GMX vs Vest: which perp DEX is better?
A side-by-side comparison of GMX and Vest on fees, leverage, volume, chain and token.
| GMX | Vest |
| 24h volume | $175M | n/a |
| Maker fee | 4 bps | 0 bps |
| Taker fee | 6 bps | 0 bps |
| Max leverage | 100x | 50x |
| Model | Pool | Pool |
| Chain | Arbitrum | zkRisk appchain |
| Token | $GMX | No token |
| Assets | Crypto | Crypto, Stocks, Forex |
GMX vs Vest: which should you choose?
If your priority is cost, Vest wins on taker fees (0 bps). For maximum leverage, GMX goes up to 100x. For depth and liquidity, GMX trades the most volume of the two.
GMX runs a pool on Arbitrum, while Vest runs a pool on zkRisk appchain. Read the full profiles: GMX and Vest.
FAQ
- Is GMX or Vest cheaper?
- Vest has the lower taker fee (0 bps vs 6 bps). Funding rates also affect total cost, so check both before trading.
- Which has higher leverage, GMX or Vest?
- GMX offers more, up to 100x, versus 50x. Higher leverage means higher liquidation risk.
- Which is bigger, GMX or Vest?
- GMX has more listed 24h volume ($175M), which usually means deeper liquidity and less slippage.
More comparisons
Not financial advice. Volume figures are compiled from each venue's public data on our
live rankings and may lag; fees, leverage and token status are curated and can change. Always verify on the exchange before trading. Perpetual futures are high risk and leverage can liquidate your position.