Wormhole vs Arbitrum Bridge Arbitrum Bridge leads by 5 points.
Arbitrum Bridge scores 5 points above Wormhole, led by trust and route clarity. Wormhole ranks #14 and Arbitrum Bridge #8 of 18 published bridges. Every term of the gap is on the ledger below; the inputs are on the audit receipt.
Wormhole50
vs
ARArbitrum Bridge55
Scores are out of 100; published scores fall within 41–99 · ranks #14 and #8 of 18
Criteria roundingThe criteria block is rounded to whole points before it is spread−0.2
Reproduced gap+5.5
Published gapAfter score rounding and bounds — see the note below5550+5.0
Weight is in points of the 86-point weighted total. Points are score points of the gap between the two.
Arbitrum Bridge's lead rests on lighter criteria: Wormhole is ahead on route coverage, which carries more weight (28) than any criterion Arbitrum Bridge leads on (26).
Arbitrum BridgeScore 55Native canonical bridge for Ethereum ↔ Arbitrum movementStrength: Trust — 10/10Watch-out: 7-day challenge delay on direct withdrawals (use third-party bridges for fast exits)WormholeScore 50Leading cross-chain messaging protocol connecting 30+ networksStrength: Route coverage — 7/10Watch-out: Higher fees on some routes than specialized bridges
Quick facts
At a glance
1 of 3 rows read the same for both.
FactWormholeArbitrum Bridge
PricingSnapshotWormhole Connect docs, "Routes" (wormhole.com/docs/ai/pages/products-connect-concepts-routes.md, fetched 30 September 2026): automatic routes deliver in one user transaction "for a small fee" - "Trustless relayers can execute the second transaction on the user's behalf, so the user only needs to perform one transaction on the origin chain to have the tokens delivered to the destination automatically - for a small fee." - while manual routes need a second, destination-chain transaction whose gas the user pays. No relayer fee amount is published on that page, so the dollar range the previous note carried is not repeated. Portal Bridge (portalbridge.com), Wormhole's consumer front end, renders client-side, so no live Portal quote was read.Arbitrum docs, "Quickstart: Arbitrum bridge" (docs.arbitrum.io/arbitrum-bridge/quickstart.md, fetched 30 September 2026): no bridge fee is stated on that page; the user pays gas - "You’ll need the native currency of the parent chain to bridge your assets to the destination chain." A withdrawal needs a second, parent-chain transaction after the challenge period: "Upon confirmation (about one week later), you can execute them" (docs.arbitrum.io cross-chain messaging page). No dollar cost is published on either page, so the deposit and withdrawal dollar ranges the previous note carried are not repeated.
Asset coverageEditorialMajor assets across all connected chainsETH and any ERC-20 with a registered token bridge contract
Region fitSnapshotglobalglobal
From the published criteria
Which should you pick?
Wormhole
50#14 of 18
Pick it when
Pick Wormhole if route coverage matters most — it scores 7/10 to Arbitrum Bridge's 2/10 there (weight 28).
Strength
Route coverage — 7/10
Tradeoff
Higher fees on some routes than specialized bridges
AR
Arbitrum Bridge
55#8 of 18
Leads
Pick it when
Pick Arbitrum Bridge if trust matters most — it scores 10/10 to Wormhole's 7/10 there (weight 26).
Strength
Trust — 10/10
Tradeoff
7-day challenge delay on direct withdrawals (use third-party bridges for fast exits)
Self-identify in 10 seconds
Which one is actually for you?
Wormhole
Choose Wormhole if route coverage matters most
Route coverage: 7/10 against 2/10 for Arbitrum Bridge (weight 28)
Transfer speed: 4/10 against 2/10 for Arbitrum Bridge (weight 22)
WormholeScore 50Leading cross-chain messaging protocol connecting 30+ networksStrength: Route coverage — 7/10Watch-out: Higher fees on some routes than specialized bridges
ARArbitrum BridgeLeads
Choose Arbitrum Bridge if trust matters most
Trust: 10/10 against 7/10 for Wormhole (weight 26)
Route clarity: 9/10 against 5/10 for Wormhole (weight 24)
Arbitrum BridgeScore 55Native canonical bridge for Ethereum ↔ Arbitrum movementStrength: Trust — 10/10Watch-out: 7-day challenge delay on direct withdrawals (use third-party bridges for fast exits)
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 5 of 10weight 6.7 of 86Wormhole leads
Wormhole7/10 out of 10
Arbitrum Bridge2/10 out of 10
Route clarity
by 4 of 10weight 5.8 of 86Arbitrum Bridge leads
Wormhole5/10 out of 10
Arbitrum Bridge9/10 out of 10
Transfer speed
by 2 of 10weight 5.3 of 86Wormhole leads
Wormhole4/10 out of 10
Arbitrum Bridge2/10 out of 10
Trust
by 3 of 10weight 6.2 of 86Arbitrum Bridge leads
Wormhole7/10 out of 10
Arbitrum Bridge10/10 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
Wormhole14/20Arbitrum Bridge14/20
Tie
Published criteriaweight 30 of 86
Wormhole14.1/30Arbitrum Bridge13.8/30
Wormhole leads
Frictionweight 10 of 86 · constant here
Wormhole2.7/10Arbitrum Bridge2.7/10
Tie
Trust recordweight 8 of 86
Wormhole6.4/8Arbitrum Bridge3.2/8
Wormhole leads
Measured dataweight 18 of 86
Wormhole6.9/18Arbitrum Bridge12.5/18
Arbitrum Bridge leads
Decision rulePublished order
Choose Arbitrum Bridge unless the term Wormhole leads on is the one you are buying.
Pick Wormhole if route coverage matters most — it scores 7/10 to Arbitrum Bridge's 2/10 there (weight 28).
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
Arbitrum Bridge scores 5 points above Wormhole, led by trust and route clarity. Published scores, out of 100: Wormhole 50 (rank 14 of 18 bridges), Arbitrum Bridge 55 (rank 8 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
