MonoSwap v3 Fee Calculator
When you hear the name MonoSwap v3 (Blast) is a decentralized cryptocurrency exchange built on the Blast Layer‑2 network that markets itself as a zero‑fee DEX and launchpad for the Blast ecosystem, the first thing you wonder is whether the hype matches reality. Launched in 2024, the platform promises cheap trades, simple Web3 wallet integration, and a native focus on three‑to‑four Blast‑based tokens. Below we break down the data, compare it to the big players, and help you decide if you should risk a trade on a service that still fights for a foothold.
Quick Take
- Zero maker and taker fees-the only cost is the Blast network gas.
- Liquidity is extremely low: under $12k total 24‑h volume across 3‑4 pairs.
- Trust scores hover at 0‑2 on major aggregators, indicating high risk.
- Supported assets are limited to USDB, WETH, and one native Blast token.
- For casual, tiny trades it may work, but most traders should stick with larger DEXs.
What Is MonoSwap v3 (Blast)?
The platform is a decentralized exchange (DEX) that runs entirely on the Blast blockchain (a newer Layer‑2 solution competing with Arbitrum, Optimism and Polygon). Users connect any Web3 wallet that supports Blast (MetaMask with a custom RPC, Trust Wallet, etc.) and can swap the handful of listed tokens without a centralized order book.
Fee Structure - The Zero‑Fee Promise
MonoSwap advertises a zero‑fee model (both maker and taker fees are set at 0%). In practice, you only pay the Blast network gas, which is typically under $0.01 for a simple swap. This makes the exchange attractive for micro‑trades, but the lack of any fee revenue raises questions about how the platform will fund future development.
Liquidity & Trading Volume - The Real Deal
Liquidity is the lifeblood of any DEX. According to CoinGecko, MonoSwap handles three coins and three pairs with a 24‑hour volume of $10,746.61. CoinMarketCap reports a slightly lower figure of $6,088.38. Either way, the numbers sit in the single‑digit‑thousands, far below the multi‑million daily volumes you see on Uniswap or SushiSwap.
Bid‑ask spreads average 0.609%, which isn’t terrible on paper, but the thin order book means a modest trade can move the price substantially. The platform’s normalized volume ratio is 1.0, but the percentile rank sits at the 0th percentile - essentially dead‑weight compared to the rest of the market.
Trust & Safety - Low Scores Across the Board
Trust scores are a quick sanity check. CoinGecko assigns MonoSwap a score of 0, while BeInCrypto gives it a 2 and ranks it 803rd for trustworthiness. These scores reflect the platform’s tiny traffic, lack of audits, and no visible regulatory oversight. A statement from CashbackForex notes that the “company does not appear to be regulated by any government authority at this time.” For anyone wary of scams, the red flags are hard to ignore.
User Experience & Community Pulse
Social media shows 104,719 Twitter followers, suggesting some marketing push. However, real‑world usage tells a different story: zero transactions recorded in the last 30 days (September2025) and a traffic rank of 550 out of 619 crypto exchanges. Bounce rates and session duration metrics are either broken or indicate that visitors leave instantly. Community forums on Reddit, Discord and Telegram have virtually no discussion threads about MonoSwap.
How to Trade on MonoSwap - Step‑by‑Step
- Set up a Web3 wallet that supports the Blast network (e.g., MetaMask with the Blast RPC endpoint).
- Acquire some Blast‑compatible gas token (usually Blast's native token) to cover transaction fees.
- Navigate to the MonoSwap UI and click “Connect Wallet”.
- Select the token you want to sell (USDB, WETH, etc.) and the token you want to receive.
- Enter the amount, review the 0% fee notification and the displayed price impact.
- Confirm the swap in your wallet and wait for the transaction to be mined (usually under a minute on Blast).
The flow mirrors any other DEX, but remember that with low liquidity you may experience slippage above the quoted price impact.
Pros, Cons & Bottom Line
- Pros
- Zero maker/taker fees - perfect for tiny swaps.
- Simple UI that anyone familiar with Uniswap can navigate.
- Direct integration with the Blast ecosystem, which could grow.
- Cons
- Extremely low liquidity - even a modest trade can cause large price shifts.
- Trust scores near zero; no public audits or regulatory clarity.
- Only three to four tokens available, limiting diversification.
- Zero‑fee model offers no clear revenue path for sustainable development.
For most traders, the cons outweigh the fee‑saving upside. If you’re testing a micro‑trade or want to explore Blast‑only assets, MonoSwap can be a quick, cost‑free entry point. Otherwise, established DEXs with deeper order books and higher trust scores are safer bets.
Comparison Table - MonoSwap vs. Leading DEXs
| Metric | MonoSwap v3 (Blast) | Uniswap (Ethereum) | SushiSwap (Multi‑chain) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Maker fee | 0% | 0.30% | 0.20% |
| Taker fee | 0% | 0.30% | 0.20% |
| 24‑h volume (approx.) | $10k | $2B | $800M |
| Trust score (CoinGecko) | 0 | 9 | 7 |
| Supported chains | Blast only | Ethereum | Ethereum, BSC, Polygon, etc. |
Future Outlook
The success of MonoSwap is tightly coupled with the growth of the Blast ecosystem. If Blast gains traction as a low‑cost, high‑throughput Layer‑2, the exchange could attract more projects and liquidity. However, without transparent roadmaps, audit reports, or a clear revenue model, the platform remains a high‑risk experiment. Potential investors should monitor Blast’s overall adoption metrics and wait for any official tokenomics announcement before committing sizable capital.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is MonoSwap v3 really free to trade?
Yes, the platform charges 0% maker and taker fees. You still need to pay Blast network gas, which is typically under a cent per trade.
Why is the liquidity so low?
MonoSwap launched only in 2024 and supports a tiny set of tokens on a single Layer‑2 chain. With few users and no major liquidity mining incentives, the order books stay shallow.
Can I trade larger amounts without huge slippage?
Not reliably. Even a $1,000 swap can move the price noticeably because the total pool depth is under $12k. Split orders or use a deeper DEX for big trades.
Is MonoSwap regulated?
No. Current reports indicate the platform is not registered with any financial authority, which adds an extra layer of risk.
Should I move my assets to MonoSwap for long‑term holding?
Probably not. For long‑term storage, a hardware wallet or a well‑established DEX with strong security track record is safer.
Nilesh Parghi
April 13, 2025 AT 01:34In the grand tapestry of DeFi, every fee‑free whisper invites us to question the true cost of convenience.
C Brown
April 20, 2025 AT 14:07Oh sure, a zero‑fee DEX sounds like a unicorn riding a rainbow straight into your wallet, right? The reality is that “zero fees” just hides the gas bill, and on Blast that can still sting if you’re swapping junk tokens. Plus, with liquidity that’s thinner than my patience on a Monday, you’ll end up paying slippage you didn’t sign up for. It’s a classic case of “free lunch” that comes with a side of hidden calories.
Ron Hunsberger
April 28, 2025 AT 02:41From a technical standpoint, MonoSwap’s lack of maker/taker fees means the only explicit cost is the Blast network gas, which is typically sub‑cent. However, the shallow liquidity pools-under $12k total-imply that any trade larger than a few hundred dollars will experience noticeable price impact. Users should therefore consider splitting larger orders or using a more mature DEX for sizable positions. Additionally, the platform currently has no public audit reports, which raises questions about smart contract security.
Lana Idalia
May 5, 2025 AT 15:14One could argue that the philosophical allure of “zero fees” masks a deeper existential void within the ecosystem. If you ask yourself why anyone would trade on a platform with such limited token variety, the answer circles back to hype rather than substance. The emotional vacuum left by the lack of community engagement is palpable; forums are eerily silent. In short, the vibe feels more like a glitch in the matrix than a thriving marketplace.
Latoya Jackman
May 13, 2025 AT 03:47I appreciate the clean UI, but the numbers speak louder than the design. With a 24‑hour volume barely reaching five figures, the platform simply doesn’t have the market depth to support reliable trades. Until the liquidity improves, I’d keep my assets on more established exchanges.
Narender Kumar
May 20, 2025 AT 16:21Esteemed members of this discourse, it is with a profound sense of gravitas that I must elucidate the inherent perils of entrusting one’s capital to a nascent exchange bereft of robust liquidity. The paucity of order‑book depth engenders a milieu wherein even modest transactions precipitate disproportionate slippage, thereby eroding the ostensible benefit of zero fees. Moreover, the absence of transparent governance mechanisms further exacerbates the risk profile, compelling a judicious appraisal prior to any allocation of funds.
Darrin Budzak
May 28, 2025 AT 04:54Looks like a neat tool for tiny swaps, but I’d steer clear if I were moving more than a couple bucks.
Eugene Myazin
June 4, 2025 AT 17:27Hey folks, if you’re just dabbling with a few dollars to test Blast tokens, MonoSwap can be a low‑cost playground. The zero fee structure is nice for curiosity, but keep an eye on the price impact – it spikes fast.
karyn brown
June 12, 2025 AT 06:01Honestly, a “zero‑fee” DEX is like a unicorn 🦄 – sounds magical but you end up losing more in slippage than you’d save on fees. The liquidity is teeny‑tiny, so you’ll probably lose more in slippage than you’d save on fees. 🙄
Megan King
June 19, 2025 AT 18:34Just a heads‑up for anyone new: start with a small amount, check the price impact, and only scale up once you see consistent depth. It’s better to be safe than sorry, especially on a brand‑new platform.
Rachel Kasdin
June 27, 2025 AT 07:07Look, I’m all for supporting home‑grown projects, but when the trust score is zero and there’s no audit, it feels like waving a flag for a sinking ship. The hype can’t cover up the fundamentals.
karsten wall
July 4, 2025 AT 19:41From a systems‑engineering perspective, the protocol stack appears to be built on standard AMM primitives, yet the scarcity of liquidity nodes leads to sub‑optimal routing efficiency. In practice, this translates to elevated effective spreads, which undermines the purported fee advantage. Stakeholders should therefore conduct a cost‑benefit analysis that incorporates both gas and slippage components.
Keith Cotterill
July 12, 2025 AT 08:14It is a well‑known axiom in the field of decentralized finance that the absence of explicit fees does not equate to the absence of cost; rather, it merely reallocates the cost vector to other, often less conspicuous, dimensions of the transaction lifecycle. One must first acknowledge that MonoSwap v3’s marketing narrative is predicated upon a seductive promise of “zero‑fee” trading, a promise that, while alluring, is grounded in a selective presentation of data. The platform’s reliance on the Blast Layer‑2 network indeed reduces raw gas expenditure to a marginal figure, yet the underlying liquidity pools are so meager that the market impact of even modest trades becomes astronomically significant. Consequently, the effective fee-when measured as the sum of gas, slippage, and opportunity cost-can easily surpass the nominal 0.30% taker fee levied by more established exchanges. Moreover, the paucity of audits, which is conspicuously absent from the project’s documentation, raises legitimate concerns regarding smart contract integrity; any undiscovered vulnerability could be catastrophic in an ecosystem already rife with exploits. In addition, the governance model appears opaque, offering no clear mechanism for community participation or protocol upgrades, thereby concentrating power in the hands of an unidentifiable core team. This centralization of authority runs contrary to the decentralized ethos that underpins the broader DeFi movement. From a user experience standpoint, the UI is streamlined, but the lack of instructional resources and robust customer support further diminishes confidence for newcomers. Investors should also be wary of the tokenomics, which remain vague; without a transparent incentive structure, liquidity mining initiatives are unlikely to attract sustainable capital. The comparative analysis presented in the original review highlights a stark discrepancy in 24‑hour volume-a mere $10k versus the multi‑billion dollar throughput of major DEXs-underscoring the marginal relevance of MonoSwap in the current market landscape. While some early adopters may find niche utility in experimenting with Blast‑specific assets, the broader applicability remains limited. Finally, the strategic outlook is heavily contingent upon the growth trajectory of the Blast ecosystem itself; should Blast achieve widespread adoption, MonoSwap’s thin order books may thicken, yet this is speculative at best. In essence, the equation for a prudent trader is: zero explicit fees minus minimal liquidity equals a net negative outcome. Therefore, proceeding with caution is not merely advisable-it is imperative.
Noel Lees
July 19, 2025 AT 20:47I get what you’re saying about the gas being cheap, but the slippage factor you mentioned can really bite when you try to move a few hundred bucks. It’s like paying nothing upfront, then watching your trade melt away because there’s not enough depth. So, for anyone eyeing a larger position, splitting it across multiple runs or hopping to a deeper pool might be the smarter play.
Raphael Tomasetti
July 27, 2025 AT 09:21Exactly, micro‑splits keep the impact low and let the cheap gas shine without the surprise loss.
Jenny Simpson
August 3, 2025 AT 21:54Sure, the UI looks polished, but a slick interface can’t mask the fundamental flaw of operating on a liquidity desert. When the market depth is that shallow, every trade becomes a gamble, regardless of how shiny the front‑end appears.
Sabrina Qureshi
August 11, 2025 AT 10:27Honestly, the whole “zero‑fee” hype feels like a circus act-bright lights, tiny acts, and then-boom-nothing substantial beneath the glitter!!!
Rahul Dixit
August 18, 2025 AT 23:01People keep shouting about “free trades” while ignoring the fact that the platform literally has no safety nets; it’s a perfect storm for anyone who isn’t watching every price tick like a hawk.
CJ Williams
August 26, 2025 AT 11:34Just a friendly reminder 😊: start tiny, watch the slippage, and maybe give the devs a nudge for an audit-small steps can lead to big safety wins! 🙌