ApexLiquid vs OneKey

Name: ApexLiquid vs OneKey OpenChainBench measurements
Creator: OpenChainBench
License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

OneKey leads on the only live benchmark. OneKey wins on Hyperliquid frontends builder revenue leaderboard ($10.7K vs $1,143.52).

Read methodology Last measured Sat, 22 Aug 2026 02:13:05 UTCWindow: rolling 24h1 shared benchmark

ApexLiquid

ApexLiquid is a Telegram bot and smart wallet that auto copies on chain smart money traders on Hyperliquid in roughly one second, routing mirrored fills via a registered builder code.

OneKey

Open source hardware and software wallet with native OneKey Perps integration for trading Hyperliquid perpetuals from any device.

Side by side measurements

Hyperliquid frontends builder revenue leaderboard

Trading

Provider	Builder fees collected	Volume routed	Users 24h	Effective fee bps	Time since last fill
ApexLiquid	$1,143.52	$2.36M	117	0.048%	2.2 s
OneKey	$10.7K	$21.48M	198	0.050%	2.7 min

Ranking is by raw builder fee revenue in USD, not by value for users. Bigger number means more fees collected via the on-chain builder code field. For the trader cost perspective, switch to the Effective fee bps companion tab. Native Hyperliquid UI orders carry no builder code and are excluded. Data from a local hl node tailing every fill on mainnet.

Frequently asked questions

ApexLiquid vs OneKey: which one is better?

ApexLiquid and OneKey are compared on 1 shared OpenChainBench benchmarks. OneKey leads on Hyperliquid frontends builder revenue leaderboard. See the live table on this page for every metric.

Which is cheaper, ApexLiquid or OneKey?

On the Hyperliquid frontends builder revenue leaderboard benchmark, OneKey leads at $10.7K versus ApexLiquid at $1,143.52. Live measurement is updated continuously by the OpenChainBench harness.

How is the ApexLiquid vs OneKey comparison measured?

Every benchmark on this page uses the same open methodology, published at https://openchainbench.com/methodology. Data is CC-BY-4.0. Measurement harnesses are MIT-licensed.

How this pair was selected

Auto-generated pairs require: both providers in the same benchmark for seven consecutive days, at least 1000 samples per provider, observable third-party search demand, and a public /products/[slug] page on OCB. Editorially curated pairs (like this one) may publish early when search demand is high and data is accruing — panels with fewer than 100 samples are shown as provisional. The full pair ledger is versioned in the public repo.