How We Compare to the Leading Venues
The comparison below is based on each venue's public documentation and deployed contract behavior. We describe only mechanical differences; we do not disclose our own parameters.
vs Centralized Exchanges (Binance/OKX class)
| Dimension | CEX | Catswap |
|---|---|---|
| Custody | Platform custody; withdrawals subject to approval | Self-custody; on-chain settlement |
| Price source | External index + synthesized mark price | Derived directly from in-pool trades |
| Verifiability | Post-hoc audits depend on platform disclosure | Every settlement verifiable on-chain |
| Product relationship | Spot and contracts are isolated markets and margins | Same pool, same margin |
The CEX mark-price system (multi-exchange index synthesis, price-dislocation guards, maintenance-margin ladders) is mature risk engineering — but its trust premise is "the platform is honest." We build the same risk-control goals (smoothed accounting price, graduated margin) into an on-chain protocol, replacing trust with verifiability.
vs Spot AMMs (Uniswap v3/v4, Raydium, Meteora class)
| Dimension | Leading AMMs | Catswap |
|---|---|---|
| Product surface | Spot (derivatives require a separate protocol) | Spot + leverage + derivatives in one pool |
| Liquidity form | LP-chosen ranges/price bins | One pool-level form with analytically tractable exit costs |
| Dynamic fees | Yes (volatility-linked fees) | Yes (deviation-linked; revenue goes to the pool) |
| Extension mechanism | v4 hook add-ons | Built into the protocol itself, upgraded as needed |
Concentrated liquidity gives leading-AMM LPs expressive freedom, at the cost of fragmented liquidity forms and protocol-level risk control that resists quantification. We choose one pool-level form: expressiveness yields to exactly computable safety — because leverage and derivatives sit on top, every segment of exit cost must be an analytically tractable function.
vs Derivatives DEXs (dYdX/Hyperliquid/Aster class)
| Dimension | Leading derivatives DEXs | Catswap |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing | External oracle feeds | Direct pricing from in-pool trades |
| Liquidity | Independent market-maker system | Shared with spot in the same pool |
| Manipulation surface | Oracle/mark-price externalization | Closed loop: manipulators pay the pool |
| Margin | Isolated/cross, product-separated | Unified margin; spot itself is margin |
The core dependency of derivatives DEXs is "a trustworthy price input." We take the opposite side: trust no external input, and make the cost of manipulation close inside the pool. This matters most in thin liquidity and newly issued assets — precisely where oracle attacks concentrate, and the territory we cover that most derivatives DEXs avoid.
In One Sentence
- vs CEXs: the same grade of mechanism engineering, but verifiable.
- vs spot AMMs: we give LPs less shape freedom in exchange for depth shared across every scenario.
- vs derivatives DEXs: we delete the oracle single point and build defense into every layer of the pool.