The same aggregator can be an excellent choice or a liability — it depends on how you integrate. Describe your setup below and this tool re-grades every aggregator against your reliability bar, using Enso Shield's measured data. The goal throughout: 99.9% execution reliability.
Start from a profile, then fine-tune. Everything below reacts live.
Enso's measured values, unchanged. The colour bands shift with your setup: with more redundancy, no-quote and sim-failure relax; without simulation, sim-failure hard-pins to the revert bar; latency grades against your budget. Click any row to add or remove it from your set — the highlighted rows are what the reliability above is computed on. Auto-pick seeds a starting set; then it's yours to edit.
| Aggregator | Score1–10 · weighted | Overquoteprice holds | Quote→fill gapavg drift | Sim failurereverts | No-quoteavailability | Median lat.speed | p95 lat.tail |
|---|
The set you selected above, traced through each gate. Every thin line is one source draining as quotes fail to return, arrive late, or fail simulation; the bold line is the combined result — redundancy recovers what individual sources lose.
Six dimensions at once — further out is better on every axis. Your selected sources are drawn in colour; the rest of the field sits faint behind them. A round hexagon is an all-rounder; a spiky one trades strengths for weaknesses. Hover any shape for its name.
A quote is only usable if it arrives in time. With one source you need the p95 inside budget; with several, the median is enough because the fastest of many arrives first. The line marks your current budget.
Execution quality is only half the picture — an aggregator also has to support the chains you ship on. Counts are refreshed server-side from verified machine-readable endpoints where providers expose one, normalized to mainnet swap networks only, and cached for one hour. Documented static values remain in place as fallbacks when a public discovery endpoint is unavailable or temporarily fails.
All measurements are produced by Enso Shield — an independent benchmark that quotes every aggregator on the identical swap and re-simulates against live chain state (methodology ↗). nordbench changes none of the numbers; it only re-grades and re-plots them for a given integration setup.
The reliability model. Each source yields a usable quote if it arrives in time and — when simulating — passes simulation. Arrival is estimated from Enso's median and p95 via a log-normal fit. With independent sources, the request fails only if all miss, so reliability = 1 − ∏(1 − uᵢ). The green band for redundancy-covered failures (no-quote; sim-failure when simulating) is 0.001^(1/N): the per-source rate at which N sources still clear 99.9%. Without simulation, sim-failure becomes revert rate directly and redundancy can't mask it, so it hard-pins to 0.1%.
The honest limit. This assumes source failures are independent. Correlated failures — honeypots, transfer-tax tokens, genuinely illiquid routes — fail every source at once and set a floor no amount of redundancy clears. Reaching sub-0.1% in practice is two jobs: enough fast, honest, independent quotes (modelled here) and pre-trade filtering to remove intrinsically unexecutable routes (not in this dataset).
Disclosure: nordbench is published by Nordstern, itself one of the measured aggregators. Presentation is kept even-handed and the source is linked throughout so any figure can be verified directly against Enso.