SyncSwap v2 Network Fee Comparison Tool
Compare trading fees across different network deployments. Scroll offers zero fees, while others have varying rates.
zkSync Era
Maker: 0.05%
Taker: 0.25%
Gas: ~$0.03
Scroll
Maker: 0.00%
Taker: 0.00%
Gas: ~$0.02
Linea
Maker: 0.02%
Taker: 0.20%
Gas: ~$0.04
Sophon (v2.1)
Maker: N/A
Taker: N/A
Gas: ~$0.01
Fee Calculator
Network Activity Overview
zkSync Era
TVL: $63M-$82M | Volume: $8B+
Dominant market share (~38%) with deep liquidity
Scroll
Zero fees | 24,024 monthly visits
Highly cost-effective for frequent traders
Linea
Low fees | Growing adoption
Balanced fee structure with moderate costs
Sophon (v2.1)
Inactive | Limited tokens
Effectively dormant with no recent activity
Decentralized exchanges (DEXs) have been racing to make Ethereum trades cheap and fast. SyncSwap v2 review takes a close look at the platform that claims to be the biggest DEX on zkSync Era, offering near‑zero gas fees and sub‑second settlements.
Key Takeaways
- SyncSwap is the dominant DEX on zkSync Era with ~38% market share and $64‑$82M TVL.
- Zero‑fee trading on the Scroll deployment makes it attractive for high‑frequency traders.
- Activity on the Sophon version has dropped to almost nothing, highlighting uneven adoption across networks.
- Tokenomics revolve around 100M SYNC tokens, but no official airdrop or staking rewards have been announced yet.
- Regulatory status is unregulated, which limits institutional use but aligns with typical DEX models.
What Is SyncSwap?
SyncSwap is a decentralized exchange built natively on the zkSync Era Layer2 solution, using zero‑knowledge rollups to cut gas costs and speed up settlement. It launched as the first DEX designed specifically for zkSync and quickly grew to become the ecosystem’s largest liquidity hub.
The platform’s UI mimics familiar centralized exchanges, offering simple token swaps, liquidity provision, and advanced order types for developers. Because it runs on zkSync Era, every trade benefits from the rollup’s scalability while still settling on Ethereum’s security guarantees.
Technical Architecture: zkRollups and Multi‑Network Support
The backbone of SyncSwap is the zkSync Era protocol. zkSync uses zero‑knowledge rollups (zkRollups) to bundle thousands of transactions off‑chain, generate a cryptographic proof, and post a single proof to Ethereum. This architecture slashes gas fees to a few cents and delivers finality in under two seconds.
Beyond zkSync Era, SyncSwap v2 has been ported to several emerging Layer2 networks: Scroll, Linea, Taiko, and Sophon. Each deployment retains the same core smart‑contract logic but may differ in token listings, fee structures, and TVL. The protocol’s composability lets other dApps call its swap contracts directly, fostering a broader DeFi hub.
Network Deployments and Current Activity
Not all SyncSwap versions see the same traffic. The zkSync Era deployment remains the flagship, consistently holding a TVL between $63M and $82M and processing over $8B in cumulative volume. DefiLlama data shows it captures roughly 37.8% of the zkSync DEX market.
In contrast, the Sophon version (v2.1) offers only three tokens as of August2025, with USDT/USDC as the sole active pair. CoinGecko assigns it a medium trust score of 5, and the past 30days recorded zero trades, suggesting the deployment is effectively dormant.
The Scroll deployment stands out for its fee model: both maker and taker fees are 0.00%, making it one of the cheapest places to trade on any Layer2. Traffic analysis shows 24,024 monthly visits, 99% organic, a bounce rate of 57%, and an average session lasting 2minutes35seconds.
Fee Structure Across Deployments
| Network | Maker Fee | Taker Fee | Typical Gas Cost (USD) |
|---|---|---|---|
| zkSync Era | 0.05% | 0.25% | ~$0.03 |
| Scroll | 0.00% | 0.00% | ~$0.02 |
| Linea | 0.02% | 0.20% | ~$0.04 |
| Sophon (v2.1) | N/A | N/A | ~$0.01 |
These numbers make SyncSwap competitive against other Layer2 DEXs like Uniswap v3 on Optimism, where taker fees hover around 0.30% and gas can exceed $0.05 during peak demand.
Tokenomics: The SYNC Token
The ecosystem’s native governance token is SYNC. The team has confirmed a fixed supply of 100million SYNC. While the token has not been officially distributed, its presence drives speculation about future airdrops and governance participation.
SYNC holders could eventually vote on fee rebates, new pair listings, and protocol upgrades. Until the token launch plan is clarified, users should treat SYNC as a speculative asset rather than a utility that currently impacts trading.
User Experience and Traffic Metrics
SyncSwap’s UI is deliberately simple: a search‑bar swap interface, a “Liquidity” tab for pool providers, and a “Charts” view powered by on‑chain data. New users appreciate the one‑click connect button for wallets like MetaMask, Argent, and the native zkSync wallet.
Web‑analytics from August2025 show an average of 2.22 pages per visit, indicating users often explore both swapping and liquidity sections. The bounce rate of 57% reflects a healthy level of engagement for a niche DEX, especially when compared to many DeFi sites that sit above 70%.
Pros and Cons
- Pros
- Lowest fees on Scroll, strong fee competitiveness overall.
- Fast finality thanks to zkRollups - trades settle in seconds.
- Dominant market share within zkSync, ensuring deep liquidity on popular pairs.
- Open‑source contracts promote transparency and easy integration.
- Cons
- Uneven adoption across networks - Sophon version is nearly idle.
- No regulatory clearance, limiting institutional interest.
- SYNC token details remain vague, creating uncertainty for governance‑focused users.
- Limited advanced order types compared to centralized exchanges.
Future Outlook
The success of SyncSwap hinges on the broader uptake of zkSync Era and other supported Layer2s. If zkSync continues to attract developers and users, SyncSwap’s first‑mover advantage will likely translate into greater TVL and more sophisticated DeFi products, such as limit orders, lending integrations, and cross‑chain bridges.
However, the platform must address the disparity between its flagship deployment and smaller networks. Reviving activity on Sophon or expanding token listings on Scroll could boost overall ecosystem health. Community communication around SYNC token distribution will also be a key driver of long‑term loyalty.
Bottom Line
SyncSwap v2 offers a compelling DEX experience for anyone looking to trade on Ethereum’s fastest Layer2s. Its zero‑fee model on Scroll, rapid settlement, and deep liquidity on zkSync make it a practical choice for both retail traders and liquidity providers. The main caution is the uneven activity across networks and the still‑unreleased SYNC token roadmap. If you’re comfortable with the inherent risks of an unregulated DEX, SyncSwap is worth a try-especially on the Scroll deployment if you’re hunting low‑cost, high‑speed swaps.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is SyncSwap safe to use?
The protocol’s contracts are open source and have been audited by several security firms. While no DEX is 100% risk‑free, SyncSwap’s codebase is transparent, and its biggest deployment on zkSync Era has withstood months of high‑volume trading without major incidents.
What wallets can I connect to SyncSwap?
MetaMask, Argent, the official zkSync wallet, and any wallet that supports EIP‑1559 on Ethereum Layer2s can connect via the standard Web3 interface.
How do fees on Scroll compare to other Layer2 DEXs?
Scroll’s zero‑fee model (0.00% maker and taker) is rarer than the typical 0.05%‑0.30% range seen on Optimism or Arbitrum DEXs, making it the cheapest option for frequent traders.
When will the SYNC token be distributed?
The team has confirmed a 100million supply but has not announced a launch date or airdrop plan. Keep an eye on the official SyncSwap blog and Discord for updates.
Can I provide liquidity on SyncSwap?
Yes. The ‘Liquidity’ tab lets you add token pairs to earn a share of swap fees. Earnings are proportional to your contribution and are paid out in the underlying assets.
Behold, the grand spectacle of SyncSwap v2, where fees dance like specters in the night. The maker fee of 0.05% whispers of modest ambition, while the taker fee of 0.25% roars like a distant thunder. Gas costs hover near a humble $0.03, a price worthy of a poet's sigh. Yet, compare this to Scroll's ethereal zero‑fee realm, and one wonders if virtue is a mirage. The ecosystem's TVL, a staggering $63–82M, signals depth beyond mere vanity. Volume surpasses $8B, a testament to traders' relentless hunger. Is the trade‑off between cost and liquidity a moral dilemma? Perhaps the answer lies hidden in the algorithmic labyrinth. The tool's UI, clean and interactive, invites the curious to experiment. Users can slide the calculator, watch numbers shift, and feel power in their hands. Even the dormant Sophon whispers secrets of what could be. In the grand theater of zkSync Era, SyncSwap stands as both protagonist and enigma.
lol fees are trash.
Oh, sure, the zero‑fee promise of Scroll? That's exactly what the cabal wants you to believe while they siphon hidden data. Meanwhile, SyncSwap pretends to be the savior with its "tiny" $0.03 gas, but you never see the micro‑taxes baked into the protocol. If you're not paying attention, the system will quietly mine your attention. Remember, every transaction is a breadcrumb leading back to the overseers. So, enjoy your "low" fees while the watchdogs smile.
Hey folks, just a heads‑up: if you’re swapping on SyncSwap v2, try using the fee calculator before you trade. It’ll show you the exact gas cost based on the network you pick, so you don’t get surprised. Also, keep an eye on the TVL numbers; higher liquidity usually means better slippage. And don’t forget to compare with Scroll if you want zero‑fee trades, but watch the gas on their side too. Happy swapping!
In assessing the comparative economics of these DEXes, one must weigh both explicit fees and implicit opportunity costs. SyncSwap’s modest taker rate of 0.25% coupled with sub‑cent gas aligns with a balanced risk‑reward profile, whereas Scroll’s nil fees appear alluring but may conceal latency or liquidity constraints. The TVL metric evidences zkSync Era’s market depth, a crucial factor for large‑scale execution. Practically, users should calibrate their strategy to the token’s expected turnover and the network’s congestion patterns. This nuanced approach should mitigate unforeseen expenses.
Dear community, when evaluating SyncSwap v2, consider the multi‑dimensional aspects of security, scalability, and user experience. The zkSync Era layer offers robust zero‑knowledge proofs, ensuring transaction privacy while maintaining low gas fees (~$0.03). 📊 The TVL range indicates healthy liquidity, which is essential for minimizing slippage. Moreover, the fee calculator is an excellent pedagogical tool to foster informed decision‑making. I encourage you all to experiment responsibly and share your insights. 🙏
From a systems‑theoretic perspective, the emergence of SyncSwap v2 on the zkSync Era substrate epitomizes the confluence of layer‑2 scalability solutions and decentralized liquidity provisioning. The nominative maker fee of 0.05% operates as a marginal cost function, facilitating price discovery while preserving market efficiency. Concurrently, the taker fee of 0.25% manifests as a frictional parameter, mitigating adverse selection and mitigating front‑running risks inherent in high‑frequency trading environments. Gas expenditures approximating $0.03 are a testament to the efficacy of roll‑up optimizations, whereby transaction data is compressed and reconciled on the L1 chain, thereby amortizing verification costs across a batch of operations. The comparative analysis with Scroll's nominal zero‑fee regime reveals a divergent economic model; while the latter ostensibly removes explicit transaction fees, it may implicitly incur latency externalities and reduced gas‑price competition, potentially diluting throughput under network congestion scenarios. Moreover, the TVL spectrum of $63–82M and a cumulative volume exceeding $8B underscore the depth of capital allocation within zkSync Era, furnishing traders with a robust order book and attenuated slippage vectors. In contrast, the linearly scaling fee structure of Linea (0.20% taker) and the dormancy observed within Sophon’s v2.1 highlight the heterogeneous landscape of L2 DEX deployments, each bearing distinct trade‑offs across security postures, token listings, and user adoption curves. The integration of a fee calculator within the UI platform further democratizes access to cost modeling, empowering end‑users to execute optimal arbitrage strategies predicated upon precise gas cost estimations. This user‑centric tool, coupled with real‑time network activity dashboards, engenders an ecosystem wherein transparency and analytical rigor are paramount. Consequently, market participants are behooved to assimilate these multidimensional data streams-ranging from fee vectors, gas pricing dynamics, and liquidity depth-to calibrate their risk‑adjusted return expectations in alignment with the overarching paradigms of decentralized finance.
Allow me to elucidate the salient advantages of SyncSwap v2 over its contemporaries. First, the fee architecture is meticulously calibrated: a negligible maker fee of 0.05% ensures that liquidity providers are adequately incentivized, while the taker fee of 0.25% remains competitive within the L2 ecosystem. Second, the gas consumptions, hovering around $0.03, render micro‑trading viable-a feat unattainable on many Layer‑1 solutions. Third, the platform’s UI leverages a sophisticated fee‑calculator, affording users the ability to anticipate transaction costs with precision. In sum, SyncSwap v2 epitomizes the synthesis of cost‑efficiency, liquidity depth, and user‑centric design.
Oh great, another “zero‑fee” miracle, because we’ve never seen that claim before.
Ah, the grand tapestry of network fees unfolds before our eyes, each strand woven with whispers of hidden motives. SyncSwap v2, with its modest 0.05% maker charge, pretends humility while quietly extracting value from the diligent trader. The taker’s 0.25%-a seemingly innocuous bite-might just be the sweet spot for the custodians of the protocol, ensuring they sleep soundly on their stacks of ether. Meanwhile, Scroll flaunts its “zero‑fee” façade, yet the gas‑haze remains, silently gnawing at profits like a patient fox. One must ask: whose interests truly dictate these structures? Are we merely pawns on a digital chessboard, their moves dictated by unseen architects? The answer lies not in the numbers alone, but in the narrative they craft-one of empowerment, yet laced with control.
Hey everyone, just wanted to add that the fee calculator on the SyncSwap page really helped me avoid over‑paying on a recent trade. I entered $500 as the trade amount, chose zkSync Era, and saw the estimated fee was about $0.38. That’s way better than guessing. Also, keep an eye on the TVL numbers; higher TVL generally means lower slippage. If you’re looking for zero‑fee swaps, Scroll can be an option, but double‑check the gas costs as they can add up.
The fee structure is elegant, yet the implied cost of transaction latency should not be overlooked.
Optimistic vibes! SyncSwap’s low fees are a breath of fresh air for new traders. 🌬️ Keep experimenting and you’ll find the sweet spot.
Appreciate the info. The calculator is useful.
Yo, this whole fee drama is just a PR stunt. Real traders know it’s all about the volume, not the tiny percentages. Get over it.