1inch vs Uniswap
Neutral on-chain benchmarking of slippage, revert rates, and overall execution quality.
ClearTrace does not rank these two on slippage. More than half of 1inch's benchmarked fills on Ethereum settle in the taker's favour against the oracle baseline, so its score reflects the composition of that flow rather than execution cost, and it cannot be set against Uniswap's. 1inch scores 91.1 out of 100 over 26,614 benchmarked transactions on Ethereum and Uniswap 90.2 over 365,599 on Ethereum; read them separately, not as a ranking. (data as of October 14, 2026)
Protocol Scorecard
| 1inch | Uniswap | |
|---|---|---|
| Slippage Score (0-100) | 91.1 Ethereum |
90.2 Ethereum |
| Trades Analyzed Ethereum |
26,614 | 365,599 |
1inch is a DEX aggregator that routes and splits orders across many venues, while Uniswap is a single automated market maker (AMM) trading against its own pools. The practical question is whether 1inch's routing and MEV-aware order flow actually beats trading directly on Uniswap. Note that 1inch can itself route through Uniswap pools, so this measures the value of aggregation, not rival liquidity.
Across the flow ClearTrace benchmarked, 1inch posted a slippage score of 91.1/100 versus 90.2/100 for Uniswap; the two are not ranked against each other here, for the reason given below. Both figures are measured on Ethereum, ClearTrace's publication chain. The score reflects realized slippage only, derived from median slippage versus a minute-level off-chain reference price (Dune prices.usd, an interpolated 5-minute exchange-aggregate feed and not a VWAP), where a higher number means lower slippage. The median is taken over individual fills, while the counts below are distinct transactions, and one transaction can contain several fills. MEV exposure and revert rates are tracked as separate metrics. 1inch was measured over 26,614 benchmarked transactions (84% of its benchmarked flow) and Uniswap over 365,599 benchmarked transactions (25% of its benchmarked flow).
The sample sizes differ substantially (Uniswap: 365,599 transactions; 1inch: 26,614), so 1inch's score reflects a narrower slice of activity and may move as more volume is observed.
ClearTrace does not rank these two on slippage. More than half of 1inch's benchmarked fills on Ethereum settle in the taker's favour against the oracle baseline, so its score reflects the composition of that flow rather than execution cost, and it cannot be set against Uniswap's. The slippage figure is the median absolute gap against the minute-level off-chain reference price, so it cannot tell a cost from a gain of the same size. Where most of a venue's fills land on the favourable side, the resulting number is describing what that flow is — market-maker inventory, vault rebalancing, searcher activity — rather than what a user would pay. Both figures stay published, and the reasoning is in our methodology write-up.
Execution-quality research, in your inbox
Periodic on-chain findings on DEX slippage, revert rates, and aggregator routing. No spam.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which has better execution quality, 1inch or Uniswap?
ClearTrace does not rank these two on slippage. More than half of 1inch's benchmarked fills on Ethereum settle in the taker's favour against the oracle baseline, so its score reflects the composition of that flow rather than execution cost, and it cannot be set against Uniswap's. 1inch scored 91.1/100 on Ethereum and Uniswap 90.2/100 on Ethereum, but those are not comparable on this metric.
Does 1inch or Uniswap offer better MEV protection?
ClearTrace publishes a slippage-based score and per-aggregator revert rates, not a per-aggregator MEV-protection score. On slippage the two are not comparable here: 1inch's ~8.9 bps is a median absolute gap over flow that mostly settles in the taker's favour, so it is not a cost a user would pay. For MEV specifically, the dashboard surfaces detected sandwich activity as a separate metric.
Is 1inch or Uniswap better for large trades?
For large orders, aggregators such as 1inch can split a trade across multiple pools to reduce price impact, which often helps on size. The right venue still depends on the specific pair and amount. The live dashboard tracks current execution quality.