Coin98 vs tuleep.trade

Name: Coin98 vs tuleep.trade OpenChainBench measurements
Creator: OpenChainBench
License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

tuleep.trade leads on the only live benchmark. tuleep.trade wins on Hyperliquid frontends builder revenue leaderboard ($644.83 vs $1.54).

Read methodology Last measured Thu, 27 Aug 2026 22:35:35 UTCWindow: rolling 24h1 shared benchmark

Coin98

Coin98 is a multi chain wallet super app whose perpetuals interface aggregates Hyperliquid alongside GMX and other venues, routing Hyperliquid fills via a registered builder code.

tuleep.trade

tuleep.trade is a multi exchange trading terminal focused on news trading; its Hyperliquid orders carry a registered builder code.

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
Coin98provisional	$1.54	$3,845.99	1	0.040%	2.6 h
tuleep.trade	$644.83	$3.22M	10	0.020%	51.7 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

Coin98 vs tuleep.trade: which one is better?

Coin98 and tuleep.trade are compared on 1 shared OpenChainBench benchmarks. tuleep.trade leads on Hyperliquid frontends builder revenue leaderboard. See the live table on this page for every metric.

Which is cheaper, Coin98 or tuleep.trade?

On the Hyperliquid frontends builder revenue leaderboard benchmark, tuleep.trade leads at $644.83 versus Coin98 at $1.54 (provisional). Live measurement is updated continuously by the OpenChainBench harness.

How is the Coin98 vs tuleep.trade 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.