# Extended vs Aster in 2026 Cross-Asset Desk Research; Updated 24 September 2026; Terms read 18 September 2026 Weights: What one account reaches 32 · Cost of getting in and out 28 · Custody of the margin 18 · How the venue has held up 12 · The book behind the quote 10, on a scale of 100. Version 1.1, fixed 23 September 2026. Method: https://gerhardandlinger.net/method ## The short answer Extended vs Aster is breadth against cost. Aster lists 578 perpetual markets to Extended's 325, yet Extended scores 85 of 100 against 82 here, on the cheaper taker rate alone — the two are level on custody and on standing. Neither of them states hours for its whole list. ## Extended vs Aster side by side | What differs | Extended | Aster | |---|---|---| | Score of 100 | 85 | 82 | | Model | Hybrid — off-chain matching, settlement on Starknet | Own layer 1, matching and settlement on Aster Chain | | Perp markets | 325 | 578 | | Asset classes | crypto, stocks, FX, commodities, indices, pre-IPO | crypto, stocks, FX, commodities, indices, pre-IPO | | Maker / taker, entry tier | 0% maker / 0.025% taker | 0% maker / 0.040% taker | | $10,000 taker round trip | $5.00 | $8.00 | | BTC leverage | 50x up to $4 million of position value, then 25x | 200x up to 400 USDT of notional, then 150x and 100x | | Median BTC depth within 10 bps | $7.4 million | $13.8 million | | Median impact of a $100,000 order | 0.06 bps | 0.39 bps | | Bug bounty | Up to $500,000, self-run | Up to $200,000, on Immunefi since 16 April 2025 | | Sign-in | Wallet signature, EVM or Starknet | Wallet signature or email | Read from each venue's own documentation and trading terms on 18 September 2026. ## What separates them 1. Breadth: 578 markets on Aster against 325 on Extended, across the same six asset classes. 2. Cost: 0% maker / 0.040% taker on Aster, 0% maker / 0.025% taker on Extended, both without volume tiers at the entry level. 3. Chain: Aster matches on its own layer 1 with closed validation; Extended settles on Starknet. 4. Security inputs: both run a public bug bounty — Extended's up to $500,000, Aster's on Immunefi up to $200,000 — and Aster's published audits cover vault, earn and stablecoin contracts rather than the chain that matches trades. ## [Extended](https://docs.extended.exchange/) — for audited settlement and a flat rate Score 85 of 100. Extended registers an account with two wallet signatures and lists 325 markets across five asset classes ([Extended docs](https://docs.extended.exchange/extended-resources/account-operations/account-creation), checked 18 September 2026) at 0% maker / 0.025% taker for every account. Settlement runs on Starknet, with a self-run bug bounty of up to $500,000 behind the contracts. - In favour: 325 markets, pre-IPO included; Public bug bounty of up to $500,000. - Against it: BTC capped at 50x; No documented forced withdrawal. - Wrong fit for: traders who want triple-digit leverage. ## [Aster](https://docs.asterdex.com) — for the longest listing on its own chain Score 82 of 100. One wallet signature opens the door to 578 perpetual markets in six asset classes ([Aster docs](https://docs.asterdex.com/getting-started/login-via-web3-wallet.md), checked 18 September 2026), priced at 0% maker / 0.040% taker. Aster Chain handles the matching; nobody outside has read its core contracts, and phase one admits no outside validators. - In favour: 578 perpetual markets; 0% maker fee. - Against it: Chain contracts are not open-sourced; No audit published for the chain that matches trades. - Wrong fit for: traders who want audited settlement they can verify. ## Breadth on one side, verifiability on the other Aster lists 578 perpetual markets across six asset classes, the longest listing of any venue this desk reads ([Aster docs](https://docs.asterdex.com/overview/what-is-aster.md), checked 18 September 2026). Extended lists 325 across five, including pre-IPO contracts ([Extended docs](https://docs.extended.exchange/extended-resources/trading/rwa-markets), checked 18 September 2026). On raw coverage the gap is real and it favours Aster. The gap reverses on what can be checked. Extended settles on Starknet, where every transaction is validated, and runs a public bug bounty of up to $500,000. Aster's own documentation states that core chain contracts and RPC infrastructure will not be open-sourced at the moment, and that external validator participation is not supported during phase one ([Aster Chain overview](https://docs.asterdex.com/overview/what-is-aster.md), checked 18 September 2026). Its published audits cover vault, earn and stablecoin contracts rather than the chain that now matches trades. ## Fees, leverage and the shape of a position Aster charges 0% maker / 0.040% taker on its order book, so passive orders are free and a $10,000 taker round trip costs $8.00. Extended charges 0% maker / 0.025% taker for every account with no tiers, or $5.00 for the same round trip. For a maker-heavy strategy Aster is cheaper; for a taker-heavy one Extended is. Leverage differs more than the fee. Aster's book reaches 200x on BTC but only up to 400 USDT of notional, stepping to 150x and then 100x as size grows; Extended holds 50x to $4 million of position value before stepping down. One is built for small aggressive positions, the other for size. At either end of that range the arithmetic underneath is the same. The margin behind a leveraged position is all it has, and a market that gaps can take the lot. ## Where neither of them commits Trading hours. Both list equities, commodities and currencies, and neither states one policy covering the lot. Extended comes closer: its real-world-asset pages put the order-book markets at 24/7 and warn that the Prime markets behind a quote request run 24/5 or only in the underlying session, halting while positions and margin requirements stay live. Aster says nothing about hours in the documentation we read on 18 September 2026. That leaves at least one side of this page guessing about the thing that decides whether a non-crypto position can be closed on a Sunday — the question EVEDEX answers by stating that all of its markets trade around the clock (18 September 2026, EVEDEX documentation), and Ostium answers by publishing each session in full. ## Which one fits which trader Aster suits a trader who wants the longest market list and trades mostly as a maker, and who accepts a chain whose contracts are closed and whose validation is not yet external. Extended suits one who wants audited settlement, a bug bounty and a flat taker rate, and can live with a shorter listing and a 50x ceiling on BTC. ## The order-book readings BTC order books read on a timer, ten minutes apart, closing 17:58 UTC on 20 September 2026; medians of the snapshots behind each row. | Venue | Median spread | Median depth within 10 bps | Median impact, $100,000 order | $10,000 round trip, taker fees | Snapshots | |---|---|---|---|---|---| | Extended | 0.12 bps | $7.4 million | 0.06 bps | $5.00 | 17 | | Aster | 0.01 bps | $13.8 million | 0.39 bps | $8.00 | 27 | ## How the comparison was made Every column here but one is read rather than measured. On 18 September 2026 the desk read each venue's terms and documentation for what it lists, when those markets are open, what it charges, who can move the collateral. Depth nobody publishes, so the desk took it: each BTC perpetual book read on a timer, ten minutes apart, closing 17:58 UTC on 20 September 2026. The desk keeps an account at none of them. The same five criteria, settled on 23 September 2026 and set out on the [method](/method) page, order the 2 venues scored here. The hours are the softest column here, and one page is ordered by them — a line in a venue's own document about when a market is open, not something anyone watched. Custody is read the same way. Depth is measured, but only on BTC, the one contract all of these venues run; thickness there says nothing about the XAUT book beside it. Fees are the day-one rate, nothing a trader earns back taken off. ## In their own words > "Core chain contracts and RPC infrastructure will not be open-sourced at the moment" — Aster documentation, Aster Chain overview, 18 September 2026. https://docs.asterdex.com/aster-chain/overview.md > "All transactions are validated and settled on Starknet, ensuring transparent and verifiable state transitions." — Extended documentation, Technical architecture, 18 September 2026. https://docs.extended.exchange/about-extended/technical-architecture > "During Phase 1, external validator participation is not supported." — Aster documentation, Aster Chain overview, 18 September 2026. https://docs.asterdex.com/aster-chain/overview.md ## FAQ ### Is Aster better than Extended? On market count, clearly: 578 markets against 325. On our five criteria Extended scores 85 of 100 to Aster's 82, and the whole gap is the taker rate: 8.5 of ten on cost against 7.0, which outweighs the marks Aster takes for a longer listing and a thicker book. Custody and standing are level. ### Which has lower fees? That turns on whether you post or take. Aster's maker side is free at 0% maker / 0.040% taker, and taking $10,000 out and back in costs $8.00. Extended runs 0% maker / 0.025% taker with no steps behind it, so the same round trip is $5.00 — the cheaper side of the two for anyone who takes. ### is aster dex open source No, and Aster says so. Its documentation states that core chain contracts and RPC infrastructure will not be open-sourced at the moment, and that external validator participation is not supported during phase one, so the layer 1 matching its trades is operator-run and unreadable from outside. ### Which lists more real-world assets? Both span equities, commodities, currencies and indices, and both add pre-IPO contracts alongside them. The practical difference is the depth of the listing inside each class rather than which classes exist: Aster carries 578 markets in total against 325 on Extended, so more names sit under every heading. ### does aster dex require kyc Neither does at the door — a wallet signature is enough on both. What each reserves in writing is different: Extended's terms let it refuse access after a risk assessment, while Aster's leave room for limited identity checks wherever a regulator demands them. The option stays on the page either way. ### is aster dex safe Level on our inputs: outside audits on both, a public bug bounty on both — Extended's up to $500,000, Aster's on Immunefi up to $200,000 — and no customer money lost by either in 24 months. Scope differs: Aster's audits cover vault and earn contracts, not the chain that matches trades. Neither documents a forced withdrawal. ### What leverage do they offer on BTC? Aster's book reaches 200x, but only on notional up to 400 USDT, stepping down to 150x and 100x as the position grows. Extended holds 50x up to $4 million of position value, then 25x, which is a lower ceiling that survives real size. ### Can I trade gold on both? Both list commodities among their asset classes, gold included. Extended puts its order-book real-world assets at 24/7 and its Prime markets on the underlying session; Aster says nothing about hours in the documentation we read, so check the venue itself before holding metal through a weekend. ### Which has deeper liquidity? Aster, in the readings: a median $13.8 million of BTC within 10 basis points against $7.4 million on Extended, with a $100,000 market order moving the price 0.39 bps and 0.06 bps respectively. Both figures are medians of ten-minute snapshots, so no single quiet hour decides them. ### Do they support pre-IPO markets? Both do. Pre-IPO contracts track a private company's secondary-market price, so there is no exchange behind the quote and no listing event to settle against. That makes them the thinnest and most venue-dependent markets either one lists. Treat the quote as an opinion about a price rather than a price, and size the position accordingly. ## About this comparison This desk is paid to publish, and a venue in this comparison may be the party that commissioned the note. Both sides are read out of their own documents. Corrections: desk@gerhardandlinger.net. — Cross-Asset Desk Research. Edition of 24 September 2026. This desk is paid to publish, and a venue covered here may be the party that paid.