Bungee scores 16 points above deBridge, led by route coverage and trust. deBridge ranks #15 and Bungee #5 of 18 published bridges. Every term of the gap is on the ledger below; the inputs are on the audit receipt.
deBridge46
vs
Bungee62
Scores are out of 100; published scores fall within 41–99 · ranks #15 and #5 of 18
Criteria roundingThe criteria block is rounded to whole points before it is spread+0.1
Reproduced gap+15.3
Published gapAfter score rounding and bounds — see the note below6246+16.0
Weight is in points of the 86-point weighted total. Points are score points of the gap between the two.
EvidenceEvidence evidence medium vs evidence high — how well each score is supported, not the score itself
BungeeScore 62Trading app with cross-chain swaps into any token, routed through SocketStrength: Route coverage — 8/10Watch-out: Default route selection is automatic — power users may want to overridedeBridgeScore 46Cross-chain bridge for users who want faster execution with broader route reachStrength: Speed — 8/10Watch-out: Less low-noise than the clearest mainstream bridge defaults
Quick facts
At a glance
1 of 3 rows read the same for both.
FactdeBridgeBungee
Bridge feeSnapshotRe-read 28 October 2026 (docs.debridge.com/dln-details/overview/fee-structure): "Flat fee – a fixed amount in the source‑chain native token paid to deBridge validators for processing the eventual unlock message."; "Taker margin (≈ 4 bps) – the solver’s profit."; worked example "Flat fee: 0.001 ETH Variable fee: 0.04 % × 1 000 = 0.40 USDC Taker margin: 0.40 USDC Operating expenses: ≈ 0.03 USDC". Earlier read: deBridge docs, "Fee Structure" (docs.debridge.com/dln-details/overview/fee-structure, fetched 30 September 2026): two order-creation fees - "Flat fee - a fixed amount in the source-chain native token paid to deBridge validators for processing the eventual unlock message." and "Variable protocol fee (4 bps) - deducted from the input token." - plus runtime costs built into the spread, "Taker margin (≈ 4 bps) - the solver's profit." and the solver's gas for fulfil, unlock and claim; "Both fees are fully refunded if the order is cancelled." The per-chain table (docs.debridge.com/dln-details/overview/fees-supported-chains.md) lists a flat fee of "0.001 ETH" on Ethereum, Arbitrum, Optimism, Base and Linea and warns "Protocol fees can be changed." On-chain the same day: eth_call DlnSource 0xeF4fB24aD0916217251F553c0596F8Edc630EB66 globalFixedNativeFee() at Ethereum block 26,086,358 returned 1000000000000000 wei (0.001 ETH) and globalTransferFeeBps() returned 4.Bungee's documentation link (docs.bungee.exchange) now resolves to Socket's docs. Socket, "Fees & Monetization" (docs.socket.tech/about/fees-monetization, fetched 30 September 2026): "For users, 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." Integrators may charge their own fee ("integrations are free to implement fee charging for their own services"). The Bungee front end (bungee.exchange) renders client-side and now titles itself "Bungee | Infinite ways to play the market", so no live Bungee quote was read.
Asset coverageEditorialFaster cross-chain movement across supported token and route pairsAggregated bridge and DEX swap routes across Socket-supported chains
Region fitSnapshotglobalglobal
From the published criteria
Which should you pick?
deBridge
46#15 of 18
Pick it when
Pick deBridge if transfer speed matters most — it scores 8/10 to Bungee's 7/10 there (weight 22).
Strength
Speed — 8/10
Tradeoff
Less low-noise than the clearest mainstream bridge defaults
Bungee
62#5 of 18
Leads
Pick it when
Pick Bungee if route coverage matters most — it scores 8/10 to deBridge's 7/10 there (weight 28).
Strength
Route coverage — 8/10
Tradeoff
Default route selection is automatic — power users may want to override
Self-identify in 10 seconds
Which one is actually for you?
deBridge
Choose deBridge if transfer speed matters most
Transfer speed: 8/10 against 7/10 for Bungee (weight 22)
deBridgeScore 46Cross-chain bridge for users who want faster execution with broader route reachStrength: Speed — 8/10Watch-out: Less low-noise than the clearest mainstream bridge defaults
BungeeLeads
Choose Bungee if route coverage matters most
Route coverage: 8/10 against 7/10 for deBridge (weight 28)
Trust: 6/10 against 5/10 for deBridge (weight 26)
BungeeScore 62Trading app with cross-chain swaps into any token, routed through SocketStrength: Route coverage — 8/10Watch-out: Default route selection is automatic — power users may want to override
Criterion by criterion
Scorecard
Published criteria · weight in points of 868 of 8 cells scored. Strength is read from the evidence file; the weight is the published one. Methodology
Route coverage
by 1 of 10weight 6.7 of 86Bungee leads
deBridge7/10 out of 10
Bungee8/10 out of 10
Route clarity
weight 5.8 of 86Tie
deBridge6/10 out of 10
Bungee6/10 out of 10
Transfer speed
by 1 of 10weight 5.3 of 86deBridge leads
deBridge8/10 out of 10
Bungee7/10 out of 10
Trust
by 1 of 10weight 6.2 of 86Bungee leads
deBridge5/10 out of 10
Bungee6/10 out of 10
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
deBridge20/20Bungee14/20
deBridge leads
Published criteriaweight 30 of 86
deBridge15.5/30Bungee16.3/30
Bungee leads
Frictionweight 10 of 86 · constant here
deBridge2.7/10Bungee2.7/10
Tie
Trust recordweight 8 of 86
deBridge3.2/8Bungee3.2/8
Tie
Measured dataweight 18 of 86
deBridge1.4/18Bungee12.5/18
Bungee leads
Decision rulePublished order
Choose Bungee unless the term deBridge leads on is the one you are buying.
Pick deBridge if transfer speed matters most — it scores 8/10 to Bungee's 7/10 there (weight 22).
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
Verification failure: an invalid state or transfer is accepted.
Scored by Trust posture · 26% (deBridge 5/10, Bungee 6/10)
Not assessed by this ranking: Contract failure, Control failure, Liveness failure, Custody 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: Route coverage (28%), Route clarity (24%), Execution speed (22%).
Questions
Frequently asked questions
Bungee scores 16 points above deBridge, led by route coverage and trust. Published scores, out of 100: deBridge 46 (rank 15 of 18 bridges), Bungee 62 (rank 5 of 18).
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
