FOMO vs Phantom

Phantom leads on both live benchmarks. Phantom wins on Trading terminal fill quality 2026 (249 bps vs 339 bps), Trading terminal execution quality 2026 (162 bps vs 171 bps). Data as of 2026-10-25 UTC.

Read methodology Last measured Window: rolling 24h2 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.

Phantom logo
Phantom

Phantom is a multi-chain wallet (Solana, Ethereum, Base, Bitcoin) whose in-wallet swap routes through Jupiter or its own router and takes a 0.85 % fee on each trade.

Side by side measurements

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

Trading

Headline: All chains

ProviderCost per swapSettlement timeTerminal feeNetworkPoolFailed swaps
FOMO339 bps3.37 s171 bps17.9 bps102 bps0.92%
Phantom249 bps3.10 s84.6 bps9.24 bps102 bps2.15%
View
FOMOn/aPhantomn/a

Random sample (1,000 a day per Solana row, 6,000 per EVM row) 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

Headline: All chains

ProviderExecution lossCost per swap, all inApp feeNetworkPool
FOMO171 bps339 bps171 bps17.9 bps102 bps
Phantom162 bps249 bps84.6 bps9.24 bps102 bps
View
FOMOn/aPhantomn/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

FOMO vs Phantom: which one is better?

FOMO and Phantom are compared on 2 shared OpenChainBench benchmarks. Phantom leads on Trading terminal fill quality 2026. See the live table on this page for every metric.

Which is cheaper, FOMO or Phantom?

On the Trading terminal fill quality 2026 benchmark, Phantom leads at 249 bps versus FOMO at 339 bps. Live measurement is updated continuously by the OpenChainBench harness.

How is the FOMO vs Phantom 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.