# EVEDEX vs Aster in 2026 Updated 24 September 2026, Books read to 19 September 2026, The Wallet First review desk ## EVEDEX vs Aster side by side | What differs | EVEDEX | Aster | |---|---|---| | Score of 5 | 3.4 | 3.8 | | Model | Hybrid — off-chain matching, settlement on Arbitrum | Own layer 1, operator-run in phase one | | Sign-in | Wallet signature | Wallet signature or email | | On this register | Entered — a wallet signature is the whole sign-in its onboarding pages document | Not entered — its own onboarding docs set out an email login beside the wallet route | | What the terms say about documents | None to trade; on-chain AML screening on deposits | Terms allow limited identity verification procedures | | Maker / taker, entry tier | 0.015% maker / 0.045% taker | 0% maker / 0.040% taker | | Fee reduction | Cashback on fees already paid, up to 35% of a trader's own fees | Volume and VIP tiers | | Perp markets | 52 | 578 | | Trading hours beyond crypto | All markets 24/7, shares and commodities included | Order-book hours per market | | Margin | Cross only, posted in USDT | Cross by default | | Median BTC depth within 10 bps | $17.9 million | $15.9 million | | Median impact of a $100,000 order | 2.06 bps | 0.39 bps | | Custody score, 0-10 | 5.0 — position snapshots on Arbitrum, no documented forced exit | 7.0 — trades on its own chain, no documented forced exit | Terms, fees and market counts read on 18 September 2026 in each venue's own documentation; depth and spread are our own snapshots. ## Verdict EVEDEX vs Aster: both open positions from a wallet signature with no documents. Aster scores 3.8 of 5 against 3.4, on 578 markets and a 0% maker fee; EVEDEX states its screening in writing and keeps every market open 24/7. Whatever the door asks for, a leveraged position asks for margin and can take all of it. ## EVEDEX — six asset classes on one USDT balance, with the checks written down (3.4 of 5) EVEDEX signs in with a wallet and states that it runs no traditional KYC, screening deposits automatically (stated in the EVEDEX documentation, 18 September 2026). Orders match off-chain and settle on Arbitrum. Its 52 markets — crypto, gold through XAUT, silver, crude oil, two FX pairs, five US stocks, an index and two pre-IPO contracts — all trade around the clock at 0.015% maker / 0.045% taker before cashback. - For: Screening mechanism named in writing; All 52 markets open 24/7. - Against: Positions written to Arbitrum in batches rather than trade by trade; Cross margin only. - Not for: UK retail clients. ## [Aster](https://docs.asterdex.com) — the widest market list from a wallet signature (3.8 of 5) One signature from a wallet is the whole of the door ([Aster docs](https://docs.asterdex.com/getting-started/login-via-web3-wallet.md), checked 18 September 2026), and behind it sit 578 perpetual markets over six asset classes priced at 0% maker / 0.040% taker. Matching happens on Aster Chain, where the core contracts stay unpublished and phase one keeps validation to invited parties. The terms reserve limited identity verification for cases where regulation calls for it. - For: 578 perpetual markets; 0% maker fee. - Against: Terms allow limited identity verification; Chain contracts are not open-sourced. - Not for: readers who expect the chain behind that open door to be open too. ## Where the two part company 1. Only one of the two is on this register: Aster documents an email login with a password beside the wallet route, and that second door keeps it off every ranking here. 2. Terms: Aster's allow limited identity verification; EVEDEX describes automated AML screening instead. 3. Markets: 578 on Aster against 52 on EVEDEX, both across six asset classes. 4. Fees: 0% maker / 0.040% taker on Aster, 0.015% maker / 0.045% taker on EVEDEX before cashback on fees already paid. 5. Depth: our snapshots put $15.9 million within 10 bps on Aster and $17.9 million on EVEDEX. Weights: access 30, custody 25, cost 20, coverage 15, liquidity 10 (https://cafrodytes.com/how-we-score) ## Order books BTC perpetual order books sampled on 19 September 2026, ten minutes between readings, beginning just after midnight UTC; every figure is the median of all successful snapshots. | Venue | $10,000 round trip, taker fees | Median spread | Median depth within 10 bps | Median impact, $100,000 order | Snapshots | |---|---|---|---|---|---| | Aster | $8.00 | 0.01 bps | $15.9 million | 0.39 bps | 56 | | EVEDEX | $9.00 | 4.12 bps | $17.9 million | 2.06 bps | 56 | ## What each one asks for, and what it reserves Neither venue collects documents to trade. Aster connects a wallet with a signature ([Aster docs](https://docs.asterdex.com/getting-started/login-via-web3-wallet.md), checked 18 September 2026), and its terms and conditions state that it may implement limited identity verification procedures to comply with applicable regulations ([Aster terms](https://docs.asterdex.com/resources/terms-and-conditions.md), checked 18 September 2026). That is a reserved right without a described mechanism: it may never be used, and a trader cannot tell in advance. The other venue takes the opposite approach to disclosure. EVEDEX states that it does not operate traditional KYC systems and that it relies on automated AML screening of on-chain behaviour with on-chain behaviour analysis, plus activity monitoring (stated in the EVEDEX documentation, 18 September 2026). The check is not smaller — it runs on every deposit — but a trader can read what it is before sending funds. One further difference decides whether a venue is listed on this site at all, and it is worth stating before the columns below are read. Aster's own onboarding documentation sets out a second way in: a six-digit email code and a password, which generates a wallet that accepts USDT on Arbitrum. That is a door the register here does not admit, so Aster is entered in none of the rankings and appears only on this page. A head-to-head is a comparison, not a register, and the pair is printed because readers ask for it — not because both sides cleared the same test. ## Where the books and the fees differ A new Aster account pays 0% maker / 0.040% taker, which leaves a maker with nothing to pay and prices a $10,000 taker round trip at $8.00. The hybrid's 0.015% maker / 0.045% taker does not shift with volume either; what happens instead is that a portion of what has already been paid comes back, on a base percentage rising through a gamification level any user can climb, with five flat points added for Prime subscribers — 35% of the trader's own fees at full stretch (stated in the EVEDEX documentation, 18 September 2026). In our snapshots the BTC books were close, $15.9 million within 10 basis points on Aster against $17.9 million on EVEDEX, with a $100,000 market order moving the price 0.39 bps and 2.06 bps respectively. ## Markets, hours and what runs the venue Aster lists 578 perpetual markets against 52 on the hybrid, and both span six asset classes. The difference is when they are open: EVEDEX states that all of its markets trade around the clock, including shares, FX and commodities (stated in the EVEDEX documentation, 18 September 2026). Underneath, Aster's matching has moved onto a chain of its own, where the core contracts and the RPC layer stay unpublished and validator seats are not open to outsiders in phase one ([Aster Chain overview](https://docs.asterdex.com/overview/what-is-aster.md), checked 18 September 2026). EVEDEX matches orders off-chain and pushes position data down to Arbitrum once enough of it has accumulated, and again on every withdrawal (stated in the EVEDEX documentation, 18 September 2026). For a trader trying to leave, the two end up in the same place: neither writes down an exit that works without the operator, which is what holds their custody marks at 5.0 and 7.0. ## Which door suits which trader Aster suits a trader who wants the widest market list and a zero maker fee, and who is comfortable with a chain run by one operator in its current phase. The hybrid suits a trader who wants gold, oil, FX and equity exposure on the same USDT balance at any hour, and who prefers a venue that publishes what it does with deposits. Neither offers spot markets, options or a fiat off-ramp. ## Quoted > "EVEDEX does not operate traditional KYC systems. Instead, we rely on: Automated AML screening via on-chain behavior analysis" — EVEDEX Help Center, AML and Compliance Standards, read 18 September 2026, 18 September 2026. > "We may implement limited identity verification procedures to comply with applicable regulations." — Aster, Terms and Conditions, 18 September 2026. https://docs.asterdex.com/resources/terms-and-conditions.md > "Core chain contracts and RPC infrastructure will not be open-sourced at the moment" — Aster documentation, Aster Chain overview, 18 September 2026. https://docs.asterdex.com/aster-chain/overview.md ## Method and limits Not one of these figures was requested from a venue. The sign-up page, the terms of use behind it, the fee schedule, the market list — each quoted as it stood on 18 September 2026, and where a marketing line and a contract disagree the contract is what gets printed. All 2 venues here are marked against [one rubric](/how-we-score), set down on 21 September 2026 before any had been read. Depth is the exception: nobody publishes it usefully, so each venue's public BTC book was opened here and sampled on 19 September 2026, ten minutes between readings, beginning just after midnight UTC. No account was registered, no order sent. Which venues were eligible to be marked at all is settled before any of that, by the one test this desk applies: the sign-in a venue's own onboarding pages document has to be a signature from a wallet the trader already holds, with no email account, no social login and no wallet the venue opens for them behind it. EVEDEX, Extended, Lighter and Aevo meet it and carry an order book we could sample. The [admission test](/how-we-score#what-puts-a-venue-on-this-register) names the venues it keeps out, and the front-page door count is where a reader can check the sorting venue by venue. Silence in a column is not a clean finding: a venue that writes nothing about screening is recorded as having written nothing. Every door and every custody line above is a venue describing itself, in a document it wrote and may rewrite, and one address on one day can be asked for more than any page here records. Two narrower ones. Depth was read on BTC books alone; fee columns carry the rate a new account is charged, nothing taken off. ## FAQ ### Is Aster better than EVEDEX? On our five criteria Aster scores 3.8 of 5 against 3.4, mostly on market count and a zero maker fee. On disclosure the order reverses: one venue names its screening mechanism and partner, while Aster's terms reserve the right to verify identity without describing what that would involve or when it would apply. ### Does Aster require KYC? Not to open a position: a wallet signature is the whole sign-in, and no documents are requested at that point. The terms and conditions do allow limited identity verification procedures where regulation requires them, which is a right the venue reserves for later rather than a step anyone meets on the way in. ### Does EVEDEX require KYC? Not for trading: the venue states that it does not operate traditional KYC systems. Deposits instead pass automated on-chain AML screening, and the published minimum deposit is 6 USDT, by documentation read on 18 September 2026. Sign-in itself is a single wallet signature. ### Which has lower fees, Aster or EVEDEX? At the entry tier Aster: 0% maker / 0.040% taker against 0.015% maker / 0.045% taker, or $8.00 versus $9.00 on a $10,000 taker round trip. EVEDEX returns part of the fees paid as cashback, which narrows the gap for active traders. ### Which has more markets? Aster, by a wide margin: 578 perpetual markets against 52 on the hybrid. Both span six asset classes, so the difference is the depth of the listing rather than the breadth of types, and the shorter list is the one that keeps every market open around the clock, shares and commodities included. ### Are both self-custodial? Both keep collateral in contracts tied to the trader's own address, and neither documents a withdrawal that works when the operator does not. Aster records trades on its own chain, where phase-one validation is closed; the hybrid writes position snapshots to Arbitrum once enough changes accumulate, and records every withdrawal on-chain. ### Can you trade gold on either? EVEDEX lists a perpetual on XAUT, a tokenised gold price, alongside silver and crude oil; a trader receives neither metal nor token. Aster's six asset classes include commodities as well. Both quote them against USDT collateral. Neither delivers metal: the position opens and closes in USDT like any other perpetual. ### Which is better for beginners? Neither is a gentle first stop: both are wallet-only, so a lost key ends the account. EVEDEX publishes a minimum deposit of 6 USDT in its documentation and runs one cross-margin balance, which is simpler to follow than several isolated ones; Aster publishes no minimum deposit we could find. ### What is Aster Chain? The layer 1 that now matches Aster's trades. Its documentation states that core contracts and RPC infrastructure are not open-sourced at the moment, and that external validator participation is not supported during phase one. Trades on EVEDEX settle on Arbitrum, a layer 2, rather than on a chain the venue runs itself. ### Do either of them offer spot trading? EVEDEX lists perpetual contracts only — no spot market and no dated futures. Aster's perpetual book is its main venue as well. For buying and holding coins, both would sit alongside a spot venue rather than replace one. Funding payments, not delivery, keep a perpetual close to the price it tracks. ## Corrections One published formula, fixed 21 September 2026; every number carries the date it was read. Corrections: desk@cafrodytes.com. Compiled by The Wallet First review desk, 24 September 2026. Publication here is paid for.