Balancer
score
Fees: Pool-defined swap fees, commonly ~0.1%–1%
Balancer suits users who want configurable, weighted liquidity pools and yield-bearing structures rather than plain swaps. But its flexibility has repeatedly translated into a larger attack surface: the large November 2025 v2 exploit, on top of earlier incidents, makes its security track record a genuine concern, so approach with appropriate caution (note that v3 was reported unaffected by the 2025 flaw). Not financial advice.
What Balancer is
Balancer is a decentralized exchange and automated market maker launched in 2020 that generalizes the AMM concept. Instead of fixed 50/50 pools, it supports weighted, multi-asset, and custom pools, plus boosted and yield-bearing structures, making it as much a programmable liquidity platform as a place to swap.
Where it stands on the criteria
Our 6.7 score is held back most by security (5.5), the lowest among the DEXs we cover here. Chain coverage (8) is a strength, spanning several major EVM networks, and fees (7.5) and UX (7) are reasonable, but liquidity (6.5) is thinner than Uniswap or Curve on many pairs. The flexibility that defines Balancer also enlarges its attack surface.
Costs and fees
Swap fees are defined per pool and commonly fall between roughly 0.1% and 1%, depending on how each pool is configured. That range means costs vary widely by pool, so the fee you pay depends heavily on the specific structure you trade through.
The main caveat
Security is the central concern. A large exploit of Balancer v2 pools in November 2025 affected roughly $120M or more, following an earlier 2023 vulnerability, and its report indicated that v3 was not affected by the 2025 flaw. Repeated incidents make its security track record a genuine reason for caution.
Who it's for
Balancer suits users who specifically want configurable, weighted, or yield-bearing pools rather than plain swaps, and who are prepared to weigh its incident history carefully. For simple, deep-liquidity swaps, larger and cleaner-record venues are generally a better fit. Approach with appropriate caution. Not financial advice.
Overall 6.7 / 10 — the weighted average of the criteria above. How we score →
- + Flexible weighted and custom pools beyond simple 50/50 AMMs
- + Boosted pools and yield integrations improve capital efficiency
- + Available across several major EVM networks
- + Well-integrated with aggregators for routing
- − Repeated security incidents, including a major November 2025 exploit of Balancer v2 pools (roughly $120M+) plus an earlier 2023 vulnerability
- − Thinner liquidity than Uniswap or Curve on many pairs
- − Advanced pool concepts add complexity and a larger attack surface
Is Balancer safe?
+
Security is its weakest area, scoring 5.5/10 in our review. A major exploit of Balancer v2 pools in November 2025 affected roughly $120M or more, on top of an earlier 2023 vulnerability, so caution is warranted. Reports indicated v3 was not affected by the 2025 flaw.
What makes Balancer different from other DEXs?
+
It supports weighted, multi-asset, and custom pools rather than only 50/50 pairs, plus boosted and yield-bearing structures. This flexibility enables advanced strategies but also adds complexity and a larger attack surface.
What are Balancer's fees?
+
Fees are set per pool and commonly range from about 0.1% to 1%, so the cost depends on the specific pool you trade through rather than a single fixed rate.
Which networks does Balancer support?
+
It is available across several major EVM networks, one of its stronger attributes at 8/10 for coverage, and it is well integrated with aggregators for routing.
Is Balancer a good DEX?
+
It scores 6.7 overall. It is well suited to users who want configurable or yield-bearing pools, but its repeated security incidents and thinner liquidity on many pairs mean it trails the top venues for straightforward swapping.