Curve Finance vs Uniswap

Curve Finance3.5/5

VS

Uniswap4.1/5

Feature	Curve FinanceVisit	UniswapVisit
Ratings
Our score	3.5/5	4.1/5
User rating	No reviews yet	No reviews yet
Liquidity & pricing	4.5	4.5
Fees	3.0	3.5
Security	3.0	4.0
Ease of use	3.0	4.0
Chain coverage	4.5	4.5
Specs
KYC required	Not disclosed	No
Type	AMM	AMM
Chains	Ethereum, Arbitrum, Other	Ethereum, Base, Arbitrum, BNB Chain, Other
Limit orders	Not disclosed	Yes
Cross-chain swaps	Not disclosed	Yes
Audited	Yes	Yes
Open source	Not disclosed	Yes
Governance token	CRV	UNI
Perpetual futures	No	No
Routes across other DEXs	Not disclosed	Yes
MEV protection	Not disclosed	Yes
Mobile app	Not disclosed	Yes
Points or rewards program	Yes	Not disclosed
Company
Founded	2020	2018
Headquarters	—	United States
Investors	1kx	Polychain Capital, BlackRock, Andreessen Horowitz, Paradigm +8
Strengths and weaknesses
Pros	Designed for low-slippage stablecoin swaps About $1.22B TVL on 16 October 2026 Deployments span Ethereum and many additional chains LlamaLend V2 supports isolated lending markets	Non-custodial wallet trading across 16+ EVM mainnets V3 offers four published pool fee tiers V4 supports programmable hooks and concentrated liquidity UniswapX can shift gas payment to fillers
Cons	AMM trades remain exposed to slippage and MEV Long-tail pools can have thin liquidity LP yields can depend on CRV incentives Lending markets add liquidation and collateral risk	Pool fees vary by market and network gas is separate Thin pools can produce high slippage and poor execution Liquidity providers face out-of-range and impermanent-loss risk V4 hooks and fillers add external smart-contract dependencies
Best for	Stablecoin swapping, Correlated-asset trading, Curve LP holders	On-chain token traders, Concentrated liquidity providers, Developers building EVM swaps

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