⚠︎ Risk warning: leveraged derivatives on unregulated platforms — you can lose everything you deposit. Not investment advice.
Aster vs GMX (2026): Order Book vs Pool Model
This is a comparison of two trading models more than two fee schedules. Aster is an order book: makers post, takers cross, and the cost is a maker or taker rate on each fill. GMX has no order book; GM pools are the counterparty, and the cost is a position fee on open and close that depends on pool imbalance, plus borrowing while the position is open and a capped price impact. Putting GMX's numbers in a maker/taker column would produce a false comparison, so this page does not.
Verdict
Different axes, so no fee winner is declared. Aster's 0% maker is a real advantage for quoting strategies that GMX's model cannot offer at all. GMX's cost is a function of holding time and pool state, which can be cheaper or dearer than Aster's taker rate depending on the trade; the GMX fees page lays out the components. On tokens, both are live; on points, Aster runs Stage 6 and GMX documents no programme, with its staking distribution suspended.
At a glance
| Aster | GMX | |
|---|---|---|
| Architecture | BNB Chain · order book | Pool model · GM pools |
| Custody | Self-custody | Self-custody |
| KYC | None | None |
| Base perp fees | 0.04% (USDT-margined) / 0.005% (USD1-margined) / 0% t/m | 0.04%–0.06% position fee, by pool imbalance / n/a (no maker/taker split) t/m |
| Funding | 8h default; per-symbol 1h/4h/8h via the API | Per-second; cost or credit |
| Token | $ASTER · live (TGE claim window 17 Sep – 17 Oct 2025) | GMX · live (staking distribution suspended) |
| Points programme | Active · Aster Convergence: Stage 6 | None documented |
facts verified · each venue's official docs Every cell restates a claim on one of this site's pages: /compare/hyperliquid-vs-aster/ , /aster/fees/ , /compare/hyperliquid-vs-gmx/ , /gmx/fees/ , /airdrops/ .
Fees
Aster — Order-book maker/taker; two perp contract families with different taker rates. Base tier: 0.04% (USDT-margined) / 0.005% (USD1-margined) taker, 0% maker. Taker numeric uses the USDT-margined family; USD1-margined trades at 0.005% — pick per family when calculating. Discounts: Referral rebate up to 10% (referrer-configured split, not guaranteed); ASTER-token fee payment discount exists as a separate lever. 0% maker means maker-heavy flow pays nothing — and generates no referral commission. Schedule verified 2026-07-31 on /aster/fees/.
GMX — Pool-based: position fee on open/close (imbalance-dependent) + borrowing fee while open + capped price impact. Base tier: 0.04%–0.06% position fee, by pool imbalance taker, n/a (no maker/taker split) maker. Not maker/taker-comparable: total cost depends on pool imbalance, holding time (borrowing), and trade size (price impact) — see the fees page for the verified components. Discounts: Referral code gives a 5% discount on open/close position fees at tier 1. Borrowing accrues while the position is open — a holding cost the flat rates above don’t capture. Schedule verified 2026-07-16 on /gmx/fees/.
Base-tier rates answer one narrow question — what a small taker order costs on day one. Your maker/taker mix, volume tier and holding period decide the real number; the fee comparison lays all twelve venues side by side and the execution-cost tool adds live slippage on top.
Markets they share
GMX is not in this site's market join — it has no public market list the join normalises — so no shared-listing count is published here rather than an estimate. Aster lists 538 perp markets in the 2026-09-02 snapshot; see the market index.
Token and points
- Aster: $ASTER · live (TGE claim window 17 Sep – 17 Oct 2025). Points: Active — Aster Convergence: Stage 6; Calculated weekly; five point categories × team boost, plus two-level referral points; weightings undisclosed. Docs: points "accumulate toward your $ASTER airdrop share at the conclusion of Stage 6". Conversion ratio, Stage 6’s share and the end date are not published.
- GMX: GMX · live (staking distribution suspended). Points: None documented . Docs: "GMX staking rewards are suspended. Bought-back GMX accumulates in the Treasury and will be distributed to stakers when GMX reaches $90." No points or airdrop programme is documented.
Both rows are restated from the points & airdrop tracker, which is re-read against each venue's docs on a 45-day cadence and never prices a point.
Where Aster wins
Everything an order book gives a maker: 0% maker on both perp families and the ability to rest orders at all, which a pool model does not have. A live $ASTER token with a published 53.5% Airdrop category and an active Stage 6 points programme that its docs tie to an airdrop share. The largest perp market list in this site's join; GMX is not in the join because it has no public market list the join normalises.
Where GMX wins
A longer operating record across two chains, Arbitrum and Avalanche, with a self-custody pool model that some traders prefer for its lack of an order book to be front-run in. Funding settles per second as a cost or a credit rather than at an interval. A referral code gives a published discount on position fees. Its earning routes are LP pools and referrals; GMX staking exists but its distribution is suspended per the docs.
What this site could not verify
- Aster: US access rules — not verified either way.
- Aster: Liquidity depth — not benchmarked by this site.
- Aster: The points-to-token ratio, Stage 6’s share of the airdrop allocation, and the stage’s end date — unpublished.
- GMX: GMX staking distribution is suspended per its docs; the resumption condition is a token-price threshold this site does not forecast.
Which to pick
If you make liquidity, or want a points programme with a documented airdrop link, Aster. If you prefer a pool counterparty, want Arbitrum or Avalanche settlement, or hold positions where GMX's per-second funding and borrowing work out cheaper than a taker rate, GMX, priced on its own components rather than a headline rate. The Aster review and GMX review carry the verified detail.
Related comparisons
- Aster vs dYdX
- Aster vs edgeX
- Aster vs Paradex
- Aster vs Extended
- Aster vs Pacifica
- Hyperliquid vs Aster
- Hyperliquid vs GMX
FAQ
Why is there no fee winner?
Because GMX has no maker/taker rate to compare. Its cost is a position fee that varies with pool imbalance, plus borrowing over time and price impact; Aster's is a per-fill rate. The table shows both as published without ranking them.
Does GMX have a points programme?
No. Its docs describe LP pools, referrals and GMX staking, and state that staking rewards are suspended with bought-back GMX accumulating in the treasury. Aster's Stage 6 is the only points programme on this page.
Why is GMX missing from the shared-markets count?
GMX is not in this site's market join, which only covers venues with a public market list the join can normalise. The page says so rather than printing a zero.
affiliate link — we may earn a commission at no extra cost to you · methodology