Jumper Exchange vs Bungee Jumper Exchange leads by 1 point.
Jumper Exchange scores 1 point above Bungee, led by route coverage and route clarity. Jumper Exchange ranks #3 and Bungee #5 of 18 published bridges. Every term of the gap is on the ledger below; the inputs are on the audit receipt.
Jumper Exchange63
vs
Bungee62
Scores are out of 100; published scores fall within 41–99 · ranks #3 and #5 of 18
Jumper Exchange scores 1 point above Bungee, led by route coverage and route clarity.
Jumper Exchange #3 of 1863
Bungee #5 of 1862
Scores are out of 100; published scores fall within 41–99; a bar is empty at 41 and full at 99.
Why, term by termJumper Exchange leads on 2 of 4 published criteria; Bungee on 2. The terms sum to the gap.
TermJumper ExchangeBungeeWeightPoints
Route coverage9/108/106.7+1.7for Jumper Exchange+0.9 of 32
Trust5/106/106.2−1.6for Bungee−0.8 of 32
Route clarity8/106/105.8+3.0for Jumper Exchange+1.5 of 32
Transfer speed6/107/105.3−1.4for Bungee−0.7 of 32
Net of the terms+1.7
Criteria roundingThe criteria block is rounded to whole points before it is spread−0.2
Reproduced gap+1.6
Published gapAfter score rounding and bounds — see the note below6362+1.0
Weight is in points of the 86-point weighted total. Points are score points of the gap between the two.
EvidenceEvidence evidence high vs evidence medium — how well each score is supported, not the score itself
Jumper ExchangeScore 63LI.FI-powered bridge + DEX aggregator with route comparisonStrength: Route coverage — 9/10Watch-out: Quality of the underlying bridges varies — Jumper aggregates, it doesn't guaranteeBungeeScore 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
Quick facts
At a glance
1 of 3 rows read the same for both.
FactJumper ExchangeBungee
Bridge feeSnapshotJumper's own terms page (jumper.exchange/legal/terms, now jumper.xyz) answered HTTP 403 on 30 September 2026, so the price is read from LI.FI, the routing layer Jumper runs on. LI.FI's FAQ (docs.li.fi/faqs/fees-monetization, fetched 30 September 2026) states "LI.FI charges a 0.25% service fee on each transaction." and "LI.FI also offers volume-based commercial discounts."; bridge, DEX and gas costs are separate ("Fee structures vary by bridge or DEX."). A same-day LI.FI quote requested with integrator=jumper.exchange for USDC Ethereum to Arbitrum (fromAmount=1000000000, six decimals) returned "toAmount":"1000000000", "feeCosts":[] and route "polymerStandard" (li.quest/v1/quote), i.e. no service fee was applied on the Jumper integrator for that route; gas is extra.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 coverageEditorialCross-chain bridge aggregation across all LI.FI-supported routesAggregated bridge and DEX swap routes across Socket-supported chains
Region fitSnapshotglobalglobal
From the published criteria
Which should you pick?
Jumper Exchange
63#3 of 18
Leads
Pick it when
Pick Jumper Exchange if route coverage matters most — it scores 9/10 to Bungee's 8/10 there (weight 28).
Strength
Route coverage — 9/10
Tradeoff
Quality of the underlying bridges varies — Jumper aggregates, it doesn't guarantee
Bungee
62#5 of 18
Pick it when
Pick Bungee if trust matters most — it scores 6/10 to Jumper Exchange's 5/10 there (weight 26).
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?
Jumper ExchangeLeads
Choose Jumper Exchange if route coverage matters most
Route coverage: 9/10 against 8/10 for Bungee (weight 28)
Route clarity: 8/10 against 6/10 for Bungee (weight 24)
Jumper ExchangeScore 63LI.FI-powered bridge + DEX aggregator with route comparisonStrength: Route coverage — 9/10Watch-out: Quality of the underlying bridges varies — Jumper aggregates, it doesn't guarantee
Bungee
Choose Bungee if trust matters most
Trust: 6/10 against 5/10 for Jumper Exchange (weight 26)
Transfer speed: 7/10 against 6/10 for Jumper Exchange (weight 22)
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 86Jumper Exchange leads
Jumper Exchange9/10 out of 10
Bungee8/10 out of 10
Route clarity
by 2 of 10weight 5.8 of 86Jumper Exchange leads
Jumper Exchange8/10 out of 10
Bungee6/10 out of 10
Transfer speed
by 1 of 10weight 5.3 of 86Bungee leads
Jumper Exchange6/10 out of 10
Bungee7/10 out of 10
Trust
by 1 of 10weight 6.2 of 86Bungee leads
Jumper Exchange5/10 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
Jumper Exchange14/20Bungee14/20
Tie
Published criteriaweight 30 of 86
Jumper Exchange16.9/30Bungee16.3/30
Jumper Exchange leads
Frictionweight 10 of 86 · constant here
Jumper Exchange2.7/10Bungee2.7/10
Tie
Trust recordweight 8 of 86
Jumper Exchange3.2/8Bungee3.2/8
Tie
Measured dataweight 18 of 86
Jumper Exchange12.5/18Bungee12.5/18
Tie
Decision rulePublished order
Choose Jumper Exchange unless the term Bungee leads on is the one you are buying.
Pick Bungee if trust matters most — it scores 6/10 to Jumper Exchange's 5/10 there (weight 26).
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.
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
Jumper Exchange scores 1 point above Bungee, led by route coverage and route clarity. Published scores, out of 100: Jumper Exchange 63 (rank 3 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
