Across Protocol vs Jumper

Across Protocol4.3/5

VS

Jumper4.0/5

Feature	Across ProtocolVisit	JumperVisit
Ratings
Our score	4.3/5	4.0/5
User rating	No reviews yet	No reviews yet
Security	4.0	3.5
Speed	5.0	4.0
Fees	4.5	4.5
Chain coverage	4.0	4.5
Ease of use	4.5	4.0
Specs
KYC required	No	No
Design	Intent-based	Aggregator
Chains	Ethereum, Arbitrum, Base, Optimism, Polygon, Other	Ethereum, BNB Chain, Arbitrum, Base, Optimism, Polygon, Avalanche, Solana, Other
Chains supported	27	50
Typical fee	Network gas and relayer fee with zero aggregator markup	0% platform fee
Typical transfer time	1.2 seconds	Not disclosed
Security model	UMA optimistic oracle	Depends on the underlying bridge selected for each route
Audited	Yes	Not disclosed
Token	ACX	JUMP
Intent-based	Yes	Yes
Native token transfers (no wrapped tokens)	Yes	Not disclosed
Max transfer	$50,000,000	Not disclosed
Company
Founded	2021	2023
Headquarters	—	British Virgin Islands
Investors	Paradigm, Bain Capital Crypto, Coinbase Ventures, Multicoin Capital +3	Multicoin Capital, Bloccelerate VC, Factor Capital, L1 Digital +3
Strengths and weaknesses
Pros	Average transfer speed of 1.2 seconds across supported chains Over $40B in cumulative volume processed without loss of user deposits Transfers use native assets without relying on wrapped tokens No identity verification (KYC) required to bridge	No platform fees added to underlying bridge or DEX costs Routes across more than 50 blockchain networks including Solana and Ethereum Processed over $40 billion in volume with 100,000+ monthly users No account creation or KYC identity checks required
Cons	July 2026 Solana relayer exploit resulted in $3.35M in stolen relayer funds Relies on third-party relayers maintaining destination chain liquidity Off-chain relayer bugs can temporarily pause specific chain routes ACX governance token undergoing sunsetting and corporate restructuring	Security depends entirely on the third-party bridge chosen for each route Multi-step transactions risk stuck funds if an underlying bridge stalls Gas fees must be paid across multiple destination networks
Best for	Fast cross-chain Layer 2 bridging, DeFi traders avoiding wrapped assets, Large stablecoin institutional transfers	Multi-chain DeFi traders, Users moving assets to non-EVM chains, Traders comparing real-time bridge routes

Highlighted cells show the stronger value in each row. Data comes from each provider's site and public sources; check details before you sign up.

More comparisons