Futures
Access hundreds of perpetual contracts
TradFi
Gold
One platform for global traditional assets
Options
Hot
Trade European-style vanilla options
Unified Account
Maximize your capital efficiency
Demo Trading
Introduction to Futures Trading
Learn the basics of futures trading
Futures Events
Join events to earn rewards
Demo Trading
Use virtual funds to practice risk-free trading
Launch
CandyDrop
Collect candies to earn airdrops
Launchpool
Quick staking, earn potential new tokens
HODLer Airdrop
Hold GT and get massive airdrops for free
Launchpad
Be early to the next big token project
Alpha Points
Trade on-chain assets and earn airdrops
Futures Points
Earn futures points and claim airdrop rewards
What are the differences between Ferra and other DEXs in the Sui ecosystem?
I've summarized the differences of Ferra; it is building the underlying liquidity layer for Sui!
It combines DLMM, CLMM, and DAMM into a multi-engine system, allowing LPs to deploy capital more concentrically within custom price ranges, while also adapting to different volatility and asset stages; in comparison, Cetus mainly uses CLMM, DeepBook employs a hybrid order book + AMM, Turbos and Magma are still closer to traditional constant product AMMs, which are inherently limited in dynamic ranges and programmable liquidity.
Regarding fee models, Ferra's design leans more towards protocol-level sustainability: the base fee rate and redistribution mechanisms are clearer and can be adjusted through governance; most other DEXs typically have fee rates around 0.2%–0.5%, mainly serving LP incentives, protocol fee reuse, and ecosystem recycling, which are relatively conservative.
In terms of tools and developer support, Ferra packages API/SDK, internal aggregation routing, and dynamic curve tools for issuance and liquidity management into a set of readily callable infrastructure, enabling projects to quickly deploy pools, routing, and issuance mechanisms; other DEXs often only provide trading frontends or limited SDKs, lacking unified aggregation and deeper customizable liquidity toolchains.
Therefore, its ecosystem positioning is more like a Liquidity Layer, providing a foundation for institutional trading, token issuance, liquidity mining, and other upper-layer applications; whereas Cetus, DeepBook, Turbos, and Magma mainly compete in trading experience, trading volume, or specific product forms, and do not define themselves as full-chain liquidity infrastructure.
In summary, Ferra's advantages lie in multi-engine + dynamic liquidity + programmable fees and toolchains, with leading strengths in capital efficiency, flexibility, and developer friendliness. Other DEXs may be stronger in trading volume and user scale but tend to be more conservative in liquidity customization and protocol-level fee redistribution!
#KaitoYap @KaitoAI #Yap @ferra_protocol