Velora:
formerly ParaSwap, rebranded the same week its DAO voted, by the narrowest of margins, to return hack-linked fees.
We tore apart Velora, the rebranded successor to ParaSwap, across the same aggregator-adapted scorecard we've used throughout this series. From a genuinely distinctive architectural evolution, Delta v2.5, an intents-based model letting multiple agents compete for trade execution rather than relying on rigid, single-block logic, disclosed Super Hooks programmable action chains, and a named, disclosed founder (Mounir Benchemled), to a real, genuinely uncomfortable governance event worth treating with precision: in February 2025, ParaSwap's own fee-collection infrastructure inadvertently earned roughly $100,000 from swaps connected to the Lazarus Group's $1.5 billion Bybit hack, triggering the closest DAO vote in the platform's history, 49.56% to 49.54%, on whether to return the money. The DAO ultimately voted to return it, and the rebrand to Velora followed within weeks; and landed on a score the marketing page won't show you.
Our take, up front: Velora is the rebranded successor to ParaSwap, one of the older DEX aggregators in this category, announced on April 14, 2025 alongside Delta v2.5, a genuinely significant architectural shift to an intents-based model where multiple agents compete to execute a trade, moving away from the rigid, single-block execution logic traditional aggregators rely on. Real, genuinely distinctive features layered on top: instant cross-chain swaps, conditional limit orders, and Super Hooks, described as programmable action chains extending what a single trade can accomplish. Real, disclosed, named founder, Mounir Benchemled, a positive contrast to some pseudonymous founders elsewhere in this series. Real, disclosed PSP-to-VLR token migration, retaining governance participation, user incentives, and fee-reduction utility. Real, no confirmed smart-contract exploit of ParaSwap or Velora itself found in our research. What we can't set aside, but can present with real precision: a genuinely uncomfortable, closely-contested governance event. In February 2025, ParaSwap's own fee-collection infrastructure inadvertently earned roughly $100,000 from swaps connected to the Lazarus Group's $1.5 billion Bybit hack. This triggered the closest DAO vote in the platform's history, 49.56% voting to return the funds against 49.54% voting to keep them, an almost perfectly split decision. The DAO ultimately voted to return the money, and the rebrand to Velora followed within weeks, a timing coincidence that drew real, direct scrutiny at the time. Real, honestly modest current scale: roughly 18,000 active users over a recent month and 4.3 million smart contract interactions over the past year, dramatically smaller than 1inch, Jupiter, or even Rango, reviewed earlier in this series. We weighted all of it below.
Real, no confirmed smart-contract exploit of ParaSwap or Velora itself found in our research. Real, genuinely distinctive, important governance event worth treating with precision: ParaSwap's own fee-collection infrastructure inadvertently earned roughly $100,000 from swaps connected to the Lazarus Group's $1.5 billion Bybit hack in February 2025; this is a real, disclosed entanglement with hack-adjacent activity, not a breach of ParaSwap's own code. Real, genuinely close, controversial, but ultimately resolved DAO vote: 49.56% to 49.54%, the closest in the platform's history, ultimately deciding to return the hack-linked fees. Real, genuinely distinctive intent-based architecture (Delta v2.5) moving away from rigid, single-block execution logic, a real, structural design evolution rather than a cosmetic rebrand.
Pros
- No confirmed smart-contract exploit of ParaSwap or Velora itself found in our research
- DAO ultimately voted to return the Bybit-hack-linked fees
Cons
- Inadvertently earned ~$100K in fees connected to the $1.5B Bybit hack
- The vote to return those fees was the closest in the platform's history (49.56% vs 49.54%)
Real, genuinely distinctive Delta v2.5 intents-based model, letting multiple agents compete for trade execution rather than relying on rigid, single-block logic. Real, honest, genuinely modest current scale: roughly 18,000 active users over a recent month and 4.3 million smart contract interactions over the past year, dramatically smaller than 1inch, Jupiter, or even Rango.
Pros
- Genuinely distinctive intents-based, multi-agent competitive execution model
Cons
- Honestly modest current scale (~18,000 monthly active users) relative to category leaders
Real, genuinely non-custodial. Real, disclosed, named founder (Mounir Benchemled), a positive contrast to some pseudonymous founders elsewhere in this series. Real, genuinely functioning, if imperfect, DAO governance: the fee-return vote, however close and contentious, was a real, disclosed, binding governance process that ultimately reached a decision.
Pros
- Genuinely non-custodial; disclosed, named founder (Mounir Benchemled)
- Functioning DAO governance that ultimately reached a binding decision
Cons
- The correct response to hack-adjacent fees was genuinely, uncomfortably contested
Real, genuinely distinctive, real cross-chain capability via instant cross-chain swaps, part of the platform's broader chain-abstraction focus. Real, aggregation across major DEXs including Uniswap, Curve, and SushiSwap.
Pros
- Real cross-chain capability via a chain-abstraction-focused design
- Aggregation across major, established DEXs
Cons
- Less exhaustive, precisely-quantified scale claims than some other aggregators in this series
Real, genuinely distinctive Super Hooks, described as programmable action chains, extending what a single trade can accomplish. Real, disclosed conditional limit orders alongside instant cross-chain swaps.
Pros
- Distinctive Super Hooks programmable action chains
- Conditional limit orders and instant cross-chain swaps
Cons
- Advanced features may carry a steeper learning curve for newcomers
Real, disclosed fee-reduction incentives tied to holding and migrating to the VLR token. Real, genuinely important, disclosed positive: the platform ultimately returned hack-linked fees rather than retaining them.
Pros
- Disclosed VLR-linked fee-reduction incentives
- Ultimately returned hack-linked fees rather than retaining them
Cons
- Precise, standard fee schedule less clearly disclosed than at some other platforms
Real, genuinely distinctive Super Hooks programmable action chains. Real, intent-based, multi-agent competitive execution via Delta v2.5. Real, chain-abstraction-focused cross-chain design.
Pros
- Distinctive Super Hooks; intent-based Delta v2.5 execution model
Cons
- These features are newer and less battle-tested than more established competitors' tools
Access only through velora.xyz directly, and note that older bookmarks or integrations may still say "ParaSwap."
Since some third-party integrations still reference the old ParaSwap name, confirm you're on the current, official Velora domain, and check whether any linked PSP holdings need active migration to VLR.
A genuinely uncomfortable governance moment, resolved the right way, but only just.
We want to be fair about something genuinely rare in this project: Velora's predecessor faced a real ethical question most platforms never have to answer directly, what to do with money you didn't ask for, connected to a hack you had nothing to do with, and its DAO got there through a vote so close it could have gone either way. We think the eventual decision, to return the funds, was the right one, and we're giving it real credit. But we don't think a coin-flip margin on the right call deserves the same score as a platform that never faced the question, or one whose community reached a clear, comfortable consensus. Layered underneath that is a genuinely interesting, real architectural evolution in Delta v2.5, and a still-modest user base that suggests Velora is more early-stage relative to its rebrand ambitions than its new name might suggest.
The scorecard above is deliberately general. Whether Velora is right for you depends heavily on which of these you already are.
The trader interested specifically in intent-based, multi-agent execution and Super Hooks' programmable trade sequences
This is genuinely where Velora's real architectural distinctiveness concentrates most heavily.
The former ParaSwap user who wants to understand exactly what changed with the rebrand before continuing to use the platform
Given the real, disclosed governance history here, this specific context genuinely matters.
The PSP holder who actively completes the migration to VLR to retain governance and fee-reduction benefits
This is a real, disclosed action worth taking directly rather than leaving old tokens unmigrated.
Traders who want the deepest, most established liquidity or a platform with no recent governance controversy to research
1inch, Jupiter, or Rango, all reviewed earlier in this series, are better fits for this specific priority.
The scorecard covers the headline judgment calls. These four tables cover the specifics we didn't want to bury in prose; the rebrand and fee-return controversy timelined precisely, Delta v2.5 explained, the PSP-to-VLR migration broken down, and our first six-way aggregator comparison.
The rebrand and fee-return controversy, timelined
| When | What happened |
|---|---|
| February 2025 | The Lazarus Group executes the $1.5 billion Bybit hack; some hack-linked funds are swapped through ParaSwap, inadvertently generating ~$100,000 in fees |
| March 20, 2025 | ParaSwap's DAO votes on whether to return the fees; the vote splits 49.56% yes to 49.54% no, the closest in the platform's history |
| Weeks later | The DAO's decision to return the funds is finalized |
| April 14, 2025 | ParaSwap rebrands as Velora, launching Delta v2.5 the same day |
We're presenting this timeline factually because the proximity of the vote and the rebrand drew real, direct scrutiny at the time; we're not asserting a causal link our sources don't establish, only noting the sequence as reported.
Delta v2.5, explained
| Traditional aggregator model | Delta v2.5 (intents-based) | |
|---|---|---|
| Execution | Single-block, rigid smart contract logic | Multiple agents compete to fill the order |
| Since | N/A | Experimentally from mid-2024; fully realized April 2025 |
| Goal | Direct routing | Faster transactions, better pricing, real MEV mitigation |
This intent-based approach is conceptually similar to 1inch's Fusion protocol and Rango's route simulation, reviewed earlier in this series, reflecting a genuine, broader industry shift toward intent-based execution.
PSP to VLR, precisely
| Detail | |
|---|---|
| Migration ratio | 1:1 |
| New chain | Base |
| Retained utility | Governance participation, user incentives, fee reductions |
| Action required | PSP holders must actively migrate to continue receiving these benefits |
If you held PSP before the rebrand, confirm your migration status directly; unmigrated tokens may not carry forward the same benefits.
Six aggregators, side by side
| 1inch | Jupiter | Rubic | KyberSwap | Rango | Velora | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Confirmed exploit? | Yes (2025) | Yes (2024, user-side) | Yes (2022) | Yes (2023) | None found | None found |
| Other real controversy | None found | None found | None found | None found | None found | Contested DAO vote on hack-linked fees |
| Named founder? | Yes | No (pseudonymous) | Not specified | Yes | Not specified | Yes |
| Distinctive feature | Fusion MEV protection | Full "DeFi superapp" | Embeddable Relay SDK | Dual aggregator+AMM | Diamond Pattern + timelocks | Intent-based Delta v2.5 |
Velora is the only aggregator in this comparison with no confirmed smart-contract exploit but a real, disclosed governance controversy instead, a genuinely different category of concern than the other five platforms' incident histories.
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 excluded one source that embedded promotional content for an unrelated third-party product within its Velora coverage, since that mixing makes it harder to treat as a fully independent assessment.
Our score lands modestly below the aggregated industry average; most news coverage treated the rebrand and the fee-return vote as a neutral, factual news event without converting it into a direct scoring factor the way 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. ParaSwap rebranded to Velora on April 14, 2025. The same team runs the same underlying product, now with the Delta v2.5 intents-based upgrade. Some third-party integrations may still reference the old ParaSwap name.
In February 2025, some funds connected to the Lazarus Group's $1.5 billion Bybit hack were swapped through ParaSwap, inadvertently generating roughly $100,000 in fees. This triggered the closest DAO vote in the platform's history (49.56% to 49.54%) on whether to return the money; the DAO ultimately voted to return it.
We found no confirmed smart-contract exploit of ParaSwap or Velora itself. The Bybit-related situation involved inadvertently earning fees on hack-linked funds passing through the platform, not a breach of Velora's own code.
Velora's intents-based aggregation engine, letting multiple agents compete to execute a trade rather than relying on rigid, single-block execution logic, aiming for faster transactions, better pricing, and real MEV mitigation.
Programmable action chains that extend what a single trade can accomplish, part of Velora's advanced trading feature set alongside instant cross-chain swaps and conditional limit orders.
PSP is migrating 1:1 to VLR (the Velora Token) on Base. VLR retains governance participation, user incentives, and fee-reduction utility, but holders need to actively complete the migration to continue receiving these benefits.
Genuinely modest: roughly 18,000 active users over a recent month and 4.3 million smart contract interactions over the past year, dramatically smaller than 1inch, Jupiter, or Rango, all reviewed earlier in this series.
Mounir Benchemled, a disclosed, named founder rather than an anonymous or pseudonymous team.
More Reviews
1inch – DEX Aggregator Review
Score: 75/100. Category-defining aggregator; a Mar 2025 resolver incident (~$5M) didn't touch user funds, but did touch trust.
Read More
Jupiter – DEX Aggregator Review
Score: 78/100. Highest score in this whole project: ~95% Solana share, with the one 2024 phishing incident purely user-side.
Read More
Rubic – DEX Aggregator Review
Score: 51/100. Lowest in this sub-series: two 2022 hacks and unresolved, wide gaps in its own claimed audit scope.
Read More
KyberSwap – DEX Aggregator Review
Score: 63.5/100. Dual aggregator+AMM; the Nov 2023 Elastic exploit left the aggregator itself confirmed unaffected.
Read More