CoWSwap vs KyberSwap
Neutral on-chain benchmarking of slippage, revert rates, and overall execution quality.
CoWSwap shows tighter execution than KyberSwap on ClearTrace's on-chain slippage benchmark on Ethereum, 89.7 vs 87.2 out of 100 (a 2.5-point edge), measured across 13,900 and 16,917 benchmarked trades there. Slippage, revert rate, and MEV exposure are scored separately. The ordering is not the same on every chain these two share: Arbitrum (KyberSwap ahead by 4.7); Base (KyberSwap ahead by 5.5). ClearTrace publishes one chain rather than a blend, so read this as a finding about Ethereum. (data as of September 16, 2026)
Protocol Scorecard
| CoWSwap | KyberSwap | |
|---|---|---|
| Slippage Score (0-100) | 89.7 Ethereum |
87.2 Ethereum |
| Trades Analyzed Ethereum |
13,900 | 16,917 |
CoWSwap and KyberSwap are both DEX aggregators: rather than holding liquidity themselves, they split each order across many underlying pools to find the best available price. Because both compete on routing quality, the difference between them shows up in execution (realized slippage and MEV exposure) far more than in their headline rates.
Across the trades ClearTrace benchmarked, CoWSwap posted a slippage score of 89.7/100 versus 87.2/100 for KyberSwap, a meaningful but not decisive edge of 2.5 points on Ethereum. Ethereum is ClearTrace's publication chain: ClearTrace compares a pair on its publication chain when both venues are benchmarked there, and otherwise on the shared chain carrying the most data on the smaller side. Either way the comparison is one chain, not one venue's all-chain rollup set against another's, because two rollups cover different chains. The ordering is not the same on every chain these two share: Arbitrum (KyberSwap ahead by 4.7); Base (KyberSwap ahead by 5.5). ClearTrace publishes one chain rather than a blend, so read this as a finding about Ethereum. The score reflects realized slippage only, derived from median slippage versus a 1-minute VWAP, where a higher number means lower slippage. MEV exposure and revert rates are tracked as separate metrics. CoWSwap was measured over 13,900 trades (77% of its benchmarked flow) and KyberSwap over 16,917 trades (29% of its benchmarked flow).
The other axis is reliability, but it is not one we will rank these two on. CoWSwap and KyberSwap settle differently, so their on-chain revert rates are not comparable: CoWSwap is a batch auction venue, where the user signs an order and a solver settles it in a batch, so orders that cannot be filled never become transactions at all; KyberSwap is a router venue, where the user signs and submits the swap transaction, so a failed swap fails on-chain and is counted. CoWSwap's on-chain revert rate is therefore structurally near zero regardless of how reliably it fills, and putting that number next to a router's would overstate its reliability rather than measure it. ClearTrace ranks revert rates only within an execution model. For a like-for-like reliability read, compare CoWSwap and KyberSwap each against venues that settle the way they do; the live aggregator leaderboard tags every venue with its execution model.
On this data, CoWSwap holds the stronger slippage score on Ethereum, but the gap reflects routing and slippage differences rather than one venue being universally better. That edge is a statement about Ethereum. Results shift with trade size, token pair, and market conditions, and MEV exposure and revert rates are separate considerations. Scores update on each data refresh; see our methodology for the full approach.
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, CoWSwap or KyberSwap?
Based on ClearTrace's slippage score (median slippage vs a VWAP baseline) on Ethereum, ClearTrace's publication chain, CoWSwap edges out KyberSwap, 89.7/100 versus 87.2/100 (a 2.5-point gap). ClearTrace compares the two on one shared chain rather than setting one venue's all-chain rollup against another's. The ordering is not the same on every chain these two share: Arbitrum (KyberSwap ahead by 4.7); Base (KyberSwap ahead by 5.5). ClearTrace publishes one chain rather than a blend, so read this as a finding about Ethereum.
Does CoWSwap or KyberSwap offer better MEV protection?
ClearTrace publishes a slippage-based score and per-aggregator revert rates, not a per-aggregator MEV-protection score. On slippage, CoWSwap was tighter on Ethereum (~10.3 bps vs ~12.8 bps). For MEV specifically, the dashboard surfaces detected sandwich activity as a separate metric.
Is CoWSwap or KyberSwap better for large trades?
For large orders, aggregators such as CoWSwap 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.
What is the revert rate of CoWSwap vs KyberSwap?
A revert is a swap transaction that fails on-chain: the trader pays gas but gets no fill. ClearTrace does not publish a revert-rate comparison for CoWSwap vs KyberSwap. CoWSwap and KyberSwap settle differently, so their on-chain revert rates are not comparable: CoWSwap is a batch auction venue, where the user signs an order and a solver settles it in a batch, so orders that cannot be filled never become transactions at all; KyberSwap is a router venue, where the user signs and submits the swap transaction, so a failed swap fails on-chain and is counted. CoWSwap's on-chain revert rate is therefore structurally near zero regardless of how reliably it fills, and putting that number next to a router's would overstate its reliability rather than measure it. ClearTrace ranks revert rates only within an execution model. Each venue's revert rate is published on the ClearTrace aggregator leaderboard alongside its execution model, and ranked only against venues that settle the way it does.