Raydium:
Solana's dominant liquidity hub, carrying two real, distinct security incidents on its record.
We tore apart Raydium, the largest DEX by TVL on Solana specifically, across the same seven-category scorecard we've used throughout this series. From a genuinely broad, unified Solana-native product suite (AMM swaps, CLMM pools, the LaunchLab token launchpad, farms, RAY staking, and a separate gasless Perps product), competitive fees helped along by Solana's own low network costs, and five named security audits backed by an active bug bounty, to two real, distinct security incidents worth treating honestly: a December 2022 private-key compromise that drained roughly $4.4 million (not a smart-contract bug), and a second, more recent incident on June 10, 2026 involving roughly $1.34 million in token-accounting losses, plus a specific, notable audit gap and a wildly divergent outlier score from one cited source that we're presenting transparently rather than quietly smoothing over; and landed on a score the marketing page won't show you.
Our take, up front: Raydium launched in 2021 and has grown into the largest DEX by total value locked on Solana specifically, combining swaps, concentrated liquidity (CLMM) pools, a token launchpad, farms, RAY staking, and a separate Perps product in one Solana-native interface. Real, genuinely dominant liquidity within its ecosystem: TVL figures ranging from roughly $1.5 to $3 billion depending on the source and date, with more than $51.9 billion processed in a single quarter (Q3 2025) per one detailed source. Real, genuinely non-custodial: the platform never has access to the private keys controlling user funds, with all trading conducted through self-custody Solana wallets. Real, genuinely extensive, well-documented audit history: five audits from named firms including Kudelski Security (the original 2021 order-book AMM audit), OtterSec, MadShield, Halborn, and Sec3, plus HashEx (August 2024, zero issues found), backed by an active bug bounty up to $505,000 via Immunefi. Real, genuinely competitive, precisely quantified fees: swaps starting at 0.01%, CLMM pools across up to eight fee tiers, and gasless perpetual futures at 0 bps maker with tiered 2-4.5 bps taker fees, aided by Solana's own famously low network costs. What we can't set aside: two real, distinct security incidents. In December 2022, a private key compromise via a trojan virus, not a smart-contract bug, allowed an attacker to drain roughly $4.4 million from liquidity pools; Raydium's response included contract upgrades removing admin control over the exploitable parameters, and affected liquidity providers were compensated. More recently, per independent on-chain data aggregation, a second, distinct incident on June 10, 2026 involved approximately $1.34 million, classified as a token and share accounting issue. Real, honest, specific gap flagged by at least one detailed source: no CertiK audit, notable for a DEX managing billions in TVL, though five other named audits exist. Real, honest, notable discrepancy worth flagging transparently rather than smoothing over: one cited review source rates Raydium a dramatically low 1.86 out of 10, attributed to interface complexity and general Solana ecosystem volatility rather than any specific hack, a score wildly out of step with the weight of our other research. We weighted all of it below.
Real, genuinely extensive, well-documented multi-year audit history: five audits from named firms including Kudelski Security (original 2021 order-book AMM audit), OtterSec, MadShield, Halborn, and Sec3, plus HashEx (August 2024, zero issues found), backed by an active bug bounty up to $505,000 via Immunefi. What we can't set aside: two real, distinct security incidents. December 2022: a private key compromise via a trojan virus, not a smart contract bug, allowed an attacker to drain roughly $4.4 million from liquidity pools; Raydium's response included contract upgrades that removed admin control over the exploitable parameters, and affected liquidity providers were compensated. More recently, per independent data aggregation, a second incident on June 10, 2026 involved approximately $1.34 million, classified as a token and share accounting issue. Real, honest, specific gap flagged by at least one detailed source: no CertiK audit, notable for a DEX managing billions in TVL, though five other named audits exist.
Pros
- Five named audits (Kudelski, OtterSec, MadShield, Halborn, Sec3) plus HashEx, zero issues found
- Concrete post-2022 remediation: admin control removed from exploitable parameters
- Active $505,000 max bug bounty via Immunefi
Cons
- December 2022 private-key compromise drained roughly $4.4M from liquidity pools
- Real, second incident on June 10, 2026 (~$1.34M, token/share accounting)
- No CertiK audit, a specific, notable gap for a DEX of this scale
Real, genuinely the largest DEX by TVL on Solana specifically, with figures ranging from roughly $1.5 to $3 billion depending on the source and date measured. Real, genuinely massive volume: more than $51.9 billion processed in a single quarter (Q3 2025) per one detailed source, and more than $21 billion in monthly swap volume per another.
Pros
- Largest DEX by TVL on Solana; genuinely dominant within its ecosystem
- $51.9B+ processed in a single quarter per detailed source data
Cons
- Real variance across sources on exact current TVL ($1.5B-$3B range)
Real, genuinely non-custodial; the platform never has access to the private keys controlling user funds, with all trading conducted through self-custody Solana wallets. Real, permissionless pool creation, similar in spirit to Uniswap's listing model. Real, RAY governance token, with a 12% trading-fee buyback mechanism creating ongoing demand. Real, honest, notable transparency gap: no exchange-wide Proof of Reserves report, liabilities tree, or recurring attestation, though this matters less for a genuinely non-custodial DEX than for a platform holding pooled user funds directly.
Pros
- Genuinely non-custodial; no admin access to user private keys
- Permissionless pool creation; RAY token buyback mechanism
Cons
- No exchange-wide Proof of Reserves report or recurring attestation
- Permissionless listing also enables scam and low-quality token pools
Real, genuinely broad token support: more than 3,300 coins, with substantial memecoin trading volume. Real, genuinely distinctive combined product suite: AMM swaps, CLMM pools across up to eight fee tiers, LaunchLab token launches, farms, RAY staking, and a separate Perps product with up to 50x leverage.
Pros
- 3,300+ supported tokens; broad memecoin and major-asset coverage
- Combined suite: swaps, CLMM, launchpad, farms, staking, and perps in one interface
Cons
- Solana-only; no multi-chain reach beyond the Solana ecosystem itself
Real, genuinely useful, distinctive workflow: move from a LaunchLab token migration to a swap, LP position, RAY stake, or perp trade without leaving the same interface. Real, honest, consistently-noted limitation: not the best first stop for beginners who want the simplest possible swap, requiring real comfort with wallet signing, token mints, and slippage. Real, weak fit for US users specifically, with fiat access routed through a third party (MoonPay) rather than native support.
Pros
- Unified workflow across swaps, LP, staking, and perps in one interface
Cons
- Not the best first stop for beginners; requires real wallet-signing comfort
- Weak fit for US users; fiat access routed through a third party
Real, genuinely competitive, precisely quantified fees: swaps starting at 0.01%, CLMM pools across up to eight fee tiers up to 2%, and perps at 0 bps maker with tiered 2-4.5 bps taker fees, with gasless perps execution. Real, Solana's own network costs are consistently among the lowest in the industry, roughly $0.01 per transaction.
Pros
- Competitive, transparent fee tiers across swaps, CLMM, and perps
- Solana's ~$0.01 network costs meaningfully undercut Ethereum-based DEXs
Cons
- At least one source notes Serum-integration slippage historically added unexpected costs
Real, genuinely distinctive LaunchLab token launchpad, filling the gap left after Pump.fun's departure. Real, gasless perpetual futures powered by Orderly Network with up to 50x leverage. Real, January 2026 Coinbase listing of the RAY token, a genuine mainstream-adoption signal.
Pros
- Distinctive LaunchLab token launchpad
- Gasless perps with up to 50x leverage via Orderly Network
- RAY listed on Coinbase (January 2026)
Cons
- None significant found in our research
Access only through Raydium's official app at raydium.io.
Given the real, documented private-key compromise in Raydium's own history, use a hardware wallet for any significant value and minimize standing token approvals rather than relying on the platform's audits alone as your only line of defense.
Solana's genuine liquidity leader, with a security record that's real but not clean.
Raydium earns real credit for what it's built: the deepest liquidity on Solana specifically, a genuinely unified product suite spanning swaps, launches, staking, and perps, and competitive fees helped along by Solana's own low costs. Five named audits and an active bug bounty are real, substantive investments. What keeps this the lowest score in our DEX series so far is that Raydium's security history isn't a single old incident like Uniswap's; it's two real, distinct events, one from 2022 and one as recent as June 2026, plus a specific, honestly-flagged gap in its audit roster. We also want to be transparent about something unusual: one cited review source rates Raydium dramatically lower than everything else we found, and we don't think that figure reflects the weight of the evidence, so we're showing it to you rather than hiding it, alongside our own reasoning for why we didn't weight it the same as our other sources.
The scorecard above is deliberately general. Whether Raydium is right for you depends heavily on which of these you already are.
The active Solana trader who wants the deepest liquidity and a unified swaps/launchpad/perps interface
Genuinely dominant Solana-specific liquidity and a broad, integrated product suite serve this profile directly.
The token creator or liquidity provider who understands LP risk and permissionless pool mechanics
LaunchLab and permissionless pool creation are genuinely useful tools for this specific audience.
The security-conscious trader willing to use a hardware wallet and minimize standing approvals
Given the real, documented 2022 key-compromise incident, this precaution is a genuinely reasonable response.
Complete beginners, US users, or anyone uncomfortable with a platform carrying two real security incidents
The interface complexity and incident history make this a better fit for experienced Solana-native users.
The scorecard covers the headline judgment calls. These four tables cover the specifics we didn't want to bury in prose; both security incidents timelined precisely, the Traders Union outlier score explained transparently, fees broken down across every product, and Raydium against the other two DEXs we've reviewed so far.
Two distinct security incidents, timelined
| December 2022 | June 2026 | |
|---|---|---|
| Root cause | Private key compromise via a trojan virus | Token and share accounting issue |
| Type | Credential theft, not a contract bug | Contract-level accounting error |
| Approximate loss | $4.4 million | $1.34 million |
| Response | Admin control removed from exploitable parameters; affected LPs compensated | Not fully detailed in our research |
These are two genuinely different kinds of failure, one about who held a key, one about how the contract tracked balances, and we're presenting them separately rather than folding them into one vague "past incidents" line.
The Traders Union score, explained transparently
| Source | Score | Stated reasoning |
|---|---|---|
| Traders Union | 1.86/10 ("high-risk") | Interface complexity and general Solana ecosystem volatility, not a specific hack |
| Our assessment of that score | Treated as an outlier | Dramatically inconsistent with five named audits, a genuine non-custodial architecture, and a multi-year operating history found across every other source we checked |
We're showing you this score rather than quietly omitting it because transparency matters more than a tidy narrative; we simply don't think it reflects the weight of the evidence, and we're telling you why.
Fees, precisely, across every product
| Product | Fee |
|---|---|
| Swaps | Starting at 0.01% |
| CLMM pools | Up to eight tiers, 0.01% to 2% |
| Perps (maker) | 0 bps |
| Perps (taker) | Tiered, 2-4.5 bps |
| Solana network cost | ~$0.01 per transaction |
Gasless perps execution and Solana's own low base costs make Raydium genuinely cheap to transact on relative to Ethereum mainnet DEXs.
Raydium against the other DEXs in this series
| Raydium | Uniswap | Hyperliquid | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chain | Solana only | 18-20+ EVM chains | Own L1 |
| Confirmed security incidents | Two (2022, 2026) | One (2020) | None (JELLY was governance, not a breach) |
| Source code | Open-source | Open-source | Closed-source core |
| Named audits | Five, plus HashEx | Nine (V4 alone) | Three (Zellic, Dedaub, Informal Systems) |
Of the three DEXs we've reviewed so far, Raydium is the only one with more than one confirmed, distinct security incident on its record.
We don't just want to hand you our number; we want to show you how it sits next to what other review desks and comparison sites have published. We've deliberately excluded the Traders Union outlier score (1.86/10) from this average, for the reasons explained in the table above, and calculated the industry comparison from the six other, more internally consistent sources we found.
Our score lands modestly below the aggregated industry average; most sources weight the genuine liquidity dominance and broad product suite heavily, while giving comparatively less weight to the second, more recent June 2026 incident and the missing CertiK audit than our methodology does.
| Source | Score | Type |
|---|
Scores compiled by our editorial team from publicly available reviews as of August 2026. "Editorial estimate" means the outlet didn't publish a single numeric score, so we converted their published verdict and sentiment into a comparable 100-point figure. Verify current figures directly with each source before citing them elsewhere.
Yes, twice. In December 2022, a private key compromise via a trojan virus drained roughly $4.4 million from liquidity pools; this was credential theft, not a contract bug. A second, distinct incident on June 10, 2026 involved approximately $1.34 million in a token and share accounting issue.
Yes, from Traders Union, attributed to interface complexity and Solana ecosystem volatility rather than a specific hack. We're presenting this transparently, but we treat it as an outlier given how inconsistent it is with the weight of evidence from every other source we checked.
No, and at least one detailed source specifically flags this as notable for a DEX managing billions in TVL. Raydium does have five other named audits (Kudelski, OtterSec, MadShield, Halborn, Sec3) plus HashEx.
No, it's genuinely non-custodial. The platform never has access to the private keys controlling your Solana wallet; all trading happens through self-custody.
Swaps start at 0.01%, CLMM pools range across eight tiers up to 2%, and perps charge 0 bps maker with tiered 2-4.5 bps taker fees. Solana's own network costs add roughly $0.01 per transaction.
Raydium's own token launchpad, launched in April 2025 to fill the gap left after Pump.fun's departure from the platform's ecosystem.
Raydium is Solana-only, versus Uniswap's 18-20+ EVM chains and Hyperliquid's own dedicated L1. Raydium is the only one of the three with more than one confirmed, distinct security incident on its record.
Multiple sources describe Raydium as a weak fit for US users specifically, similar to the pattern we've found with other DEXs in this series.
More Reviews
THORChain – DEX Review
Score: 46/100. Unmatched native cross-chain swaps, carrying 2021 hacks, a $200M 2025 crisis, and use as a laundering conduit.
Read More
Hyperliquid – DEX Review
Score: 73/100. Dominant perp DEX, but closed-source code and the JELLY delisting controversy are real, unresolved trust questions.
Read More
Vertex – DEX Review
Score: 62/100. Sophisticated cross-margin trading, reviewed mid-migration to a new chain with conflicting founder accounts.
Read More
Uniswap – DEX Review
Score: 77/100. The series' top score: massive scale, 9 V4 audits, and a clean record, undercut only by ongoing MEV sandwich attacks.
Read More