dYdX V4
Best for documented on-chain trading
How it rates
- Documentation published at a public address
- No audit report linked in the public dataset at this check
- Single-chain deployment
Each indicator scores 2, 1 or 0. A pillar is the points earned over the points available; the overall score is the weighted sum. Every source below is public — check any of them yourself.
- Not metIndependent audit published with a linked report
No audit report linked in the public protocol dataset at this check.
defillama.com/protocol/dydx-v4 - Not met
- MetProtocol tracked by an independent analytics platform
Listed with published TVL and history.
defillama.com/protocol/dydx-v4 - Met
- Met
- MetDocumentation published where fees are described
Documentation reachable for fee review.
docs.dydx.xyz/ - Met
- MetIndependent dataset publishes protocol economics
TVL and change history published independently.
defillama.com/protocol/dydx-v4 - PartialFee model documented publicly
Documentation available; specific fee tiers not captured at this check.
docs.dydx.xyz/ - Met
- Met
- Not met
- Not met
- Not met
- PartialListed on the independent dataset for over a year
Listing date recorded in the dataset.
defillama.com/protocol/dydx-v4
- MetIndependent analytics page published
Public protocol page with history.
defillama.com/protocol/dydx-v4 - Not metAudit documentation linked publicly
No audit report linked at this check.
defillama.com/protocol/dydx-v4 - Met
- MetProtocol identity and chains disclosed
Chains and category published: Derivatives.
defillama.com/protocol/dydx-v4 - Met
- Met
- Met
- Met
- Not met
- Met
A perpetuals protocol running on its own purpose-built chain, with a decentralised order book matched by validators and settled on-chain.
Our assessment
dYdX v4 moved off Ethereum onto its own chain so that the order book itself could be decentralised — validators run the matching, and settlement happens on-chain. It holds $77m at this check, well below its pre-migration peak.
Rebuilding the whole stack to decentralise one component
Earlier versions ran a centralised matching engine over on-chain settlement, which meant a company could halt trading or censor an account. Building a dedicated chain where validators handle order flow removes that, at the cost of leaving Ethereum's liquidity and tooling behind. Few teams would attempt this; it is a genuine architectural commitment rather than a marketing position.
What the migration cost
Liquidity did not follow in full. A venue that once led on-chain perpetuals now holds less than several newer competitors, and depth is what traders actually buy. The decentralisation is real and so is the reduced market quality — our rubric weights that at 25% and the score reflects it.
Evidence gaps
No audit report was retrievable at a public address at this check, and several transparency indicators returned nothing. For a protocol with this much engineering history, publishing the reviews would be a straightforward improvement.
Who it suits
dYdX fits traders who specifically want order-book perpetuals with no centralised matching operator and accept thinner books for it. Traders prioritising depth should use GMX, Hyperliquid or Jupiter.
How rivals compare
| Service | Score | Best for | |
|---|---|---|---|
| GMX V2 Perps | 9.3 | audited, multi-chain deployment | Read → |
Frequently asked
Does this score mean dYdX V4 is safe to use?
No. It measures what an outsider can verify: linked audits, published documentation and independently recorded market data. Contract behaviour is not tested by us.
Where does the TVL figure come from?
An independent public analytics platform, queried at the verification date. Anyone can re-run the same query.
Why do some protocols score zero on audits?
Because no audit report is linked in the public dataset. It records what a user can reach, not a claim that no audit was ever performed.