Jupiter scores 8 points above Aave, led by ecosystem and operating style. Jupiter ranks #6 and Aave #8 of 10 published Web3 apps. Every term of the gap is on the ledger below; the inputs are on the audit receipt.
Jupiter59
vs
AAAave51
Scores are out of 100; published scores fall within 41–99 · ranks #6 and #8 of 10
Jupiter scores 8 points above Aave, led by ecosystem and operating style.
Jupiter #6 of 1059
AAAave #8 of 1051
Scores are out of 100; published scores fall within 41–99; a bar is empty at 41 and full at 99.
Why, term by termJupiter leads on 2 of 4 published criteria; Aave on 2. The terms sum to the gap.
TermJupiterAaveWeightPoints
Job fit8/109/107.2−1.9for Aave−1.0 of 32
Ecosystem9/108/105.8+1.5for Jupiter+0.8 of 32
Confidence6/107/105.8−1.5for Aave−0.8 of 32
Operating style5/103/105.3+2.7for Jupiter+1.4 of 32
AvailabilityScore dimension201420+15.6for Jupiter
Trust recordScore dimension3.26.48−8.3for Aave
Net of the terms+8.2
Criteria roundingThe criteria block is rounded to whole points before it is spread−0.1
Reproduced gap+8.1
Published gapAfter score rounding and bounds — see the note below5951+8.0
Weight is in points of the 86-point weighted total. Points are score points of the gap between the two.
Jupiter's lead rests on lighter criteria: Aave is ahead on job fit, which carries more weight (30) than any criterion Jupiter leads on (24).
JupiterScore 59Solana-native app for swap routing and ecosystem-first activityStrength: Ecosystem — 9/10Watch-out: Less useful if your main onchain activity is EVM-heavyAaveScore 51Onchain lending and borrowing — supply assets, borrow against themStrength: Job fit — 9/10Watch-out: Borrowing carries liquidation risk if collateral value falls; rates are variable
Quick facts
At a glance
1 of 3 rows read the same for both.
FactJupiterAave
PricingSnapshotJupiter Spot routes swaps through Ultra Mode by default ("By default, Spot uses Jupiter Ultra to execute trades."), and Ultra charges a Jupiter commission: the Jupiter Spot Fees page (docs.jup.ag, fetched 30 September 2026) lists "Ultra Mode 0-0.5%", varying by pair and volatility. The Ultra Mode page (same date) tables it: "0%" on stable-to-stable, LST-to-LST and SOL/stable into JUP, JLP or jupSOL; "SOL ↔ Stable 0.02%"; LST to stable "0.05%"; "All other swaps 0.1%"; and "0.5%" for buying or selling tokens within 24h of launch. Manual Mode (Market Swap) is "0%": "Manual swaps do not incur any Jupiter commission". Fees are included in the quote shown before confirming. Solana network fees (not charged by Jupiter) apply, plus Jito tips if chosen in Manual Mode; gasless trades add the SOL gas Jupiter pays to the swap fee, with no margin. Swaps inside the Jupiter Mobile app follow a separate schedule.Aave's FAQ (aave.com/faq, fetched 30 September 2026): suppliers earn and borrowers pay variable, per-asset rates shown in the Markets tab of the V3 Interface or Aave Pro (V4). "Each borrowable reserve in an Aave market has a parameter called reserve factor, which is the percentage of borrow interest accumulated to the treasury and is determined on a per-asset basis by Aave Governance." Transactions "may incur gas fees", which are "typically highest on Ethereum, and significantly cheaper on all other networks". A liquidated borrower pays a penalty that "depends on the asset used as collateral". The FAQ lists no separate platform or access fee.
Asset coverageEditorialSolana-native swap assets and ecosystem executionSupplied and borrowed assets across supported money markets
Region fitSnapshotus, europe, globalus, europe, global
From the published criteria
Which should you pick?
Jupiter
59#6 of 10
Leads
Pick it when
Pick Jupiter if ecosystem matters most — it scores 9/10 to Aave's 8/10 there (weight 24).
Strength
Ecosystem — 9/10
Tradeoff
Less useful if your main onchain activity is EVM-heavy
AA
Aave
51#8 of 10
Pick it when
Pick Aave if job fit matters most — it scores 9/10 to Jupiter's 8/10 there (weight 30).
Strength
Job fit — 9/10
Tradeoff
Borrowing carries liquidation risk if collateral value falls; rates are variable
Self-identify in 10 seconds
Which one is actually for you?
JupiterLeads
Choose Jupiter if ecosystem matters most
Ecosystem: 9/10 against 8/10 for Aave (weight 24)
Operating style: 5/10 against 3/10 for Aave (weight 22)
JupiterScore 59Solana-native app for swap routing and ecosystem-first activityStrength: Ecosystem — 9/10Watch-out: Less useful if your main onchain activity is EVM-heavy
AAAave
Choose Aave if job fit matters most
Job fit: 9/10 against 8/10 for Jupiter (weight 30)
Confidence: 7/10 against 6/10 for Jupiter (weight 24)
AaveScore 51Onchain lending and borrowing — supply assets, borrow against themStrength: Job fit — 9/10Watch-out: Borrowing carries liquidation risk if collateral value falls; rates are variable
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
Job fit
by 1 of 10weight 7.2 of 86Aave leads
Jupiter8/10 out of 10
Aave9/10 out of 10
Ecosystem
by 1 of 10weight 5.8 of 86Jupiter leads
Jupiter9/10 out of 10
Aave8/10 out of 10
Operating style
by 2 of 10weight 5.3 of 86Jupiter leads
Jupiter5/10 out of 10
Aave3/10 out of 10
Confidence
by 1 of 10weight 5.8 of 86Aave leads
Jupiter6/10 out of 10
Aave7/10 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
Jupiter20/20Aave14/20
Jupiter leads
Published criteriaweight 30 of 86
Jupiter17/30Aave16.7/30
Jupiter leads
Frictionweight 10 of 86
Jupiter2.7/10Aave2.7/10
Tie
Trust recordweight 8 of 86
Jupiter3.2/8Aave6.4/8
Aave leads
Measured dataweight 18 of 86 · constant here
Jupiter6.9/18Aave6.9/18
Tie
Decision rulePublished order
Choose Jupiter unless the term Aave leads on is the one you are buying.
Pick Aave if job fit matters most — it scores 9/10 to Jupiter's 8/10 there (weight 30).
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
None of this ranking's criteria scores a way of losing money; the families that apply are listed below as not assessed.
Not assessed by this ranking: Contract failure, Control 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: Use-case fit (30%), Ecosystem fit (24%), Operating style (22%), Confidence signal (24%).
Questions
Frequently asked questions
Jupiter scores 8 points above Aave, led by ecosystem and operating style. Published scores, out of 100: Jupiter 59 (rank 6 of 10 web3 apps), Aave 51 (rank 8 of 10).
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
