Skip to main content

Head-to-head · Perp DEXs

Drift Protocol vs Lighter Lighter leads by 13 points.

Lighter scores 13 points above Drift Protocol, which no longer operates (since 2026-04-01) and scores zero on the criteria block. Drift Protocol ranks #11 and Lighter #7 of 12 published perp DEXs. Every term of the gap is on the ledger below; the inputs are on the audit receipt.

Drift Protocol41
Lighter54
Scores are out of 100; published scores fall within 41–99 · ranks #11 and #7 of 12
Methodology v2026.10.18Ranking snapshot 2 published criteria5 score dimensions Receipt #cc-VS-DRIFT-PROTOCOL-VS-LIGHTER-81c40649
Published verdictRanking snapshot 3 November 2026

Lighter leads by 13 points

Lighter scores 13 points above Drift Protocol, which no longer operates (since 2026-04-01) and scores zero on the criteria block.

Drift Protocol #11 of 1241
Lighter #7 of 1254
Scores are out of 100; published scores fall within 41–99; a bar is empty at 41 and full at 99.
Why, term by termLighter leads on 0 of 2 published criteria; Drift Protocol on 0. The terms sum to the gap.
TermLighterDrift ProtocolWeightPoints
Published criteriaScore dimension15.6030+40.6for Lighter
Net of the terms+40.6
Reproduced gap+40.6
Published gapAfter score rounding and bounds — see the note below5441+13.0

Weight is in points of the 86-point weighted total. Points are score points of the gap between the two.

  • EligibilityDrift Protocol no longer operates (since 2026-04-01): its criteria block is zeroed
  • 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.
  • Drift Protocol no longer operates (since 2026-04-01) and is kept for reference: the engine zeroes its criteria block, whatever its cells say.
  • A floor bound on one row means the criterion arithmetic does not reproduce the displayed gap exactly.
Quick facts

At a glance

1 of 5 rows read the same for both.
FactDrift ProtocolLighter
PricingSnapshotModel: hybrid orderbook + AMM + JIT (Solana). Live by 2022; closed, program paused since 1 April 2026 (status feed read 2026-11-03: "Drift is being paused until further notice due to irregular activity in the protocol."). Contract-custodied, admin-controlled. Audited (Trail of Bits, Neodyme); fund-loss events (2022 $14.5M market manipulation, returned; April-2026 $295M admin-key compromise; DFX recovery-token claims opened 1 October 2026). Up to 101x (as advertised on drift.trade). No live fee schedule while paused. Live TVL shown for context (DefiLlama, dated), not scored.Model: zk-verified orderbook (offchain sequencer, proofs committed to Ethereum). Since 2025. Self-custodial with L1 force-withdrawal. Admin-controlled (a protocol multisig, the governor, holds the administrative functions). Audited (nine published audits; the September-2026 verifier changes have no published sources). Up to 50x. Fees (Lighter docs "Trading Fees", read 3 November 2026): Standard Accounts "Fees: 0 maker / 0 taker on regular perpetual and spot orders; 1 bp on TWAP/advanced orders and RFQ"; Plus and Premium/Advanced accounts pay maker and taker fees. Live TVL shown for context, not scored.
Asset coverageEditorial——
Region fitSnapshotglobaleurope, global
Custody modelSnapshotContract-custodiedSelf-custodial
Security postureSnapshotAudited; admin-controlled contracts; an exploit that lost user or LP funds (2026, rated severe).Audited; admin-controlled contracts.
From the published criteria

Which should you pick?

Drift Protocol

41#11 of 12
Pick it when
Drift Protocol leads Lighter 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
Nothing — Drift is closed; its program has been paused since 1 April 2026
Tradeoff
Closed: the Drift program has been paused since 1 April 2026 and no market can be traded; Velocity, where the Drift app now redirects, is a separate new program with no Drift state carried over

Lighter

54#7 of 12
Leads
Pick it when
Lighter leads on no published criterion; its edge is published criteria (15.6 vs 0 points). Pick it if that term is what you are buying.
Strength
zk-verified orderbook with proofs committed to Ethereum
Tradeoff
Newer venue (2025) — shorter track record, and the live verifier was replaced on 3 and 10 September 2026 with no sources published, so the published audits cannot be shown to cover the running code
Self-identify in 10 seconds

Which one is actually for you?

Drift Protocol

Drift Protocol leads Lighter on no published criterion

  • Choose it only if something outside the published criteria decides for you — your country, a funding rail, or custody.
LighterLeads

Lighter leads Drift Protocol on no published criterion

  • Choose it only if something outside the published criteria decides for you — your country, a funding rail, or custody.
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
Drift ProtocolNot scored

No evidence cell for this criterion, so no strength is drawn.

LighterNot scored

No evidence cell for this criterion, so no strength is drawn.

Decentralization

weight 9.6 of 86Not scored
Drift ProtocolNot scored

No evidence cell for this criterion, so no strength is drawn.

LighterNot 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
Drift Protocol14/20Lighter14/20
Tie
Published criteriaweight 30 of 86
Drift Protocol0/30Lighter15.6/30
Lighter leads
Frictionweight 10 of 86 · constant here
Drift Protocol2.7/10Lighter2.7/10
Tie
Trust recordweight 8 of 86 · constant here
Drift Protocol3.2/8Lighter3.2/8
Tie
Measured dataweight 18 of 86 · constant here
Drift Protocol5.5/18Lighter5.5/18
Tie
Decision rulePublished order

Choose Lighter unless the term Drift Protocol leads on is the one you are buying.

Drift Protocol leads Lighter 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

Lighter scores 13 points above Drift Protocol, which no longer operates (since 2026-04-01) and scores zero on the criteria block. Published scores, out of 100: Drift Protocol 41 (rank 11 of 12 perp dexs), Lighter 54 (rank 7 of 12).

Related pages

Go deeper

Reviewed Next review by Methodology v2026.10.18
How this page is reviewed

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.

Accountable for this review: Mathias Siemonsmeier, Founder.

How we review · Review calendar · Corrections log · How we make money

Free advisorNo signup needed

Skip the comparison — get your best match

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 signupFree first pass · PrivateNo spam · No account

Not financial advice · Independent · Always do your own research

Not financial advice · For informational purposes only · Always do your own research