dYdX Review

How dYdX scores in perpetual DEXs

This entry rates the dYdX Chain (v4) perpetuals exchange in our perpetual DEX ranking. The dYdX Chain is a Cosmos SDK blockchain whose validators keep and match the order book. The basis is desk research of the dYdX documentation and the v4-chain GitHub repository, checked on November 1, 2026. No account was opened and no trades were placed. The category uses five criteria, each marked 0 to 10 and weighted equally, as described in our ratings methodology.

The overall score is the plain average: (9 + 9 + 10 + 7 + 8) ÷ 5 = 43 ÷ 5 = 8.6. Ostium also scores 8.6. Ties are listed alphabetically, so on the current peer scores Ostium is listed first of nine and dYdX second. One mark changed at this check. Audit disclosure rose from 3 to 7. The 3 had been set when no audits page could be reached, and the documentation's Security page now names Informal Systems and links its reports.

Strongest criteria: open core, fees and liquidation terms

Licence & code openness (10)

The LICENSE file in dydxprotocol/v4-chain grants use under the GNU Affero General Public License v3. It covers the chain, the forked Cosmos SDK and CometBFT, and the web front end. This is the code that matches orders and runs liquidations, not an SDK wrapped around a closed engine, and that is what earns the top mark. One caveat: dYdX Trading Inc. adds a preamble under which the licence ends automatically for anyone who breaks applicable law or the v4 terms while using the software. That condition goes beyond the plain AGPL.

Fee transparency (9)

The fees page lists all seven tiers. Taker fees fall from 5.0 bps at tier 1 to 2.5 bps above $100M of monthly volume, and maker fees fall from 1.0 bps to rebates of -0.7 and -1.1 bps at the top two tiers. Fees are the same across markets. A tier-1 market order of $10,000 pays $5. The staking discount table is also published: 3,000 staked DYDX takes 25% off tier-1 fees and 20,000 takes 50%. The page says governance can change the schedule at any time, and it points traders to the front end's fees page for the live rates. That is why the mark is 9 rather than 10.

Funding & liquidation clarity (9)

Funding is paid every hour. The rate is the one-hour average premium divided by 8, plus an interest component that is 0% by default for cross markets. Governance vote 220 set it at 1 bps per 8 hours for isolated markets. The 8-hour cap is 600% times the gap between initial and maintenance margin, which is 12% for a large-cap market at 5% and 3%. Mid-cap markets use 10% and 5%, and long-tail markets 20% and 10%. The liquidations page gives the liquidation-price formulas with worked examples. It also states the default maximum penalty of 1.5%, paid to the insurance fund. Most of these values are described as defaults that governance can adjust, which is the one reason the mark is not a 10.

Weaker criteria: audit breadth and backstop size

Audit disclosure (7): named and dated, but one firm

The documentation's Security page states that "the protocol has been audited by the Informal Systems team." It links the v4-chain audits folder, which holds six Informal Systems reports: Phase I–II, Phase III, 2023 Q4, 2024 Q1, 2024 Q2 and 2024 Q2+. The same page describes a public bug bounty. That is a named, dated, reachable record, which the rubric rewards. It stops at 7 rather than the 9 or 10 given to peers for two reasons. All six reports come from a single firm, where GMX names five firms and Ostium three. And the newest is from 2024, so later upgrades have no newer report on the page.

Risk documentation (8)

The contract-loss page explains the backstop with worked examples. The insurance fund lets liquidation orders fill up to a maximum spread from the oracle price (1.5 × the maintenance margin fraction by default). Once an account's value turns negative, it is deleveraged at once against randomly chosen offsetting positions, without using the fund. Isolated markets have their own insurance funds. What is missing is the fund's balance or a place to monitor it. A trader can see how losses are shared but not how much stands behind the venue.

What the score does not cover

• Liquidity and execution. Depth, spreads and fill quality were not measured.
• Access. The software terms bar US, Canadian and UK residents from the perpetuals software. Availability is not scored.
• Withdrawal limits. Default USDC withdrawal rate limits and pauses exist but sit outside the five criteria.
• MegaVault. The pooled liquidity product carries its own risks and is not rated here.

dYdX vs Ostium, GMX and Hyperliquid

Ostium also scores 8.6 and is listed first under the alphabetical tie rule. dYdX outscores it on fees (9 against 8), funding and liquidation (9 against 8) and licence (10 against 9). It trails on audit disclosure, 7 against 10. Both mark 8 for risk documentation. GMX follows at 8.4 after its own re-scoring. It marks 9 for audits against dYdX's 7, and 8 for licence against 10. Hyperliquid, at 7.0 after its own re-scoring, edges dYdX on funding and liquidation (10) but marks 6 for audits and 2 for licence and code openness.

Who this rating suits

The score suits traders and developers who want to read the exchange's own code and look up the fee, funding and liquidation rules before trading. Anyone who wants audits from several firms, or reports newer than 2024, should note that the record rests on one firm. The rating describes published documentation and is not advice to trade with leverage.