Gains Network vs Hyperliquid
Short answer: On data collected October 19, 2026, Hyperliquid scores 6.6/10 (#3 of 14 perpetual DEXs) and Gains Network 6.24/10 (#4), both with 100% of the score measured. Hyperliquid holds roughly 780 times more value ($6.78B against $8.7M), but DefiLlama lists no published audit for it, while Gains Network has one published audit link. On this method the value-locked lead is worth more than the audit gap, and Hyperliquid ends 0.36 points ahead.
Data collected October 19, 2026 · Full perp DEX ranking · No affiliate links
Hyperliquid scores higher: 6.6/10 against 6.24/10. It leads on 1 of 6 criteria, Gains Network on 2.
Criterion by criterion
Same category, same weights, heaviest criterion first. Open a row for each side’s reasoning and evidence.
Scale of value trusted30% of the scoreHyperliquid leadsGains Network4Hyperliquid9Why these marks ↓Hide ↑
Security audits26% of the scoreGains Network leadsGains Network6Hyperliquid2Why these marks ↓Hide ↑
Track record18% of the scoreLevelGains Network9Hyperliquid9Why these marks ↓Hide ↑
Multi-chain reach10% of the scoreGains Network leadsGains Network9Hyperliquid8Why these marks ↓Hide ↑
Latency8% of the scoreLevelGains Network10Hyperliquid10Why these marks ↓Hide ↑
Status transparency8% of the scoreLevelGains Network2Hyperliquid2Why these marks ↓Hide ↑
Criterion by criterion
| Criterion (weight) | Gains Network | Hyperliquid | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Scale of value trusted (30%) | 4 — $8.7M | 9 — $6.78B | Hyperliquid |
| Security audits (26%) | 6 — 1 audit link | 2 — none listed | Gains Network |
| Track record (18%) | 9 — 4.9 yr since listing | 9 — 3.5 yr since listing | Level |
| Multi-chain reach (10%) | 9 — 5 chains | 8 — 2 chains | Gains Network |
| Latency (8%) | 10 — 78 ms | 10 — 56 ms | Level |
| Status transparency (8%) | 2 — none found | 2 — none found | Level |
| Score | 6.24 | 6.6 | |
| % measured | 100% | 100% |
Why the $6.78B venue finishes ahead
- Value locked: +1.50 for Hyperliquid. Its $6.78B is the largest in the category and scores 9. The scale is logarithmic by design, so the jump from millions to billions counts, but not 780-fold.
- Audits: +1.04 for Gains Network. DefiLlama lists one published audit link for Gains Network (scored 6; a link can lead to more than one report) and none for Hyperliquid. The method scores "no published audit" as 2, not as proof of insecurity, and states plainly that it counts audit links rather than grading the audits.
- Reach: +0.10 for Gains Network. Five chains against two, which narrows the gap to 0.36.
- Everything else is level, including no status page found for either.
Which number you should weight more depends on your concern. Value locked shows how much capital the market has entrusted to Hyperliquid. The audit count shows whether independent reviews are linked where anyone can read them. The score treats both as important; on this snapshot the 1.50 points from scale outweigh the 1.14 Gains Network gets back on audits and reach.
Incidents outside the score
Hack history carries 0% weight for perp DEXs. DefiLlama's hack database (checked October 23, 2026) lists one small Hyperliquid entry: a $37K risk-parameter abuse on June 15, 2023. Nothing is listed under Gains Network. Source: DefiLlama hacks.
What this comparison does not measure
Trading fees (including Hyperliquid's maker/taker schedule and deposit or withdrawal costs), funding rates, order-book depth, open interest, listed markets and leverage, KYC or jurisdiction limits, UX and support. The two are also built differently: Hyperliquid runs its own chain, while Gains Network is deployed across five chains; the score does not assess architecture. Check each venue's documentation.
Which fits which reader
- You want the deepest pool of capital behind a venue: Hyperliquid, by far.
- You want independent audit reports you can read: Gains Network, which has a published audit link on DefiLlama.
- You want chain choice: Gains Network (five chains).
- You want both large value locked and audits: on this ranking that combination is GMX; see GMX vs Gains Network.
Full evidence: Gains Network rating · Hyperliquid rating · Hyperliquid company profile · How scores are built
The numbers side by side
| Measured | Gains Network | Hyperliquid |
|---|---|---|
| Value locked | $8.7M | $6.78B |
| Published audits | 1 | 0 |
| Track record | 4.9 yr | 3.5 yr |
| Chains | 5 | 2 |
| Latency (our probe) | 78 ms | 56 ms |
| Status feed | none | none |
Where each one falls short
Gains Network
Status transparency: No public status page found. Nothing about its reliability can be verified from outside — including by us.
Not for: Anyone who needs to know when it breaks: no status feed, so you find out it is down by discovering it yourself.
Hyperliquid
Security audits: No published audits on DefiLlama. Not proof of insecurity, but an unaudited contract holding funds is a red flag.
Not for: Anyone putting size into it: it holds funds in smart contracts with no published audit. Fine to experiment with, not to trust with a position you cannot afford to lose.
Which to choose
Which scores higher, Gains Network or Hyperliquid?+
Hyperliquid, 6.6 against 6.24 on October 19, 2026 data. Its much larger value locked outweighs Gains Network's listed audit link.
Does "no published audit" mean Hyperliquid is unsafe?+
No. It means DefiLlama links no audit for it, so the review cannot be checked from that source. The score marks the missing evidence, not a known flaw.
Where do I find Hyperliquid's fees?+
Fees are not scored on CoinPulse. Check Hyperliquid's own fee documentation; background is in the Hyperliquid company profile.