Over the past few days, I’ve been experimenting with a DEX on the TON network that uses an interesting approach to liquidity management.
Instead of routing trades through a single pool, it aggregates liquidity from multiple paths before executing the swap. That might sound like a small detail, but the impact is noticeable in practice:
Reduced price impact on mid-sized trades
More consistent execution during volatile moments
Fully traceable routing logic thanks to on-chain transparency
I’m not naming the protocol here to keep this purely analytical rather than promotional — but I’m curious about other traders’ priorities.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
Over the past few days, I’ve been experimenting with a DEX on the TON network that uses an interesting approach to liquidity management.
Instead of routing trades through a single pool, it aggregates liquidity from multiple paths before executing the swap. That might sound like a small detail, but the impact is noticeable in practice:
Reduced price impact on mid-sized trades
More consistent execution during volatile moments
Fully traceable routing logic thanks to on-chain transparency
I’m not naming the protocol here to keep this purely analytical rather than promotional — but I’m curious about other traders’ priorities.
When choosing a DEX, what matters more to you?
1. Lowest possible fees
2. More reliable routing and price stability
Would love to hear different perspectives.