Synthetix Review
A published, volume-tiered perps fee schedule
of 10
Synthetix scores 3.4 in DeFi protocols. Its Ethereum Mainnet perps exchange publishes a clear fee schedule, but no source code, audits, contract addresses or admin controls are disclosed for the live system, and the MIT v3 code it was credited for is archived. Desk research checked November 6, 2026.
Overall score
3.4 = (8 + 0 + 3 + 3 + 3) / 5
Trading fees
Taker 0.05% / maker 0.02%, down to 0.017% / 0% by 14-day volume
Liquidation clearance fee
0.5% (BTC, ETH) to 2.0% of notional, by market
Code
No public exchange repository; MIT synthetix-v3 archived since Aug 2025
Market backing
SLP vault, run internally and closed to deposits; size not stated
Exchange terms party
Molon Labe Inc., a Panamanian corporation
Scores
Each criterion carries equal weight. The overall score is the average of these 5 scores — (8.0 + 0.0 + 3.0 + 3.0 + 3.0) ÷ 5 = 3.4.
Pros
- Fees 8: taker 0.05% and maker 0.02%, down to 0.017% and 0% by 14-day volume
- Fees charged on notional value, with worked taker and maker examples
- Liquidation clearance fees published per market, 0.5% to 2.0% of notional
Cons
- Licence 0: no public repository or licence for the Ethereum Mainnet exchange contracts
- Audits 3: no auditor or bug bounty named in the current documentation
- Backing 3: exchange contract addresses and SLP vault size are not published
- Governance 3: who can upgrade or pause the exchange contracts is not stated
How Synthetix scores in DeFi protocols
This entry rates Synthetix as it operates today: a perpetual futures exchange on Ethereum Mainnet that matches orders off-chain on a central limit order book and settles on-chain, with traders' collateral held in Synthetix smart contracts. Its earlier products, synths, legacy staking and the v3 deployments on Base and Arbitrum, are listed by Synthetix as legacy or deprecated and are not rated. The basis is desk research of the current Synthetix documentation, its developer site, its terms and its GitHub organization, checked on November 6, 2026. No account was funded and no trade was placed. The category has five criteria, each marked 0 to 10 and weighted equally, as set out in our DeFi protocols ranking and ratings methodology.
| Criterion | What the sources show | Mark |
|---|---|---|
| What it does & fees | Function stated plainly. Taker 0.05% and maker 0.02%, falling by 14-day volume to 0.017% and 0%, on notional value, with worked examples. Liquidation clearance fees of 0.5% to 2.0% by market. Withdrawal and swap fees are shown only in the app. | 8 |
| Licence & code openness | No public repository or licence was found for the Ethereum Mainnet exchange contracts. The MIT-licensed synthetix-v3 repository is archived and covers deprecated deployments. | 0 |
| Audit disclosure | The current documentation lists no audit, auditor or bug bounty for the exchange. | 3 |
| Backing & transparency | Collateral sits in Synthetix contracts, but no exchange contract addresses are published. The SLP vault backs all perps markets; it is run internally, closed to deposits, and its size is not stated. Auto-deleveraging is the last resort. | 3 |
| Governance & control | Governance runs through improvement proposals and a seven-seat council. Trading is under terms with Molon Labe Inc. (Panama). Who can upgrade or pause the exchange contracts is not stated, and matching depends on Synthetix's off-chain service. | 3 |
The overall score is the plain average: (8 + 0 + 3 + 3 + 3) / 5 = 17 / 5 = 3.4, down from 5.4 at the July 24, 2026 check. One mark moved. Licence & code openness fell from 10 to 0: the July mark rested on the MIT synthetix and synthetix-v3 repositories, but v3 is now archived, its deployments were wound down in June 2026, and no source has been published for the exchange that replaced them. Under the licence scale applied across the category on November 6, 2026, live contracts with no public source score 0. The other four marks are unchanged because the documentation still gives no audit, contract or control information for the live system.
Strongest criterion
A complete trading fee schedule (8)
The fees page is clear. Every fill pays a maker or taker fee on its notional value, "not on the margin you deposit". The base rates are 0.02% maker and 0.05% taker, and tiers by 14-day rolling volume reduce them to 0% and 0.017% above $5 billion. The docs work the numbers: 0.5 BTC at 100,000 USDT is 50,000 USDT notional, costing 25 USDT as a taker or 10 USDT as a maker. A limit order that crosses the spread pays the taker rate. Liquidated positions pay a clearance fee on notional, from 0.5% for BTC and ETH to 2.0% for the smallest markets. The mark is not 9, as Derive's is, because the withdrawal fee is shown only "before confirmation" and the forced auto-exchange fee is described only as "approximately 2x" the voluntary swap rate.
Weakest criteria
No published source for the live exchange (0): a deficiency
The official links page points to the Synthetixio GitHub organization for "open-source development". Its recently active repositories are a Python SDK, asset files, the improvement-proposal archive and tooling that disabled and swept the deprecated v3 contracts in June 2026. The synthetix-v3 repository, MIT-licensed, has been archived since August 2025. We found no repository, licence or verified contract list for the Ethereum Mainnet exchange. The category gives 0 when the live contracts have no public source, as it does for Derive; 2 is for code that is visible under a licence that is not open source, such as Term Finance's. If Synthetix publishes the exchange contracts under the MIT licence its earlier code used, this mark would return to the top of the scale.
Audits (3): not disclosed
Earlier Synthetix systems were audited, and their audit pages appear in search results, but the current documentation index contains no audit page, and the FAQ, developer site and official links name no auditor or bug bounty for the exchange. This is a disclosure gap: it does not show that the exchange is unaudited. The mark matches the 3 the category gave other protocols whose pages named no audit firm.
Backing and control (3 and 3): not disclosed
The FAQ says "Your funds are held by Synthetix smart contracts rather than by a centralised custodian", and the docs list the token addresses for USDT and WETH collateral. They do not list the exchange contracts themselves, so a trader cannot check where deposits sit or what an escape path looks like. The SLP vault, described as designed "to back all perps markets", is "running internally today" and not open to deposits; its size is not given. When a liquidated account goes bankrupt, auto-deleveraging closes the most profitable, most leveraged positions on the other side. On control, the docs do not say who holds admin, upgrade or pause rights. The governance structure is described elsewhere: a 2024 referendum, SR-2, replaced three councils with one seven-seat council, and the exchange terms are with Molon Labe Inc., a Panamanian corporation. Neither tells a trader who can change the contracts holding their margin.
What the score does not cover
The score rates disclosure, not execution quality, liquidity or market risk. Leverage reaches 50x on BTC and ETH, accounts funded with WETH can run a USDT debt that accrues hourly interest, and open-interest caps can block new orders. Holders of legacy synths, sUSD or 420-pool positions should follow Synthetix's migration pages, which the score does not assess. Our guide to maker, taker and gas fees explains the fee terms, and our risk management guide covers position sizing under leverage.
Synthetix vs Derive and Term Finance
Derive, the closest match because it is also a derivatives exchange with off-chain matching and on-chain settlement, scores 5.2. Both carry a licence mark of 0 for unpublished core code. Derive leads on fees (9 against 8), audits (7 against 3), backing (5 against 3) and governance (5 against 3), because it names a V3 auditor, publishes its contract addresses and an escape hatch, and states who owns its contracts. Term Finance also scores 5.2; it ties Synthetix on fees (8) and leads on licence (2 against 0), audits (6 against 3), backing (6 against 3) and governance (4 against 3).
Who it suits
On these marks, Synthetix suits traders who want a published, volume-tiered fee schedule on an Ethereum Mainnet venue without account sign-up, and who accept that its contracts, audits and admin controls are not yet documented. It suits less well anyone who needs to verify the code or the backing of the vault on the other side of their trades. Licence, audits and backing would all move if Synthetix published its exchange contracts and their audit reports.
How it compares
Nexus Mutual
GPL code, an on-chain capital pool and a per-release audit log
Reserve
Open-source basket tokens with capped fees and 19 audits
dHEDGE
Open AGPL code and a full, linked audit archive
Maple Finance
Dated, linked audits for every release since V2
Index Coop
Per-product fees, Apache code and six named auditors
Ondo Finance
Thirteen named auditors and daily attestations on tokenized assets
Derive (formerly Lyra)
Options and perp fees published in full, with a named V3 audit
Term Finance
Fixed-rate loans with published fees and a worked example
Sources
Scored from published primary sources rather than hands-on use. Every figure above comes from one of the pages below, on the date shown. Manufacturers change prices and specifications without notice — if something here no longer matches the source, tell us and we will correct it.
- 1.Synthetix docs — Fees — checked
- 2.Synthetix docs — Tiers — checked
- 3.Synthetix docs — FAQ (custody) — checked
- 4.Synthetix docs — SLP vault — checked
- 5.Synthetix docs — Auto-deleveraging — checked
- 6.Synthetix docs — Official links — checked
- 7.Synthetix docs — Products (current and legacy) — checked
- 8.Synthetix developer documentation — checked
- 9.GitHub — Synthetixio/synthetix-v3 (MIT, archived) — checked
- 10.GitHub — Synthetixio organization — checked
- 11.Synthetix — Exchange Terms — checked
- 12.Synthetix blog — What SR-2 means for the future (4 Oct 2024) — checked
Frequently asked questions
Why does Synthetix score 3.4?
It is the plain average of five equal marks: fees 8, licence 0, audits 3, backing 3 and governance 3. The fee schedule is the only well-documented criterion for the current exchange.
Why did the score fall from 5.4?
The July licence mark of 10 rested on MIT-licensed v2 and v3 repositories. Those cover deprecated systems; synthetix-v3 is archived, and no source or licence has been published for the Ethereum Mainnet exchange. The licence mark fell to 0, the category's mark for live contracts with no public source.
Is Synthetix still open source?
Its older code is MIT-licensed, but we found no public repository for the contracts behind the current Ethereum Mainnet exchange. The SDK and some tooling remain MIT.
What would raise the score?
Publishing the exchange contracts with a licence, listing their audits, publishing the contract addresses and SLP vault size, and stating who holds upgrade and pause rights would each lift a mark.
How does Synthetix compare with Derive?
Derive scores 5.2. Both have a licence mark of 0, but Derive names a V3 auditor, publishes its contract addresses and states who owns its contracts, so it leads on audits, backing and governance.
Nothing here is financial advice. Editorial policy · How we score · How we're funded.