Best DEX for a $BOT market order, live slippage ranked
Effective slippage in basis points for a $10,000 market buy of $BOT perps, walked live on each DEX orderbook every 30 seconds. Lower means the venue fills the size closer to mid. Lighter native and Hyperliquid HIP-3 (xyz:BOT) are the two DEX venues currently listing $BOT.
$BOT is currently listed on two decentralized perp venues, Lighter and Hyperliquid HIP-3 (as `xyz:BOT`, deployed by third-party operator xyz). Rack-rate taker fees do not tell a trader which venue actually fills their market order closer to mid; the answer depends on the depth of the visible orderbook at the notional they want to trade, and both books move continuously. This benchmark polls the two public orderbook endpoints every 30 seconds, walks each side for a fixed set of USD notionals (from $100 up to $500,000), and publishes the effective slippage in basis points as a live gauge per venue, per side and per size. The headline number is the 24 hour average at the $10,000 buy bucket, which is the size a mid-sized $BOT trader is most likely to execute at market. CEX venues are not part of this bench; DefiLlama covers the CEX side of the audit.
Methodology
We measure the live execution quality of a $BOT market order across every DEX that lists $BOT as a perp. Every 30 seconds the harness polls Lighter `/api/v1/orderBookOrders?market_id=185` and Hyperliquid `POST /info {type:l2Book, coin:"xyz:BOT"}`, computes the top-of-book mid, then walks each side for a set of USD notional buckets to derive the size-weighted average execution price. Effective slippage is reported in basis points relative to mid, per venue, per side and per size. Books that lack the depth for a given size are excluded from the slippage series and only reported through `perp_execution_max_fillable_usd`. No trades are placed; every value is derived from public, unauthenticated REST endpoints.
Frequently asked
Which DEX has the best execution for a $BOT market order right now?
Hyperliquid HIP-3 (xyz:BOT) currently leads at 0.91% of slippage on a $10,000 buy (24 h average). The leaderboard re-sorts every 30 seconds against fresh Prometheus samples so the answer reflects the last day of live orderbook walks on Lighter and Hyperliquid HIP-3 (`xyz:BOT`), not a marketing snapshot.
Why is $BOT only tracked on two venues?
Because those are the only two decentralized perp venues currently listing $BOT with a public orderbook endpoint: Lighter (market_id 185) and Hyperliquid HIP-3 under the `xyz:BOT` coin symbol. Native Hyperliquid does not have $BOT listed, so `coin="BOT"` on `/info` returns nothing; the HIP-3 permissionless listing is the only path for $BOT on Hyperliquid infrastructure today.
What is HIP-3 and how is `xyz:BOT` different from a native Hyperliquid perp?
HIP-3 is Hyperliquid's permissionless perp listing standard: a third party (here `xyz`) stakes HYPE and deploys a perp market under a namespaced coin symbol, e.g. `xyz:BOT`. The orderbook is settled on the same HyperBFT infrastructure as native Hyperliquid perps, but liquidity is bootstrapped by the deployer rather than by the flagship Hyperliquid market-making stack, so depth on smaller HIP-3 markets is typically thinner.
How is slippage computed here vs a raw quote?
Every 30 seconds the harness fetches the top of book on each venue, walks the ask side (for a buy) or the bid side (for a sell), and consumes levels until the requested USD notional is filled. Effective execution price is size-weighted; slippage is (avg_exec - mid) / mid in basis points. This is exactly what a market order would cross assuming the visible book at tick time, no impact model on top.
Why publish so many size buckets?
Because execution quality is not linear in size. A venue that fills $1k with 1 bps of slippage can charge 200 bps at $50k if its book thins out fast. The bench publishes eight size buckets from $100 to $500,000 on both sides so a trader can pick the row that matches their intended clip.
What about CEX venues like Binance or Bybit for $BOT?
Out of scope for this bench. CEX taker fees and orderbook depth are covered by DefiLlama's aggregated stats for the CEX side. This bench answers a narrower question: given that a user wants to execute onchain, which DEX will fill their $BOT order closer to mid right now.
What happens when the visible book cannot fill the requested size?
The slippage series for that (venue, side, size) is dropped for that tick and `perp_execution_max_fillable_usd{side}` reports how much notional the book could actually clear, so the leaderboard does not silently print a misleading number when depth runs out.
Source code github.com/ChainBench/OpenChainBench/tree/main/harnesses/perp-execution-scanner