{ "schemaVersion": 1, "id": "gmx-vs-mux-vs-synfutures", "version": "1.1.0", "name": "GMX vs MUX vs SynFutures", "reviewedAt": "2026-10-24", "reviewIntervalDays": 14, "reviewer": "Decentralised News editorial research", "evidenceType": "documentation_comparison", "liveTested": false, "summary": "The final three-way refresh sharpens product-scope and cost differences without producing a winner. GMX adds more explicit pool-impact/funding/borrowing controls, MUX now quantifies native V3 fees and borrowing, and SynFutures' current 2026 stack is broader than the historical V3 snapshot.", "scope": "3 pinned documentation briefs compared by decision condition. Not a live execution test, security audit, exhaustive product inventory or individual eligibility assessment.", "comparisonContext": "GMX is scoped to V2 on Arbitrum. MUX separates aggregation from native V3 markets; SynFutures coverage concerns its perpetual engine. These are different product scopes, not three interchangeable or necessarily independent liquidity venues. No common deployment or current route inventory is asserted.", "comparisonParticipants": [ "gmx", "mux", "synfutures" ], "sources": [], "networks": [ { "id": "perpetuals", "name": "Perpetual trading across distinct product scopes", "collaterals": [], "collateralNote": "Market, account and route dependent. No universal collateral equivalence or shared deployment is asserted." } ], "illustration": null, "rows": [ { "id": "product", "label": "Product and execution route", "meaning": "These are different execution architectures. Interface count does not equal independent liquidity, and current product/version must be identified before comparing mechanics.", "gmx": "GMX V2 remains a direct-market model with pool-specific execution and collateral. This review stays Arbitrum-focused even though current GMX materials reference other deployments and source-chain funding routes.", "gmxSources": [ "overview" ], "mux": "MUX remains a suite: aggregator routes may combine underlying venues, while native V3 uses its own elemental-pool model.", "muxSources": [ "routing" ], "synfutures": "Current SynFutures materials describe a broader 2026 stack with newer mainnet/API surfaces and deployments including Base, Blast and Monad; the perpetual engine remains distinct from tokenized/RWA products.", "synfuturesSources": [ "overview" ] }, { "id": "collateral", "label": "Collateral and market selection", "meaning": "Confirm the exact market, collateral token and execution chain. A deposit option or tutorial example is not a universal margin list.", "gmx": "Collateral choices depend on the market and pool. The order guide gives BTC or USDC as choices for a BTC-USDC market. Non-stable collateral adds price exposure.", "gmxSources": [ "orders" ], "mux": "The V3 guide describes pools with different collateral, markets and directional exposure. Positions can route to multiple elemental pools.", "muxSources": [ "v3" ], "synfutures": "The tutorial distinguishes stablecoin and coin-margin markets, then illustrates a USDC deposit.", "synfuturesSources": [ "tutorial" ] }, { "id": "fees", "label": "Trading and holding costs", "meaning": "Do not compare a GMX position-fee component, MUX native V3 schedule and a historical SynFutures rebate notice as equivalent current all-in costs.", "gmx": "Position fees remain only one component; current docs also emphasize pool-specific price impact, funding, borrowing, swaps and execution/network costs.", "gmxSources": [ "fees" ], "mux": "Native V3 currently documents 0.06% open/close position fees, hourly borrowing based on an 8% base annualized rate that can rise toward roughly 40–50%, and a 0.06% liquidation fee; third-party routes inherit underlying venue economics.", "muxSources": [ "fees" ], "synfutures": "The April 2024 V3 fee-tier announcement remains historical and should not be treated as a current 2026 fee schedule without newer official confirmation.", "synfuturesSources": [ "fees" ] }, { "id": "execution", "label": "Order and routing conditions", "meaning": "Preview, route optimization and oracle-trigger logic are not execution receipts. A matched live benchmark is still required.", "gmx": "Oracle-side triggers, acceptable-price constraints and pool price-impact limits can prevent or alter execution during fast moves.", "gmxSources": [ "orders" ], "mux": "Aggregator routing and leverage boosting add route selection plus boost-specific charges; route estimates remain provider-side optimization rather than measured execution quality.", "muxSources": [ "routing" ], "synfutures": "Trade previews still expose margin, price impact, estimated value and fees; current API availability adds a submission route but not proof of better fills.", "synfuturesSources": [ "tutorial" ] }, { "id": "exit", "label": "Managing exposure before exit", "meaning": "Exit mechanics differ materially. Closing a position, removing liquidity and withdrawing funds remain separate steps.", "gmx": "Stop-loss attempts before liquidation remain conditional and are not guaranteed; pool and market constraints can also affect risk capacity.", "gmxSources": [ "liquidation" ], "mux": "Native V3 supports cross/isolated modes, while aggregator routes may inherit different underlying venue settings.", "muxSources": [ "v3", "routing" ], "synfutures": "Liquidity removal can still convert into a trading position that must then be closed separately; removal is not automatically a cash exit.", "synfuturesSources": [ "tutorial" ] }, { "id": "evidence", "label": "What remains unmeasured", "meaning": "No matched live trades, stop-loss observations or withdrawal tests support a performance or safety winner.", "gmx": "This pinned snapshot provides no independent measurements of execution, withdrawal reliability or individual eligibility.", "gmxSources": [], "mux": "No contemporaneous multi-venue execution benchmark, withdrawal test or stop-loss reliability test was conducted for this brief.", "muxSources": [ "routing" ], "synfutures": "This pinned snapshot provides no independent measurements of execution, withdrawal reliability or individual eligibility.", "synfuturesSources": [] } ], "unknowns": [ "Matched executable quotes including entry, holding and exit costs", "Independent fill, stop-loss and withdrawal reliability", "Current permissions, recovery and revocation behaviour", "Individual eligibility and current regional restrictions" ], "history": [ { "date": "2026-10-24", "type": "DN evidence refresh", "detail": "Comparison refreshed to GMX 1.1.0, MUX 1.1.0 and SynFutures 1.1.0 after primary-source review. No matched live trade, routing, trigger, liquidity-removal, withdrawal or eligibility benchmark was performed." }, { "date": "2026-10-14", "type": "DN publication", "detail": "Initial comparison of pinned documentation snapshots. Evidence coverage differs; unsupported conditions remain unknown." } ], "reviewTriggers": [ "Changed official product, fee, margin or withdrawal documentation", "A substantiated correction", "The earliest underlying editorial review deadline" ], "disclosure": "DN may receive compensation through commercial links elsewhere on the site. This comparison has no trading CTA or payout-based ranking. Documentation does not establish current operational status, safety or user eligibility.", "evidenceSnapshots": { "gmx": { "schemaVersion": 1, "id": "gmx", "version": "1.1.0", "name": "GMX", "reviewedAt": "2026-10-24", "reviewIntervalDays": 14, "reviewer": "Decentralised News editorial research", "evidenceType": "provider_documentation", "liveTested": false, "summary": "GMX V2 still separates funding routes, market/pool collateral and execution. Current docs now make pool-specific price-impact caps, continuous/event-driven funding and borrowing, conditional margin deposits, network-fee handling and delegated-subaccount controls more explicit.", "scope": "Review of accessible provider documentation for GMX V2, focused on Arbitrum. Not a live trade, security audit, exhaustive market inventory or eligibility assessment.", "decisionTitle": "Separate funding, collateral and execution.", "decisionContext": "Start with the market and pool, then check collateral, cost components and order conditions. A convenient funding route does not remove bridge, oracle or delegated-permission dependencies.", "sources": [ { "id": "overview", "name": "GMX trading overview", "url": "https://docs.gmx.io/docs/trading/overview/", "reviewedAt": "2026-10-24" }, { "id": "orders", "name": "GMX positions and order types", "url": "https://docs.gmx.io/docs/trading/order-types/", "reviewedAt": "2026-10-24" }, { "id": "fees", "name": "GMX fees", "url": "https://docs.gmx.io/docs/trading/fees/", "reviewedAt": "2026-10-24" }, { "id": "liquidation", "name": "GMX liquidations and ADL", "url": "https://docs.gmx.io/docs/trading/liquidations/", "reviewedAt": "2026-10-24" }, { "id": "delegation", "name": "GMX delegated trading integration", "url": "https://docs.gmx.io/docs/api/contracts/delegated-trading/", "reviewedAt": "2026-10-24" } ], "networks": [ { "id": "arbitrum", "name": "Arbitrum (review scope)", "collaterals": [], "collateralNote": "Market and pool dependent; inspect the selected position.", "sourceId": "orders" } ], "claims": [ { "id": "network", "question": "Where does the trade execute?", "label": "Provider-reported", "finding": "The overview lists direct markets on Arbitrum, Avalanche and MegaETH. GMX Account access from supported source chains settles on Arbitrum.", "consequence": "Distinguish the funding chain from the execution chain. This brief focuses on Arbitrum; it does not inventory other deployments.", "sourceIds": [ "overview" ] }, { "id": "collateral", "question": "Is the deposit token always the position collateral?", "label": "Provider-reported", "finding": "Collateral choices depend on the market and pool. The order guide gives BTC or USDC as choices for a BTC-USDC market. Non-stable collateral adds price exposure.", "consequence": "Confirm the pool, stored collateral and output token separately. A token accepted for funding is not proof that every pool accepts it as collateral.", "sourceIds": [ "orders" ] }, { "id": "costs", "question": "What does the headline position fee leave out?", "label": "Provider-reported", "finding": "Current GMX V2 fees remain market- and balance-dependent. Position fees are still separate from price impact, swaps, funding, borrowing and execution/network costs; current docs also describe continuous or event-driven funding/borrowing accrual and pool-specific price-impact caps.", "consequence": "Use the exact market, size, imbalance state and holding period. A headline position fee does not establish all-in cost.", "sourceIds": [ "fees" ] }, { "id": "orders", "question": "Does a chart touching the trigger guarantee an exit?", "label": "Provider-reported", "finding": "Order triggering still uses direction-dependent oracle bid/ask bounds rather than chart midpoint. Current documentation also describes market-specific acceptable-price and price-impact constraints that can cancel or limit execution during fast moves.", "consequence": "A chart touch is not a fill receipt. Check trigger side, acceptable price and pool impact limits for the actual order.", "sourceIds": [ "orders" ] }, { "id": "liquidation", "question": "Can a stop-loss guarantee protection from liquidation?", "label": "Provider-reported", "finding": "The liquidation path remains conditional and stop-loss execution is not guaranteed before liquidation. Current docs also distinguish margin deposits/top-ups from order execution and note that pool/market conditions can affect available risk capacity.", "consequence": "Do not rely on stop-loss or top-up timing as guaranteed liquidation protection. DN has not reproduced these paths.", "sourceIds": [ "liquidation" ] }, { "id": "permissions", "question": "What changes with one-click trading?", "label": "Provider-reported", "finding": "One-click/delegated trading still uses a local subaccount key with configurable expiry/action limits and revocation. Current documentation continues to separate delegated trading permissions from the main wallet authority.", "consequence": "Review delegated scope, expiry and revocation before automation. Documentation is not a deployed-permission audit.", "sourceIds": [ "overview", "delegation" ] }, { "id": "access", "question": "Who is eligible, and is the platform live for them?", "label": "Unknown", "finding": "This documentation review does not establish individual eligibility, current regional restrictions or end-to-end operational availability.", "consequence": "No active trading CTA or ranking is supplied. Wallet connection and accessible documentation do not establish permission to trade.", "sourceIds": [ "overview" ] } ], "illustration": null, "unknowns": [ "Current pool-specific all-in cost and available liquidity", "Independent trigger, fill and withdrawal reliability", "Deployed permission scope and revocation behaviour", "Current individual eligibility and regional restrictions" ], "history": [ { "date": "2026-10-24", "type": "DN evidence review", "detail": "Re-opened the five cited GMX V2 documentation pages. This version adds current price-impact cap, funding/borrowing, conditional margin-deposit and delegated-subaccount detail while preserving the Arbitrum-focused review scope. No live trade, trigger, withdrawal, permission or eligibility test was performed." }, { "date": "2026-10-14", "type": "DN publication", "detail": "Initial Arbitrum-focused documentation brief. Distinguishes source chains from settlement, pool collateral from funding assets and documented controls from tested behaviour." } ], "reviewTriggers": [ "Changed provider documentation or deployment configuration", "A substantiated correction", "The 14-day editorial review deadline" ], "disclosure": "DN has an existing GMX referral entry. This brief introduces no trading CTA and makes no operational-status or safety endorsement. Compensation does not affect evidence labels." }, "mux": { "schemaVersion": 1, "id": "mux", "version": "1.1.0", "name": "MUX", "reviewedAt": "2026-10-24", "reviewIntervalDays": 14, "reviewer": "Decentralised News editorial research", "evidenceType": "provider_documentation", "liveTested": false, "summary": "MUX remains a suite that combines aggregator routing with native V3. Current docs now quantify native V3 costs more clearly, including 0.06% open/close position fees, hourly borrowing based on an 8% base annualized rate that can rise toward 40–50%, and a 0.06% liquidation fee.", "scope": "Provider-documentation review of MUX perpetual trading. Not a live execution test, exhaustive product inventory, security audit or individual eligibility assessment.", "decisionTitle": "Inspect the route behind the unified trading screen.", "decisionContext": "Scope: MUX aggregator routing and native V3 documentation. V1 and Degen rules are not assumed to apply to every route. No live quote comparison or routing benchmark was performed.", "sources": [ { "id": "routing", "name": "MUX perpetual aggregator", "url": "https://docs.mux.network/protocol/overview/leveraged-trading-aggregator", "reviewedAt": "2026-10-24" }, { "id": "v3", "name": "MUX V3 trading protocol", "url": "https://docs.mux.network/protocol/overview/mux-v3-trading-protocol", "reviewedAt": "2026-10-24" }, { "id": "fees", "name": "MUX fee structure", "url": "https://docs.mux.network/protocol/fee-structure", "reviewedAt": "2026-10-24" } ], "networks": [ { "id": "mux", "name": "MUX perpetual trading (review scope)", "collaterals": [], "collateralNote": "V3 pools have different collateral and exposure configurations. Verify the actual pool or underlying protocol; there is no universal token list in this brief." } ], "claims": [ { "id": "routing", "question": "Can one trade use multiple underlying venues?", "label": "Provider-reported", "finding": "The aggregator describes routing across one or more liquidity sources based on market, size, available liquidity, estimated costs and user preferences.", "consequence": "Inspect the selected sources. A single interface can expose the position to several protocols and their distinct constraints.", "sourceIds": [ "routing" ] }, { "id": "cost", "question": "Does the native fee schedule apply to every route?", "label": "Provider-reported", "finding": "Third-party aggregator routes still inherit underlying-protocol economics. Current MUX V3 docs separately describe a 0.06% position fee on opening and closing, hourly borrowing based on an 8% base annualized rate that can rise with utilisation toward roughly 40–50%, plus a 0.06% liquidation fee.", "consequence": "Price the selected route and holding period. Native V3 rates cannot be applied to third-party routes, and borrowing can dominate longer holds.", "sourceIds": [ "fees" ] }, { "id": "boost", "question": "Is leverage boosting free additional margin?", "label": "Provider-reported", "finding": "Aggregator leverage boosting still adds supplied margin plus separate boost opening/closing and boost-funding costs on top of underlying venue economics.", "consequence": "Treat boost leverage as a second cost layer rather than free margin. Compare both underlying and boost charges.", "sourceIds": [ "routing" ] }, { "id": "collateral", "question": "Do all V3 pools accept the same assets?", "label": "Provider-reported", "finding": "Native V3 remains pool-specific: elemental pools can use different collateral, market and directional-exposure configurations, and positions can span multiple elemental pools.", "consequence": "Confirm the exact V3 pool or underlying routed venue. No universal collateral list or risk model applies to every MUX route.", "sourceIds": [ "v3" ] }, { "id": "modes", "question": "Does a V3 feature description establish every route setting?", "label": "Provider-reported", "finding": "The native V3 overview lists cross and isolated margin. Aggregator routes can use other underlying protocols.", "consequence": "Verify the margin mode on the selected route; do not transfer native V3 settings to another venue.", "sourceIds": [ "v3", "routing" ] }, { "id": "measured", "question": "Has DN verified the lowest-cost routing claim?", "label": "Not measured", "finding": "No contemporaneous multi-venue execution benchmark, withdrawal test or stop-loss reliability test was conducted for this brief.", "consequence": "Treat optimization statements as provider claims. Documentation alone cannot support a cheapest-platform ranking.", "sourceIds": [ "routing" ] } ], "illustration": null, "unknowns": [ "Current executable quotes and all-in holding costs", "Independent fill, stop-loss and withdrawal reliability", "Live signing permissions and revocation behaviour", "Individual eligibility and current regional restrictions" ], "history": [ { "date": "2026-10-24", "type": "DN evidence review", "detail": "Re-opened the three cited MUX documentation pages. This version adds current native V3 fee, borrowing and liquidation parameters while preserving the distinction between native V3 and third-party aggregator routes. No live routing, fill, withdrawal or eligibility benchmark was performed." }, { "date": "2026-10-14", "type": "DN publication", "detail": "Initial documentation brief. Account-specific conditions and evidence limits are preserved in this version." } ], "reviewTriggers": [ "Changed official product, fee or margin documentation", "A substantiated correction", "The 14-day editorial review deadline" ], "disclosure": "DN may receive compensation through commercial links elsewhere on the site. This brief contains no trading CTA or payout-based ranking. A documentation review does not establish current operational status or user eligibility." }, "synfutures": { "schemaVersion": 1, "id": "synfutures", "version": "1.1.0", "name": "SynFutures", "reviewedAt": "2026-10-24", "reviewIntervalDays": 14, "reviewer": "Decentralised News editorial research", "evidenceType": "provider_documentation", "liveTested": false, "summary": "SynFutures still combines orderbook and AMM liquidity for perpetuals, but its 2026 product stack is broader than the original snapshot. Current official material references a newer mainnet architecture, API access and deployments including Base, Blast and Monad, so product and network scope must be checked before applying older workflow assumptions.", "scope": "Provider-documentation review of SynFutures perpetual trading. Not a live execution test, exhaustive product inventory, security audit or individual eligibility assessment.", "decisionTitle": "Know which position remains after you exit liquidity.", "decisionContext": "Scope: documented perpetual trading and the adjacent liquidity-exit workflow. Tokenized stocks, ETFs and spot aggregation are separate products and are not assessed here.", "sources": [ { "id": "overview", "name": "SynFutures product introduction", "url": "https://docs.synfutures.com/", "reviewedAt": "2026-10-24" }, { "id": "tutorial", "name": "SynFutures written tutorial", "url": "https://docs.synfutures.com/tutorials/written-tutorial", "reviewedAt": "2026-10-24" }, { "id": "fees", "name": "SynFutures April 2024 fee-tier announcement (historical)", "url": "https://blog.synfutures.com/v3-update-introducing-fee-tiering-and-institutional-tools/", "reviewedAt": "2026-10-24" } ], "networks": [ { "id": "synfutures", "name": "SynFutures perpetual trading (review scope)", "collaterals": [], "collateralNote": "The tutorial distinguishes stablecoin-margined and coin-margined pairs. Its USDC deposit example is not a complete current collateral or network list." } ], "claims": [ { "id": "product", "question": "Does the same product rule cover every asset on the site?", "label": "Provider-reported", "finding": "Current SynFutures materials describe a broader 2026 platform stack than the earlier V3-only framing, with a newer mainnet architecture, API access and separate product surfaces. Perpetual trading remains distinct from tokenized/RWA offerings.", "consequence": "Identify the exact current product/version before carrying over older V3 workflow or fee assumptions. A perpetual remains synthetic exposure, not ownership of the referenced asset.", "sourceIds": [ "overview" ] }, { "id": "collateral", "question": "Can one deposit example establish all supported collateral?", "label": "Provider-reported", "finding": "The reviewed tutorial still distinguishes stablecoin- and coin-margined markets, but current deployment references now span networks including Base, Blast and Monad. A single USDC example remains insufficient as a universal collateral/network list.", "consequence": "Verify the selected market, network and margin token from the current app/API rather than relying on an old tutorial example.", "sourceIds": [ "tutorial" ] }, { "id": "execution", "question": "What belongs in the order-cost check?", "label": "Provider-reported", "finding": "The trade preview still exposes margin required, price impact, estimated trade value and fee before confirmation; current API availability adds another route for submission but does not by itself establish better fills.", "consequence": "Compare executable previews or fills at the intended size. UI/API availability is not an execution-quality benchmark.", "sourceIds": [ "tutorial" ] }, { "id": "rebates", "question": "Is a fee discount necessarily credited at execution?", "label": "Historical provider statement", "finding": "The April 2024 V3 fee-tier announcement remains historical evidence. Current 2026 product changes mean those discount/rebate terms should not be treated as current without a newer official fee source.", "consequence": "Do not subtract historical rebate terms from present trading costs unless current program documentation confirms them.", "sourceIds": [ "fees" ] }, { "id": "liquidity", "question": "Does removing liquidity finish the exit?", "label": "Provider-reported", "finding": "The tutorial describes removal as conversion into a trading position, followed by a separate close. It distinguishes removal price from liquidation price.", "consequence": "Check for remaining directional exposure after removal. Liquidity provision is not equivalent to a cash deposit.", "sourceIds": [ "tutorial" ] }, { "id": "margin", "question": "Is available balance interchangeable with position margin?", "label": "Provider-reported", "finding": "The guide treats position-margin transfers and withdrawals from account balance as separate operations.", "consequence": "Confirm what remains committed before withdrawing. Published workflow descriptions do not establish live withdrawal speed.", "sourceIds": [ "tutorial" ] } ], "illustration": null, "unknowns": [ "Current executable quotes and all-in holding costs", "Independent fill, stop-loss and withdrawal reliability", "Live signing permissions and revocation behaviour", "Individual eligibility and current regional restrictions" ], "history": [ { "date": "2026-10-24", "type": "DN evidence review", "detail": "Re-opened the cited SynFutures documentation and current official product/deployment material. This version records the broader 2026 mainnet/API/network scope while keeping historical V3 fee-tier evidence explicitly historical. No live execution, liquidity-removal, withdrawal or eligibility test was performed." }, { "date": "2026-10-14", "type": "DN publication", "detail": "Initial documentation brief. Account-specific conditions and evidence limits are preserved in this version." } ], "reviewTriggers": [ "Changed official product, fee or margin documentation", "A substantiated correction", "The 14-day editorial review deadline" ], "disclosure": "DN may receive compensation through commercial links elsewhere on the site. This brief contains no trading CTA or payout-based ranking. A documentation review does not establish current operational status or user eligibility." } } }