Journalism for the digital-asset economy
Best Decentralised Exchanges · Rank 02 of 8
Large stablecoin and pegged-asset swaps
Last verified August 17, 20264 scored axes
Documented, with gaps
Curve scores 8.9 out of 10 and ranks #2 of 8 in the best decentralised exchanges table, strongest on liquidity quality (9.2) and weakest on decentralisation (8.4).
For swapping one dollar for another dollar at size, nothing has matched Curve's pricing in six years. The governance system around veCRV is the most complex in DeFi, and a 2023 compiler-level exploit is a reminder that maturity is not immunity.
4 axes, weighted as published in the table’s methodology. Each score below is read from the fact printed under it.
8.8/ 35% of the score
Pool contracts in production since 2020; multiple published audits; a July 2023 exploit caused by a reentrancy bug in the Vyper compiler drained several pools of roughly $70m, of which about three-quarters was returned by white hats and by the attackers themselves.
9.2/ 25% of the score
Deepest stable-to-stable reserves on-chain; a significant share of pool liquidity is directed by CRV emissions through the gauge system, with the schedule published.
9.2/ 20% of the score
StableSwap pools quote very low price impact for pegged assets; fee tiers published per pool.
8.4/ 20% of the score
Pools are immutable; emissions and parameters are set by veCRV votes executed on-chain with a timelock; an emergency DAO can kill gauges.
For swapping one dollar-pegged asset for another at size, nothing has matched Curve's pricing in six years. The StableSwap invariant is built for assets that should trade near parity, and the resulting price impact on large stable-to-stable orders is the reason protocols route through it rather than around it.
Several pools were drained of roughly $70m through a reentrancy bug that lived in specific versions of the Vyper compiler rather than in Curve's own logic. About three-quarters of the funds came back, returned by white hats and by the attackers themselves. The episode is worth carrying because it broke a common assumption: audited contract code can be correct and still compile into something exploitable.
Pools are immutable, but emissions and gauge weights are directed by veCRV votes, and an entire economy of vote markets has grown around who gets paid to provide liquidity where. A significant share of Curve's depth follows those emissions. That is not hidden — the schedule is published on-chain — but it does mean some of the liquidity you are trading against is rented rather than resident.
Anyone moving size between dollar-pegged assets, and any protocol that needs a reliable venue for pegged swaps. For casual swapping of volatile pairs it is the wrong tool — the invariant that makes it excellent for assets near parity works against you when they are not.
The pools themselves are immutable and the vulnerability was in the Vyper compiler rather than in Curve's contract logic; affected versions were patched and most of the funds were returned. It remains the deepest venue for pegged assets, and the incident is on its record.
Its StableSwap formula assumes the two assets should trade near parity, which concentrates liquidity around that point and produces far lower price impact than a constant-product pool for the same size.
CRV locked for a period in exchange for voting power over which pools receive token emissions. It is how Curve directs liquidity, and it is why a market exists in buying those votes.
8 services in best decentralised exchanges