FOMO vs GMGN

FOMO leads on 5 of 7 shared benchmarks, GMGN on 2. FOMO wins on iOS App Store rating (4.80x vs 3.69x), Memecoin trading fees (0.71% vs 0.92%), Solana DEX volume ($78.04M vs $18.61M), Unique daily swap transactions on Solana (1.30M vs 877.2K). GMGN wins on Trading platform leaderboard ($112.66M vs $52.14M), Average swap size on Solana ($128.42 vs $40.11).

Read methodology Last measured Window: rolling 24h7 shared benchmarks
FOMO logo
FOMO

FOMO is a multi-chain trading app (Solana, Base, BNB Chain, and more) for memecoins and perps. It provides social copy-trading, onchain signals, and routes swaps through pump.fun, Raydium, and other DEX pools.

GMGN logo
GMGN

GMGN is a Solana and EVM memecoin trading terminal combining wallet tracking, smart money copy trading and a Telegram bot. It routes swaps through pump.fun and DEX pools with a configurable slippage and fee.

Side by side measurements

Trading platform leaderboard: GMGN vs Axiom vs Fomo vs pump.fun, live 24h volume

Trading

FOMO

Trails

$52.14M

p99
$52.14M
rank
#3
samples
52,141,100

GMGN

Leads

$112.66M

p99
$112.66M
rank
#1
samples
112,658,000

Volume figures are sourced from Dune community datasets, which aggregate cross-chain trading activity per platform (Solana, BNB Chain, Base, Robinhood node, HyperEVM, Monad, and more). Data is refreshed every 4 hours. pump.fun volume = bonding-curve Solana swaps (dataset_pumpapp_sol_daily) + cross-chain relay swaps (dataset_pumpfun_relay_daily). Fomo = Solana only (dataset_fomo_sol_daily). All others sum across all blockchains.

Crypto trading app iOS App Store ratings, live

Trading
ProviderApp Store ratingReview count
FOMO4.80x16.9K
GMGNprovisional3.69x87

Ratings reflect the current all-time average user rating from the Apple App Store as returned by the iTunes lookup API. Apple does not expose star-distribution breakdowns or time-windowed averages via the public API. A high rating with few reviews carries more statistical uncertainty than the same rating with tens of thousands of reviews. The review count column shows how many users contributed to each rating.

Solana memecoin platform fee rates: Axiom vs Fomo vs pump.fun vs GMGN vs Trojan, live 24h

Trading

FOMO

Leads

0.71 %

p99
0.71%
rank
#2
samples
368,583

GMGN

Trails

0.92 %

p99
0.92%
rank
#3
samples
1,031,880

Take rate = fees / volume * 100. Fees are on-chain inflows to known fee wallets (Dune query 8316589, refreshed every 6h). Fomo fees come from DeFiLlama (on-chain USDC + off-chain relay). Volume is total Mobula-attributed volume; the take rate is a lower bound since platforms with variable or waivable fees will show lower observed rates.

Solana DEX volume: pump.fun vs Axiom vs GMGN vs Fomo, live 24h

Trading
Provider24h volumeProtocol revenue (24h)7-day volumeTake rate
FOMO$78.04M$1.59M$349.76M0.020%
GMGN$18.61M$176.2K$72.74M0.0095%

Volume and revenue data sourced from DeFiLlama's DEX and fees APIs. DeFiLlama attributes volume via on-chain referral tags and program IDs; platforms without standard tags may be undercounted. Figures are 24-hour and 7-day rolling totals updated every 30 minutes. Revenue uses DeFiLlama's dailyRevenue dataType, stripping LP fees. Terminal volume (Axiom, GMGN, Fomo) and launchpad volume (pump.fun) use different attribution methods and are not directly additive.

Average swap size on Solana: pump.fun vs GMGN vs Fomo vs Axiom, live

Trading

FOMO

Trails

$40.11

p99
$40.11
rank
#11
samples
1,300,070

GMGN

Leads

$128.42

p99
$128.42
rank
#3
samples
877,238

Average swap size is computed as 24h attributed volume divided by 24h attributed trade count from Mobula lighthouse. Both numerator and denominator include bot and MEV activity; the metric reflects all on-chain swaps attributed to each platform, not human-only trades. pump.fun volume comes from the byLaunchpad bucket (bonding-curve swaps via pump.fun's own frontend); all other platforms come from byPlatform. Attribution is mutually exclusive per Mobula's referral-tag methodology.

Unique daily swap transactions on Solana: pump.fun vs GMGN vs Fomo vs Axiom vs Trojan, live

Trading

FOMO

Leads

1.30M

p99
1.30M
rank
#2
samples
1,300,070

GMGN

Trails

877.2K

p99
877.2K
rank
#3
samples
877,238

Counts unique tx_ids per platform, not unique wallets. Actual unique-wallet count is 3-10x lower since active traders execute multiple transactions per day. Includes bots, MEV searchers, and multi-wallet traders. Terminals (GMGN, Axiom, Fomo, Trojan, Photon, Maestro) use fee wallet inflow detection; pump.fun uses Dune Spellbook (dex_solana.trades, project IN pumpdotfun/pumpswap) to avoid noise from fee-wallet micro-inflows at 0% fee.

Rolling 24h · Unique swap tx 24hRaw JSON

Daily active wallets per trading platform: GMGN vs Axiom vs Fomo vs pump.fun, live

Trading

FOMO

Leads

92.6K

p99
92.6K
rank
#1
samples
92,558

GMGN

Trails

46.1K

p99
46.1K
rank
#3
samples
46,090

Wallet counts are unique wallets per platform per day from Dune community datasets (cross-chain). A wallet using two platforms is counted in each; counts are not mutually exclusive. Includes bots, MEV searchers, and multi-wallet traders. pump.fun wallets come from dataset_pumpapp_sol_daily only (not relay); relay wallets would overlap with pumpapp and double-count. Data represents the most recent complete day, refreshed every 4 hours.

Rolling 24h · Active wallets 24hRaw JSON

Frequently asked questions

FOMO vs GMGN: which one is better?

FOMO and GMGN are compared on 7 shared OpenChainBench benchmarks. FOMO leads on iOS App Store rating. GMGN leads on Trading platform leaderboard. See the live table on this page for every metric.

Which is higher-rated, FOMO or GMGN?

On the Crypto trading app iOS App Store ratings, live benchmark, FOMO leads at 4.80x versus GMGN at 3.69x (provisional). Live measurement is updated continuously by the OpenChainBench harness.

Which is cheaper, FOMO or GMGN?

On the Trading platform leaderboard benchmark, GMGN leads at $112.66M versus FOMO at $52.14M. Live measurement is updated continuously by the OpenChainBench harness.

How is the FOMO vs GMGN 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.