Gains vs Jupiter Perps

Gains leads on 3 of 5 shared benchmarks, Jupiter Perps on 2. Gains wins on Most tradable markets on a perp DEX, live count per venue (355 vs 3), Perp DEX token P/E ratio 2026 (1.278x vs 31.2x), Perp DEX price to fees (0.964x vs 5.28x). Jupiter Perps wins on Perp DEX volume share, live 24h notional ranked ($123.90M vs $15.97M), Perp DEX volume to open interest (1.195x vs 6.13x). Data as of 2026-10-06 UTC.

Read methodology Last measured Window: rolling 24h5 shared benchmarks
Gains logo
Gains

Perp DEX on Polygon, Arbitrum, Base and Solana. Pool-based execution against the gToken vaults, oracle-priced trades with synthetic leverage.

Jupiter Perps logo
Jupiter Perps

Solana swap aggregator. REST APIs for quotes, swap routing, price, and token lists across Solana DEXs.

Side by side measurements

Perp DEX token P/E ratio 2026: Hyperliquid, Lighter, GMX, dYdX, GNS live

Trading

Gains

Leads

1.278x

p99
1.278x
rank
#1
samples
2,880

Jupiter Perps

Trails

31.2x

p99
31.2x
rank
#4
samples
2,880
P/E ratio
Gainsn/aJupiter Perpsn/a

P/E = fully diluted valuation (CoinGecko) divided by annualized protocol revenue (DeFiLlama dailyRevenue, 30-day trailing average x365). Protocol revenue = fees accruing to the treasury or token holders, not total user fees. Tokens without a CoinGecko listing show no P/E. FDV reflects total supply at current price, not circulating supply; tokens with large unvested allocations will show inflated FDV-based P/E. Updated hourly.

Perp DEX price to fees: what the market pays per dollar of trading fees

Trading
ProviderP/F ratioFDV / feesP/SFees 30dRevenue 30dFloatOpen interestFees / OI
Gains0.964x0.964x1.278x$841.5K$634.7K100.0%$2.45M4.19x
Jupiter Perps5.28x10.9x15.1x$17.99M$6.29M48.4%$49.28M4.44x
View
Gainsn/aJupiter Perpsn/a

P/F = circulating market cap (CoinGecko) / annualized fees (DeFiLlama dailyFees, trailing 30d x 365/30), on the DeFiLlama parent the token accrues from. Fees include the share paid to liquidity providers; P/S uses protocol revenue only. Low-float tokens show a much higher FDV/F than P/F. Pre-TGE venues are listed unranked with fees and OI, no ratio. A low multiple is not a recommendation.

Perp DEX volume to open interest: 24h turnover per dollar of OI, live

Trading

Gains

Trails

6.13x

p99
6.83x
rank
#20
samples
2,880

Jupiter Perps

Leads

1.195x

p99
1.403x
rank
#11
samples
2,880
Volume / OI (24h)
Gainsn/aJupiter Perpsn/a

The ratio is a screen, not a verdict. Both terms are the venue's own figures (24h volume and open interest as each API reports them, in USD), so a venue that counts both legs of a fill moves its ratio without changing anything real. A very low ratio (Ostium, 0.2x) means positions held for days on thin daily volume; a very high one (Kalshi, above 40x) means a day of trading dwarfs what stays open. The bands in the methodology say what each range usually means.

Rolling 24h · Volume / OI (24h)Raw JSON

Frequently asked questions

Gains vs Jupiter Perps: which one is better?

Gains and Jupiter Perps are compared on 5 shared OpenChainBench benchmarks. Gains leads on Most tradable markets on a perp DEX, live count per venue. Jupiter Perps leads on Perp DEX volume share, live 24h notional ranked. See the live table on this page for every metric.

Which has the higher active markets, Gains or Jupiter Perps?

On the Most tradable markets on a perp DEX, live count per venue benchmark, Gains leads at 355 versus Jupiter Perps at 3. Live measurement is updated continuously by the OpenChainBench harness.

Which has the higher 24h perp volume, Gains or Jupiter Perps?

On the Perp DEX volume share, live 24h notional ranked benchmark, Jupiter Perps leads at $123.90M versus Gains at $15.97M. Live measurement is updated continuously by the OpenChainBench harness.

How is the Gains vs Jupiter Perps 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.