# MEXC Alternatives in Score Order, With What Each One Documents About Checks Read Beside It

Updated: 24 September 2026; Terms read 18 September 2026; Books checked to 22 September 2026; The Switch Guide editors

Of these mexc alternatives, Lighter scores highest on the six criteria fixed here in advance, at
25.3 of 30. On the separate question of what a venue writes
down about screening, EVEDEX is the only one of the six that names a mechanism and a vendor. Writing
it down is not the same as doing it.

## Where each venue lands

Weights, fixed 22 September 2026 before a venue on this site was scored: Book depth we measured 28 · Who holds the collateral 22 · Cost of a round trip 18 · Markets on offer 14 · Record so far 12 · Whether the door opens 6. Method in full: https://doliacats.com/methodology

Ordered by the overall switch score.

| No. | Venue | Score of 30 | Maker / taker | Perp markets | BTC leverage |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Lighter | 25.3 | 0% / 0% | 214 | 50x, 2% margin |
| 2 | Extended | 23.1 | 0% / 0.025% | 325 | 50x to $4 million |
| 3 | Aster | 23.0 | 0% / 0.040% | 578 | 200x to 400 USDT |
| 4 | ApeX Omni | 21.2 | 0.020% / 0.050% | 125 | 100x to $100,000 |
| 5 | EVEDEX | 19.6 | 0.015% / 0.045% | 52 | 200x to $50,000 |
| 6 | dYdX | 17.2 | 0.010% / 0.050% | 78 | 50x, 2% margin |

## Before you move

1. Names the mechanism: EVEDEX, whose Help Center describes automated on-chain screening on deposits rather than traditional identity checks.
2. Reserves a right: Extended may refuse access after a transaction risk assessment, and Aster's terms allow limited identity verification procedures.
3. States there is nothing to pass: ApeX Omni documents equity exposure with no identity check, no fiat conversion and no brokerage account.
4. Publishes nothing either way: Lighter and dYdX, in everything we read on 18 September 2026, which is not the same as promising nothing will be asked.

## What we measured ourselves

BTC perpetual order books read every 10 minutes in the hours between 07:10 and 23:58 UTC on 22 September 2026; every figure is the median of the successful readings.

| Venue | Round trip on $10,000 | Depth within 10 bps | Impact of a $100,000 order | Readings |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lighter | $0.00 | $17.4 million | 0.70 bps | 93 |
| Extended | $5.00 | $7.7 million | 0.06 bps | 93 |
| Aster | $8.00 | $14.8 million | 0.56 bps | 94 |
| ApeX Omni | $10.00 | $1.8 million | 0.36 bps | 94 |
| EVEDEX | $9.00 | $18.9 million | 2.06 bps | 94 |
| dYdX | $10.00 | $845,469 | 6.74 bps | 94 |

## Step 1 — What each venue has written down

None of this is scored. The formula above prices the fill, the custody, the cost, the coverage,
the record and the door — not the disclosure. Read the disclosure on its own:

| Venue | What its own pages say about checks |
|---|---|
| EVEDEX | Help Center article names the mechanism: automated on-chain AML screening |
| Extended | Terms of use reserve the right to deny access after a Know Your Transaction risk assessment |
| Aster | Terms and conditions allow limited identity verification procedures |
| ApeX Omni | Docs state no KYC and no forms for equity exposure |
| Lighter | Nothing on screening in the documentation we read on 18 September 2026 |
| dYdX | Nothing on screening in the KYC page we read on 18 September 2026 |

A venue that publishes a mechanism can be measured against it later. A venue that publishes a
right has told you it may change its mind. A venue that publishes nothing has told you nothing,
and two of the six are in that position. That reading runs in almost the opposite direction to
the table above, which is the reason the two are kept apart.

## Step 2 — Screening is not identity verification

The two get mixed up constantly, and they answer different questions. Identity verification asks who
you are: a passport, a selfie, an address. Screening asks where the money came from: an address is
checked against sanctions lists and known-bad clusters before a deposit is credited.

None of the six venues here asks for identity documents to trade. Four say something about screening
anyway, and the four statements differ in kind. EVEDEX names a vendor and a method. Extended's terms
reserve a right to refuse after a transaction risk assessment, which is a right rather than a
procedure. Aster's allow limited identity verification, a right to ask for documents it does not
currently ask for. ApeX Omni states the opposite: equity exposure with no identity check.

Reading them in that order is the whole point of this page: a mechanism can be checked against its
own description later, a reserved right can be exercised on any day the venue chooses, and silence
commits nobody to anything.

## Venue 1 — [Lighter](https://lighter.xyz), move here for silence, on the cheapest venue here (25.3 of 30)
Nothing in Lighter's documentation, read on 18 September 2026, says whether deposits are screened.
An account is registered by signing a message with an Ethereum wallet, and that is the whole
procedure ([Lighter docs](https://docs.lighter.xyz/trading/api.md), checked 18 September 2026). On everything except disclosure it leads this guide:
0% maker / 0% taker on a standard account, $17.4 million of resting BTC depth and an exit
through Ethereum documented for the day the sequencer stops.

- Getting in: Wallet signature.
- Worth moving: Registration is one wallet signature, at 0% maker / 0% taker on a standard account; A documented exit that does not need the operator.
- Worth knowing: Nothing published about screening in the documentation we read; 300 ms of added latency on takes at the free rate, and no bug bounty.
- Not for: traders who want the policy in writing before depositing.

## Venue 2 — [Extended](https://extended.exchange/), move here for a reserved right, spelled out in the terms (23.1 of 30)
Extended's terms of use say it may deny access at its own discretion where a transaction risk
assessment puts an engagement beyond its tolerance. No procedure is described and no vendor is
named, so what a trader learns is the right, not the test. Everything else is straightforward:
0% maker / 0.025% taker for every account, 325 markets, every transaction
settled on Starknet ([Extended docs](https://docs.extended.exchange/about-extended/technical-architecture), checked 18 September 2026).

- Getting in: Wallet signature, EVM or Starknet.
- Worth moving: The right to refuse is written down rather than left implied; 0% maker / 0.025% taker for every account, with a $500,000 bug bounty.
- Worth knowing: No method, threshold or vendor described anywhere we read; Most markets quote by request, and the book shown on screen is indicative only.
- Not for: traders who want to know the test before they take it.

## Venue 3 — [Aster](https://www.asterdex.com), move here for a right to ask for documents it does not ask for (23.0 of 30)
Aster's terms allow limited identity verification procedures, while getting in is a wallet
signature and nothing else — Rabby, MetaMask or anything that speaks WalletConnect. So the gap
between the practice and the paperwork is the widest here. The venue itself is the largest list in
this guide, 578 contracts at 0% maker / 0.040% taker, matched and settled on its own
operator-run chain ([Aster docs](https://docs.asterdex.com/overview/what-is-aster.md), checked 18 September 2026).

- Getting in: Wallet signature or email.
- Worth moving: Wallet signature and nothing else in practice, across 578 contracts; 0% to make at every tier since 2 February 2026.
- Worth knowing: Terms permit identity checks the venue does not currently run; Operator-run chain, closed core code, no forced withdrawal documented.
- Not for: anyone who reads a reserved right as a plan.

## Venue 4 — [ApeX Omni](https://omni.apex.exchange/), move here for a venue that states there is nothing to pass (21.2 of 30)
ApeX Omni's own pages describe equity exposure traded around the clock with no identity check, no
fiat conversion and no brokerage account. Sign-in is a wallet or an email address that creates a
self-custodial wallet, matched trades go to the zkLink rollup
([ApeX Omni docs](https://docs.zk.link/architecture/transactionflow), checked 18 September 2026), and a forced withdrawal to layer 1 is documented. Its
restricted list is the shortest of any venue scored in this guide.

- Getting in: Wallet, or email with a Privy wallet.
- Worth moving: Documentation states equity exposure needs no identity check or brokerage account; Forced withdrawal to layer 1, and the shortest restricted list here.
- Worth knowing: Nothing published about screening deposits either way; 0.050% to take, on $1.8 million of resting BTC depth.
- Not for: size, on that book.

## Venue 5 — EVEDEX, move here for a documented mechanism rather than a reserved right (19.6 of 30)
The Help Center states that EVEDEX does not operate traditional identity checks and relies instead
on automated screening of on-chain behaviour
(EVEDEX documentation, consulted 18 September 2026). Getting in is a wallet signature and a deposit of 6 USDT, which is
checked against the minimum and screened before it is credited. What closes the door is the terms
rather than the paperwork: UK retail clients sit outside the intended audience, and sanctioned
persons are not served.

- Getting in: Wallet signature.
- Worth moving: The screening method and its vendor are named in the venue's own Help Center; No identity documents to trade, and a 6 USDT minimum deposit.
- Worth knowing: Screening runs on deposits, so a flagged address can be stopped at the door; Positions reach Arbitrum in periodic batches rather than trade by trade; No bug bounty listed on CertiK Skynet, checked 18 September 2026.
- Not for: anyone who needs a support desk to argue with about a blocked deposit.

## Venue 6 — [dYdX](https://www.dydx.xyz), move here for silence, with a social login in front of it (17.2 of 30)
dYdX's own explainer says an eligible trader needs a compatible wallet and nothing else, and its
pages say nothing about screening deposits. Since the Turnkey integration you can also arrive with
Google, Apple or an email address and still hold the keys ([dYdX docs](https://www.dydx.xyz/blog/use-google-apple-or-email-to-start-trading-on-dydx-social-logins-now-live-with-dydx), checked 18 September 2026). Orders
sit in validators' in-memory books and matches are committed to its own Cosmos chain. Tier-one fees
are 0.010% maker / 0.050% taker on 78 markets.

- Getting in: Wallet signature, or Google, Apple or email.
- Worth moving: Sign-in with Google, Apple or email into a wallet you control; Bug bounty of up to $1,000,000 for a critical report.
- Worth knowing: Nothing published about screening in the pages we read; A median $845,469 of resting BTC depth, and a chain halt in October 2025.
- Not for: large orders.

## In their own words

> "EVEDEX does not operate traditional KYC systems. Instead, we rely on: Automated AML screening via on-chain behavior analysis" — EVEDEX Help Center, AML and compliance standards, 18 September 2026.
> "We reserve the right, at our sole discretion, to deny access to the Services if a Know Your Transaction (KYT) risk assessment indicates that an engagement poses a risk beyond our company's risk tolerance" — Extended documentation, Terms of use, 18 September 2026. https://docs.extended.exchange/extended-resources/legal/terms-of-use
> "Trade real-world equity exposure on-chain — price performance on major U.S. companies and ETFs, 24/7, with no KYC, no fiat conversion, and no brokerage account required." — ApeX Omni documentation, Spot stocks, 18 September 2026. https://apex-pro.gitbook.io/apex-pro/apex-omni/spot-swap/spot-stocks
## FAQ from people mid-switch

### What is a good alternative to MEXC?

For onboarding that is written down, EVEDEX, whose Help Center names its screening method. For cost,
Lighter at 0% maker / 0% taker. For depth, edgeX. MEXC's own BTC perpetual held
$17.1 million within 10 basis points when we read it, against $17.4 million on
Lighter.

### Can I trade crypto futures without verification?

On all six venues here you trade by signing with a wallet and send no identity documents. That is
not the same as no checks: EVEDEX screens deposits on-chain, Extended may refuse
access after a risk assessment, and Aster's terms permit verification it does not currently run.

### What is AML screening in crypto?

An automated check of the depositing address against sanctions lists and clusters linked to theft
or fraud, run before the deposit is credited. It asks where the money came from rather than who
sent it, and it can stop a deposit without anyone ever reading a document.

### Do decentralized exchanges report to tax authorities?

None of these six publishes a reporting process, and none of them issues a tax statement. That
leaves the record-keeping with you, and it does not remove the obligation: what you owe depends on
where you live, not on what the venue collects.

### Is trading without KYC legal?

It depends on where you are, which is why every venue here publishes its own list of places it
will not serve rather than a single rule. Those lists differ and are revised without notice, and
none is reproduced here: read the terms of the venue you are considering, in the version live on
the day you deposit.

### Why was my deposit rejected on a DEX?

Usually the screening step rather than the chain. A deposit from an address linked to a sanctioned
entity or a known theft can be held or refused, and on a venue with no support desk there is often
nobody to appeal to. Send a small test amount first.

### What is the difference between KYC and KYT?

Know Your Customer identifies the person behind the account; Know Your Transaction inspects the money
arriving at it. Extended's terms name the second and not the first, and EVEDEX runs automated on-chain
screening of deposits. Neither approach asks a trader for a passport to open a
position.

### Do I need an email address to use a perp DEX?

Not on any of these six. Two of them, dYdX and ApeX Omni, take one as an alternative door and create a
self-custodial wallet behind it, so the key stays with the trader either way. An address is a
convenience at sign-in here, not an account in the old sense.

### Can a DEX freeze my funds?

It can refuse a deposit and it can stop serving its interface, and either leaves a trader stuck. Whether
it can hold collateral that already sits in a contract depends on the contract, which is what the
custody criterion reads: who can move the balance when the operator will not.

### Which venues publish nothing about screening?

Lighter and dYdX here, plus edgeX, Hyperliquid, Paradex and Aevo elsewhere in this guide: six of the ten
scored venues said nothing about screening in what we read on 18 September 2026. Silence is not a promise,
because a venue that documents no screening today can add it tomorrow.

## Where every figure on this page came from

One of the six numbers is ours and five are quotations. Depth is measured here, in the window this
page names. Fees, markets, ladders, sign-in, who the terms refuse and audit history were lifted from
each venue's own documentation and terms on 18 September 2026. The rule that weights them was
settled on 22 September 2026 and is set out on [how we rate](/methodology). Placement on this guide is paid
for; the order of the table is not.

Three things this guide cannot do. It cannot watch a venue behave: custody, the route out, who gets in
and the record come off pages the venue wrote itself; silence costs points without proving anything.
It cannot price your trading: the fees here are what a new account pays, before volume tiers and
rebates. And only BTC was read, so anything narrower is thinner than it looks.

The Switch Guide editors, 24 September 2026. Corrections, say which step it is on and what the venue actually publishes: editorial@doliacats.com

This guide is paid to publish, and a venue you are being walked towards may be the one who bought the walkthrough.