KyberSwap vs ParaSwap
Neutral on-chain benchmarking of slippage, revert rates, and overall execution quality.
Protocol Scorecard
KyberSwap and ParaSwap 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, KyberSwap posted a slippage score of 88.7/100 versus 86.4/100 for ParaSwap — a meaningful but not decisive edge of 2.3 points. 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. KyberSwap was measured over 43,469 trades and ParaSwap over 10,791.
The sample sizes differ substantially (KyberSwap: 43,469 trades; ParaSwap: 10,791), so ParaSwap's score reflects a narrower slice of activity and may move as more volume is observed.
The other axis is reliability: a swap that reverts on-chain still costs gas and a missed price. After a sender-level filter that excludes solver and MEV-bot spam (methodology v5), KyberSwap's revert rate is 2.11% of 998,743 routing transactions versus 3.01% of 84,598 for ParaSwap, tx-weighted across chains. Rates are recalculated on every data refresh; the live aggregator leaderboard carries the current per-chain numbers.
On this data, KyberSwap holds the stronger slippage score, but the gap reflects routing and slippage differences rather than one venue being universally better — 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.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which has better execution quality, KyberSwap or ParaSwap?
Based on ClearTrace's slippage score (median slippage vs a VWAP baseline), KyberSwap edges out ParaSwap, 88.7/100 versus 86.4/100 (a 2.3-point gap).
Does KyberSwap or ParaSwap offer better MEV protection?
ClearTrace publishes a slippage-based score and per-aggregator revert rates — not a per-aggregator MEV-protection score. On slippage, KyberSwap was tighter (~11.3 bps vs ~13.6 bps). For MEV specifically, the dashboard surfaces detected sandwich activity as a separate metric.
Is KyberSwap or ParaSwap better for large trades?
For large orders, aggregators such as KyberSwap 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 KyberSwap vs ParaSwap?
A revert is a swap transaction that fails on-chain — the trader pays gas but gets no fill. After ClearTrace's sender-level filter that excludes solver and MEV-bot spam, KyberSwap's revert rate is 2.11% and ParaSwap's is 3.01% of tracked routing transactions, tx-weighted across chains. Rates are recalculated on every data refresh; per-chain numbers are on the ClearTrace aggregator leaderboard.