Scroll Bridge vs Squid Router Squid Router leads by 9 points.
Squid Router scores 9 points above Scroll Bridge, led by route coverage and transfer speed. Scroll Bridge ranks #10 and Squid Router #4 of 18 published bridges. Every term of the gap is on the ledger below; the inputs are on the audit receipt.
Scroll Bridge53
vs
Squid Router62
Scores are out of 100; published scores fall within 41–99 · ranks #10 and #4 of 18
Squid Router scores 9 points above Scroll Bridge, led by route coverage and transfer speed.
Scroll Bridge #10 of 1853
Squid Router #4 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 termSquid Router leads on 2 of 4 published criteria; Scroll Bridge on 2. The terms sum to the gap.
TermSquid RouterScroll BridgeWeightPoints
Route coverage10/101/106.7+15.7for Squid Router+8.1 of 32
Trust5/109/106.2−6.5for Scroll Bridge−3.3 of 32
Route clarity5/107/105.8−3.0for Scroll Bridge−1.5 of 32
Transfer speed7/105/105.3+2.7for Squid Router+1.4 of 32
Net of the terms+9.0
Criteria roundingThe criteria block is rounded to whole points before it is spread−0.1
Reproduced gap+8.8
Published gapAfter score rounding and bounds — see the note below6253+9.0
Weight is in points of the 86-point weighted total. Points are score points of the gap between the two.
Squid RouterScore 62Axelar-powered cross-chain swap and bridge aggregatorStrength: Route coverage — 10/10Watch-out: Slippage on the swap leg adds to bridge feesScroll BridgeScore 53Native canonical bridge for Ethereum ↔ Scroll zkEVMStrength: Trust — 9/10Watch-out: Lower liquidity than Arbitrum/Optimism/Base
Quick facts
At a glance
1 of 3 rows read the same for both.
FactScroll BridgeSquid Router
Bridge feeSnapshotScroll docs, "ETH and ERC20 Token Bridge" (docs.scroll.io/en/developers/l1-and-l2-bridging/eth-and-erc20-token-bridge, fetched 30 September 2026): no bridge fee is stated on that page; the ETH sent with a deposit pays the L2 execution fee and with a withdrawal the L1 fee, excess refunded - "0.00001 ETH should be more than enough to process a token deposit." and "Fees will depend on L1 activity but 0.005 ETH should be enough to process a token withdrawal." The same page warns: "There is no way to recover bridged ETH, tokens, or NFTs if your transaction reverts on L1."Squid docs, "Transaction times and fees" (docs.squidrouter.com/additional-resources/architecture/transaction-times-and-fees, fetched 30 September 2026; the page reads "Last updated 6 months ago"): "Squid currently charges no fees. The user will only pay gas fees on source and destination chains." Integrators may add their own fee: "Partners can elect a % fee they would like to charge, and Squid will receive a portion of this fee." Routes with a destination swap also pay Axelar relayer gas in the source-chain token ("This fee is paid to Axelar's relayers, who trustlessly pass messages and proofs across chains."). Squid's homepage (squidrouter.com) advertises "Avg total cost $0.02 $0.10" (Squid versus others), "Based on a $100 ETH transaction from Ethereum mainnet." The swap-leg percentage and relay-cost range the previous note carried are on neither page.
Asset coverageEditorialETH and major ERC-20sCross-asset swap and bridge across all Axelar-connected chains
Region fitSnapshotglobalglobal
From the published criteria
Which should you pick?
Scroll Bridge
53#10 of 18
Pick it when
Pick Scroll Bridge if trust matters most — it scores 9/10 to Squid Router's 5/10 there (weight 26).
Strength
Trust — 9/10
Tradeoff
Lower liquidity than Arbitrum/Optimism/Base
Squid Router
62#4 of 18
Leads
Pick it when
Pick Squid Router if route coverage matters most — it scores 10/10 to Scroll Bridge's 1/10 there (weight 28).
Strength
Route coverage — 10/10
Tradeoff
Slippage on the swap leg adds to bridge fees
Self-identify in 10 seconds
Which one is actually for you?
Scroll Bridge
Choose Scroll Bridge if trust matters most
Trust: 9/10 against 5/10 for Squid Router (weight 26)
Route clarity: 7/10 against 5/10 for Squid Router (weight 24)
Scroll BridgeScore 53Native canonical bridge for Ethereum ↔ Scroll zkEVMStrength: Trust — 9/10Watch-out: Lower liquidity than Arbitrum/Optimism/Base
Squid RouterLeads
Choose Squid Router if route coverage matters most
Route coverage: 10/10 against 1/10 for Scroll Bridge (weight 28)
Transfer speed: 7/10 against 5/10 for Scroll Bridge (weight 22)
Squid RouterScore 62Axelar-powered cross-chain swap and bridge aggregatorStrength: Route coverage — 10/10Watch-out: Slippage on the swap leg adds to bridge fees
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 9 of 10weight 6.7 of 86Squid Router leads
Scroll Bridge1/10 out of 10
Squid Router10/10 out of 10
Route clarity
by 2 of 10weight 5.8 of 86Scroll Bridge leads
Scroll Bridge7/10 out of 10
Squid Router5/10 out of 10
Transfer speed
by 2 of 10weight 5.3 of 86Squid Router leads
Scroll Bridge5/10 out of 10
Squid Router7/10 out of 10
Trust
by 4 of 10weight 6.2 of 86Scroll Bridge leads
Scroll Bridge9/10 out of 10
Squid Router5/10 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
Scroll Bridge14/20Squid Router14/20
Tie
Published criteriaweight 30 of 86
Scroll Bridge13/30Squid Router16.4/30
Squid Router leads
Frictionweight 10 of 86 · constant here
Scroll Bridge2.7/10Squid Router2.7/10
Tie
Trust recordweight 8 of 86
Scroll Bridge3.2/8Squid Router3.2/8
Tie
Measured dataweight 18 of 86
Scroll Bridge12.5/18Squid Router12.5/18
Tie
Decision rulePublished order
Choose Squid Router unless the term Scroll Bridge leads on is the one you are buying.
Pick Scroll Bridge if trust matters most — it scores 9/10 to Squid Router'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
Squid Router scores 9 points above Scroll Bridge, led by route coverage and transfer speed. Published scores, out of 100: Scroll Bridge 53 (rank 10 of 18 bridges), Squid Router 62 (rank 4 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
