Axiom vs Terminal

Split decision: Axiom leads on Trading platform leaderboard ($105.37M vs $18.12M) and Trading app daily volume 2026 ($105.37M vs $18.12M); Terminal leads on Trading terminal fill quality 2026 (419 bps vs 462 bps) and Trading terminal execution quality 2026 (313 bps vs 379 bps). Data as of 2026-09-30 UTC.

Read methodology Last measured Window: rolling 24h4 shared benchmarks
Axiom logo
Axiom

Axiom is a Solana-native trading terminal expanding to Hyperliquid perps with a registered builder code, focused on advanced order types and pro-trader UX.

Side by side measurements

Trading platform leaderboard: what GMGN, Axiom, FOMO and Terminal route and what they charge

Trading
ProviderDaily volumeCommissionTake rate
Axiom$105.37M$590.6K0.56%
Terminal$18.12M$117.8K0.65%
View
Axiomn/aTerminaln/a

Volume is what each app's DeFiLlama dexs adapter attributes to it per UTC day, over every chain that adapter covers. Commission is the app's own cut from its fees adapter (dailyRevenue), not the total fees paid on the trade: the venue underneath takes its own share, and counting that would roughly double the figure. The take rate divides the two over the same days, so it is a floor where an adapter covers fewer chains for fees than for volume. Rows end on each app's own latest closed day.

Trading app daily volume 2026: GMGN, Axiom, FOMO, Terminal, Photon, Trojan by UTC day, every chain

Trading
ProviderDaily volumeVolume 30dShare 30d
Axiom$105.37M$2.69B14.6%
Terminal$18.12M$456.31M2.48%
View
Axiomn/aTerminaln/a

Volume is what each app's DeFiLlama adapter attributes to the app per UTC day, over every chain the adapter covers: FOMO is Solana only on DeFiLlama, GMGN spans ten chains. Each row ends on the app's latest closed day: most adapters are Dune queries that publish a day 10 to 20 hours after it closes, so before mid-day UTC some rows are dated one day behind, and GMGN's adapter skips some days. DeFiLlama can restate the last day for about a day; the series is re-read hourly.

Trading terminal fill quality 2026: what a swap costs on Axiom, GMGN, FOMO, Photon, Trojan, measured on-chain

Trading
ProviderCost per swapTerminal feeNetworkPoolFailed swaps
Axiom462 bps95.7 bps26.0 bps75.2 bps4.90%
Terminal419 bps98.7 bps20.2 bps89.6 bps5.33%
View
Axiomn/aTerminaln/a

Random sample (150 a day per row, Solana and EVM alike) of the swaps each terminal routed, every attempt counted for the fail rate. Reference = the pool's state before the swap (its reserves, or the previous trade within 60 s); swaps without one keep their split, no loss figure. Published from 50 priced swaps pooled over the product's chains at 25 or more (a single-chain product from 25), ranked from 100; the median's 95 % interval is in the JSON. Compare medians, not single swaps.

Trading terminal execution quality 2026: what a swap costs once the app's own fee is removed

Trading
ProviderExecution lossCost per swap, all inApp feeNetworkPool
Axiom379 bps470 bps95.7 bps26.0 bps75.2 bps
Terminal313 bps412 bps98.7 bps20.0 bps92.5 bps
View
Axiomn/aTerminaln/a

Same sample, window and reference as bench 268; read that page for how a swap is priced. Here each swap's loss has the terminal's fee subtracted before the median is taken. Subtracting the two published medians gives a different number wherever an app's fee varies across its own swaps, which is why this is measured, not derived. A swap reads negative when a fee was rebated or the reference drifted the user's way; those stay in. Compare medians with their intervals, never single swaps.

Frequently asked questions

Axiom vs Terminal: which one is better?

Axiom and Terminal are compared on 4 shared OpenChainBench benchmarks. Axiom leads on Trading platform leaderboard. Terminal leads on Trading terminal fill quality 2026. See the live table on this page for every metric.

Which has the higher daily volume, Axiom or Terminal?

On the Trading platform leaderboard benchmark, Axiom leads at $105.37M versus Terminal at $18.12M. Live measurement is updated continuously by the OpenChainBench harness.

Which is cheaper, Axiom or Terminal?

On the Trading terminal fill quality 2026 benchmark, Terminal leads at 419 bps versus Axiom at 462 bps. Live measurement is updated continuously by the OpenChainBench harness.

How is the Axiom vs Terminal 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.

Related comparisons

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.

Live data refreshes via ISR within 60 seconds of a new run. Sources are the same Prometheus queries surfaced on the parent benchmark pages.