Garden vs Relay
How Garden vs Relay compare on our ratings, bridge specs, funding, pros and cons.
| Feature | ||
|---|---|---|
| Ratings | ||
| Our score | 3.3/5 | 4.3/5 |
| User rating | No reviews yet | No reviews yet |
| Security | 2.0 | 3.5 |
| Speed | 4.5 | 5.0 |
| Fees | 3.0 | 4.5 |
| Chain coverage | 4.0 | 4.5 |
| Ease of use | 4.0 | 4.5 |
| Specs | ||
| KYC required | Not disclosed | No |
| Design | Intent-based | Intent-based |
| Chains | Bitcoin, Ethereum, Arbitrum, Base | Ethereum, Base, Arbitrum, Optimism, Polygon, BNB Chain, Solana, Bitcoin, Sui, Tron, Other |
| Chains supported | 8 | 85 |
| Typical fee | Not disclosed | Under $0.01 average cost plus dynamic execution fees |
| Typical transfer time | As little as 30 seconds | 1 second |
| Security model | Hash Time-Locked Contracts with an off-chain solver layer and trustless atomic settlement | Non-custodial depository with authorized signer oracle Hub and relayer settlement |
| Audited | Yes | Yes |
| Token | SEED | Not disclosed |
| Intent-based | Yes | Yes |
| Native token transfers (no wrapped tokens) | Yes | Yes |
| Company | ||
| Founded | — | 2023 |
| Headquarters | — | United States |
| Investors | Not disclosed | Archetype, Union Square Ventures |
| Strengths and weaknesses | ||
| Pros |
|
|
| Cons |
|
|
| Best for | Direct native Bitcoin cross-chain transfers, Users avoiding centralized wrapped asset custodians, Multi-chain traders bridging to EVM and Sui | Fast native multi-chain transfers, Cross-chain stablecoin settlements, Developers building cross-chain checkout |
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.

