Skip to content
Crypto Almanac Daily
R
Dex

RocketSwap Anubis

Best for documented on-chain trading

Total value locked:$184m at this checkChains:1Audits recorded:0Audit report linked:Not foundRubric:v2.0 · verified 9 Aug 2026
Kayla PetersonKayla PetersonDeFi Research Analyst· Last verified August 9, 2026
Confidence ARubric v2.0Verified August 9, 2026
4.8
out of 10
Open account
Scorecard

How it rates

Counterparty & contract risk · 30%4.0
Cost transparency · 20%4.0
Market quality · 25%5.0
Transparency & track record · 15%6.0
Public documentation surface · 10%6.0
Pros
  • Tracked and verifiable from public sources at this check
Cons
  • No audit report linked in the public dataset at this check
  • No documentation site found at a conventional address
  • Single-chain deployment
How this score was built

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.

Counterparty & contract risk · 30% weight4/10 points · 4.0/10
Cost transparency · 20% weight4/10 points · 4.0/10
Market quality · 25% weight5/10 points · 5.0/10
Transparency & track record · 15% weight6/10 points · 6.0/10
Public documentation surface · 10% weight6/10 points · 6.0/10

A single-chain automated market maker holding $184m, with the thinnest published evidence base of any decentralised exchange in this comparison.

Our assessment

RocketSwap Anubis holds $184m on a single chain and scores lowest of the fifteen DEXs in this comparison. The gap between the value it holds and the evidence it publishes is the whole story.

Value locked is not validation

$184m sounds substantial, and it says nothing about whether the contracts have been reviewed, who operates them, or what happens if something breaks. Value can accumulate quickly on a protocol offering high emissions, and it can leave faster. Depth without published evidence is a measurement of incentives, not of safety.

What we could not establish

No audit report at a public address, and thin results across the transparency and documentation indicators. For a protocol at this size that is an unusually sparse record, and our rubric has no way to award credit for evidence that does not exist — nor should it.

How to treat a protocol like this

If you use it, treat any deposit as capital at risk of total loss, keep the position small, and do not leave it unattended. These are the standard precautions for unaudited DeFi and they are routinely ignored when a yield figure is attractive.

Who it suits

On published evidence, we would direct most readers to better-documented venues in this table. RocketSwap suits users already active in its ecosystem who have made their own assessment of the contracts.

Alternatives

How rivals compare

ServiceScoreBest for
Uniswap V39.8audited, multi-chain deploymentRead →
Curve DEX9.6audited, multi-chain deploymentRead →
PancakeSwap AMM9.6audited, multi-chain deploymentRead →
Reference

Frequently asked

Does this score mean RocketSwap Anubis 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.