, May 2025). Jan-2026 chain rollback (operational, not a fund-draining exploit). Up to 50x. Fees (Paradex docs "Trading Fees", read 3 November 2026): "Retail Takers and Makers have 0% fees on all products: Perps, Spot and Options"; API (Pro) traders pay the published Pro schedule. Live TVL shown for context, not scored.
Aster leads Paradex on no published criterion and no score dimension — pick it only if a fact outside the score (country, funding rail, custody) decides for you.
Strength
Multi-chain deposits incl. BNB Chain (bridged to Aster Chain)
Tradeoff
DefiLlama delisted its perp volume in Oct 2025 over suspected wash trading (volumes could not be independently verified) — treat headline volume with caution
PA
Paradex
49#8 of 12
Leads
Pick it when
Paradex leads on no published criterion; its edge is published criteria (13.4 vs 9.8 points). Pick it if that term is what you are buying.
Strength
Starknet-based appchain with settlement proven onchain
Tradeoff
A January-2026 chain rollback reversed an incident — an operational intervention and a centralisation/liveness signal to weigh
Self-identify in 10 seconds
Which one is actually for you?
Aster
Aster leads Paradex on no published criterion
Choose it only if something outside the published criteria decides for you — your country, a funding rail, or custody.
AsterScore 41Newer multi-chain venue — high leverage, but centralisation & wash-trading flagsStrength: Multi-chain deposits incl. BNB Chain (bridged to Aster Chain)Watch-out: DefiLlama delisted its perp volume in Oct 2025 over suspected wash trading (volumes could not be independently verified) — treat headline volume with caution
PAParadexLeads
Paradex leads Aster on no published criterion
Choose it only if something outside the published criteria decides for you — your country, a funding rail, or custody.
ParadexScore 49Starknet appchain perps — offchain order matching, bridged custodyStrength: Starknet-based appchain with settlement proven onchainWatch-out: A January-2026 chain rollback reversed an incident — an operational intervention and a centralisation/liveness signal to weigh
Criterion by criterion
Scorecard
Published criteria · weight in points of 860 of 4 cells scored. Strength is read from the evidence file; the weight is the published one. Methodology
Security
weight 14.4 of 86Not scored
AsterNot scored
No evidence cell for this criterion, so no strength is drawn.
ParadexNot scored
No evidence cell for this criterion, so no strength is drawn.
Decentralization
weight 9.6 of 86Not scored
AsterNot scored
No evidence cell for this criterion, so no strength is drawn.
ParadexNot scored
No evidence cell for this criterion, so no strength is drawn.
Score dimensions
weights sum to 86
The published score is five dimensions, each weighted for the category. "Published criteria" is the criteria block above; the other four are the engine's own terms — availability, friction, trust record, measured data. Each bar is one side's points out of that dimension's maximum; the weight beside the name is its points of the 86-point weighted total. The published criteria above can fill 24 of the block’s 30. A weight marked “constant here” belongs to a dimension every ranked product in the category holds at the same value: it still counts in the total, and it orders nothing here.
Availabilityweight 20 of 86 · constant here
Aster14/20Paradex14/20
Tie
Published criteriaweight 30 of 86
Aster9.8/30Paradex13.4/30
Paradex leads
Frictionweight 10 of 86 · constant here
Aster2.7/10Paradex2.7/10
Tie
Trust recordweight 8 of 86 · constant here
Aster3.2/8Paradex3.2/8
Tie
Measured dataweight 18 of 86 · constant here
Aster5.5/18Paradex5.5/18
Tie
Decision rulePublished order
Choose Paradex unless the term Aster leads on is the one you are buying.
Aster leads Paradex on no published criterion and no score dimension — pick it only if a fact outside the score (country, funding rail, custody) decides for you.
The published order weighs every criterion the same way for everyone. To weigh them your way, run .
From the published order
Next best action
If this isn't your case
Other matchups worth comparing
How you can lose money here, and what the ranking scores
Contract failure: the code holding the funds is exploited.
Scored by Security & track record · 60%
Control failure: a key or vote changes the rules, freezes or mints.
Scored by Decentralization & trust-minimization · 40%
Not assessed by this ranking: Oracle failure, Insolvency failure, Regulatory failure, Execution failure, Exit failure. A high place says nothing about these; the Methodology tab says what each means.
Questions
Frequently asked questions
Paradex scores 8 points above Aster on the published criteria (13.4 vs 9.8 points), which this ranking scores from the record as a whole, not criterion by criterion. Published scores, out of 100: Aster 41 (rank 9 of 12 perp dexs), Paradex 49 (rank 8 of 12).
Reviewed means both products compared here 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.
Answer a few quick questions and get one clear recommendation based on how you actually plan to use crypto — with rationale, tradeoffs, and a path to monitor the decision.
No signup·Free first pass · Private·No spam · No account
Not financial advice · Independent · Always do your own research
Not financial advice · For informational purposes only · Always do your own research
