Volume & Liquidity

On raw activity, Near Intents leads meaningfully: $39.0M 24h volume vs $10.3M for Ekubo. Higher volume typically translates into better execution for market orders and large notional trades, especially when routes can be sourced across many venues/solvers rather than a single chain’s pool set.

On depth, Near Intents also posts higher TVL at $54.9M versus Ekubo’s $41.2M. While TVL is not a perfect proxy for swap depth (and can be fragmented by asset choice/venue design), the headline number suggests more capital available to support routing and fulfillment.

That said, Ekubo’s concentrated liquidity design can deliver strong in-range depth on its core pairs even with lower aggregate TVL, which may benefit active Starknet markets. But strictly by the provided metrics—both volume and TVL—Near Intents has the clearer advantage today.

Fee Structure & Costs

The reported 24h fees show a stark difference: Near Intents: $129K vs Ekubo: $8K. In practice, Near Intents’ intent-based, cross-chain execution can embed multiple cost layers (solver spreads, bridge/settlement costs, and gas across heterogeneous chains), which often makes the all-in cost less predictable than a single-chain AMM-style swap.

Ekubo, as a Starknet-native DEX with concentrated liquidity and modern AMM architecture (singleton pattern), is positioned to offer comparatively transparent swap fees and typically benefits from Starknet’s lower execution costs relative to L1. Even if headline “fees collected” are lower (which can also just reflect lower volume), the user-per-trade cost experience on a single L2 is often simpler and cheaper than cross-chain fulfillment.

Near Intents can still be cost-efficient in scenarios where it avoids manual bridging and reduces user error/extra hops, but based on the provided fee figures and typical cross-chain overhead, Ekubo offers the better fee value proposition for straightforward swaps.

Multi-chain & Ecosystem

Near Intents is built for broad chain reach, spanning major ecosystems (Ethereum, Bitcoin, Solana, Tron, Arbitrum, Polygon, Base, Optimism, Avalanche, etc.) plus long-tail networks. This breadth expands addressable liquidity, asset availability, and use cases like cross-chain swaps, payments, and portfolio rebalancing without users manually moving funds.

Ekubo is focused: Starknet + Ethereum. That narrower footprint can be a strength for tight integration and deep Starknet-native liquidity innovation, but it limits the immediate universe of assets and counterparties compared with an intent layer that can source across dozens of networks.

On ecosystem optionality—integrations, routing opportunities, and where users can come from—Near Intents clearly wins given its multi-chain coverage.

User Recommendations

Choose Ekubo (Starknet) if you are primarily a Starknet user who wants a familiar DEX experience with concentrated liquidity, predictable on-chain execution, and tight integration with Starknet wallets and DeFi flows. It’s also a good fit for active LPs and traders who prefer AMM transparency (pool states, ranges, and on-chain mechanics) over solver-based execution.

Choose Near Intents if your main pain point is cross-chain complexity—bridging, switching networks, and fragmented liquidity. Intent-based UX can feel closer to “state your outcome, get it filled,” which is particularly attractive for multi-chain users, market participants moving between ecosystems, and applications/agents that want programmatic execution.

Overall, for the average user who holds assets on multiple chains and values convenience over AMM mechanics, Near Intents is likely the easier on-ramp—provided they are comfortable with solver/route abstraction and variable execution paths.

Trends & Innovation

Momentum favors Near Intents in the provided trends: TVL is slightly up (+3.7% vs Ekubo’s -6.7%), and volume is also up (+2.8%) while Ekubo’s volume trend is down (-24.8%). While short windows can be noisy, the directionality suggests Near Intents is currently capturing incremental usage.

On innovation, Near Intents’ model—intent-based transactions enabling exchange of assets/actions across chains and even between agents/services—represents a structural shift in how users may interact with DeFi (more orchestration, less manual transaction choreography). That can unlock new distribution (integrations, wallets, AI/agent workflows) beyond traditional DEX front-ends.

Ekubo is still meaningfully innovative (concentrated liquidity on Starknet, singleton architecture, extensibility), but its near-term trajectory in the data looks more cyclical/pressure-driven. Combining trend + product direction, Near Intents has the stronger innovative trajectory right now.