Why CoinPulse rated SushiSwap 7.37 in decentralized exchanges
The decentralized exchanges ranking weights five criteria: Scale of value trusted (32%), Security audits (27%), Track record (19%), Multi-chain reach (13%) and Latency (9%). Value locked and audits lead because an on-chain venue depends on liquidity and code safety. Status transparency and Security record are not scored in this category, so neither counts for or against SushiSwap.
All five criteria were measured, so coverage is 100% and no weight was redistributed. The contributions: Scale of value trusted 6 × 32% = 1.92, Track record 10 × 19% = 1.90, Security audits 6 × 27% = 1.62, Multi-chain reach 10 × 13% = 1.30, Latency 7 × 9% = 0.63. Total: 7.37. Of the 2.63 points not earned, 1.28 come from scale, 1.08 from audits and 0.27 from latency. The methodology page sets out the bands behind each score.
The rating covers SushiSwap as one protocol: value locked and chains are counted across all of its DefiLlama listings of the same kind rather than from a single version, with the SushiSwap V3 page as the linked evidence. Company background, products and fees are on the separate SushiSwap company profile and play no part in the score.
Where SushiSwap scored well
Multi-chain reach: 44 chains (10/10)
DefiLlama lists SushiSwap on 44 chains across its listings. The median DEX in this ranking is on two, and only Uniswap V3, also on 44, matches that breadth. Reach carries 13% of the weight and is meant as a tie-breaker rather than a main event, so the full 1.30 points it earns here are a modest part of the total. It says nothing about how much liquidity sits on any one of those chains.
Track record: 6.3 years (10/10)
Track record is measured at 2,302 days, counted from the documented 2020 launch rather than a DefiLlama listing date. The record gives the year without a month, so the count starts on July 1, 2020. That is about 1.8 times the category median of 1,295 days and earns the top band. The methodology treats survival as signal because most failures happen young. It is a statement that the service kept operating, not about what happened along the way; the three incidents in DefiLlama's hack database, described below, all fall inside those years.
Where SushiSwap lost points
Scale of value trusted: $96.3M locked (6/10)
DefiLlama recorded $96,322,850 in total value locked for SushiSwap at collection, counted across its DEX listings, against a category median of $232.9M and a median scale score of 7. On the log scale, $96.3M scores 6, which at 32% weight is 1.92 points where a median DEX earns 2.24. The 1.28 points lost here are the largest cost in this rating, and the whole gap to PancakeSwap AMM in third place. Value locked is not insurance; more of it would not have protected anyone in the incidents below.
One published audit link (6/10)
DefiLlama carries one published audit link for SushiSwap, a PeckShield audit report. The criterion counts links on DefiLlama, not the audits behind them, so this is not a claim that SushiSwap has been audited only once. One link scores 6, where three would score 10; at 27% weight the shortfall is 1.08 points. The median DEX in this run has no audit link and scores 2, so SushiSwap is above most of the table here. The count says nothing about which contract versions or chain deployments the report covers, or what it found; reading it is the way to find out.
Latency: 423 ms (7/10)
Our probe timed the sushi.com interface at a median 423 ms to first byte, against a category median of 122 ms. That is one location, with the slowest of three samples discarded, and it measures the website rather than the contracts, which keep running whether or not a front end responds quickly. At 9% weight the 7 costs 0.27 points.
What the SushiSwap rating does not tell you
Trading fees, price impact, slippage, token listings, the governance token and the interface experience are not scored for any DEX on CoinPulse. Smart-contract risk is approximated only through audits and value locked. Risks specific to a trade, such as approving a malicious token or using a fake front end, are outside what any of these criteria can see.
Security record is not part of the DEX profile, so the following is context rather than score. DefiLlama's hack database matched three incidents to the name SushiSwap when checked on October 19, 2026. On April 10, 2023, DefiLlama records a $3,300,000 loss attributed to missing input validation, with $3,300,000 recorded as returned. On January 27, 2021, it records a $103,842 loss attributed to a swap logic flaw, with no returned amount recorded. On November 30, 2020, it records a $15,000 loss attributed to improper access control, also with no returned amount recorded. Had Security record been scored, the worst of the three would have set the score. The matches are by name rather than protocol id, so they may not map one-to-one onto any particular contract version. Incidents outside that database are not tracked.
No public status page was found for SushiSwap, and no incidents were logged in the 90-day collection window. Status transparency is not scored for DEXs, so the missing page costs nothing.
How SushiSwap compares in the decentralized exchanges ranking
SushiSwap and every peer named here have 100% coverage, so every gap comes straight from criterion scores. The leader, Uniswap V3 at 9.49, matches SushiSwap on reach (44 chains each, 10). The 2.12-point gap is audits (three links against one, 10 against 6, worth 1.08), scale ($1.56B against $96.3M, 9 against 6, worth 0.96) and latency (10 against 7, worth 0.27), less the 0.19 SushiSwap gains on track record.
PancakeSwap AMM, third at 8.33, has the same audit, track record, reach and latency scores; its $1.57B locked scores 9, and that 0.96 is the entire gap. Quickswap Dex, fourth at 7.38, is just 0.01 ahead: same scale, audit and track record scores, a 73 ms probe worth 0.27 more, and two chains worth 0.26 less.
Below SushiSwap, Raydium AMM, sixth at 7.00, holds far more ($1.18B, 9 on scale, worth 0.96) and has a faster probe (0.27), but has no audit link on DefiLlama (1.08 to SushiSwap) and one chain (0.52), finishing 0.37 behind. 1inch, seventh at 6.74, also has one audit link but only $3.2M locked, 0.63 behind.
What the 7.37 means in practice
On the open signals this method reads, SushiSwap is broad and old, with a published audit link, but its value locked is well under the category median, and value locked carries the most weight. That, more than any single measured failure, is why it sits fifth rather than higher. The three incidents in DefiLlama's database are not scored for DEXs and do not move the number. The rating does not tell you whether a given pool, chain or trade is safe. Reading the linked audit, checking which contracts it covers, and checking the contracts and front end you use remain the reader's job. No service can pay for its position here; see how this site is funded.
