aggregator.ink

← All comparisons

Matcha (0x) vs KyberSwap

How Matcha (0x) and KyberSwap differ on routing, chains and what they’re best at.

Matcha (0x)KyberSwap
CategoryDEX aggregatorDEX aggregator
TypeClassic routerMeta-aggregator
How it worksRoutes through the 0x aggregation API across many DEXes and RFQ market makers and settles in one transaction. Adds limit orders and DCA.The KyberSwap Aggregator routes across Uniswap, Sushi, Curve and dozens more plus Kyber’s own Elastic/Classic AMMs. KyberSwap × NEAR Intents (2026) routes native BTC/DOGE/NEAR without wrapped assets.
Chains16+ (EVM + Solana)15+ EVM (+ NEAR Intents)
Highlight0x powers Coinbase, MetaMask, Robinhood~31% of ETH aggregator volume (2026)
Best forA clean UI on proven infraTop ETH share + native BTC routing

Matcha (0x)

  • Broadest chain coverage
  • Battle-tested 0x infrastructure
  • Limit orders + DCA
  • Less aggressive routing than CoW/1inch on big trades
  • ZRX less central to the product

KyberSwap

  • Highest Ethereum aggregator share (2026)
  • Routes own + external liquidity
  • Native BTC/DOGE via NEAR Intents
  • History includes the 2023 Elastic exploit
  • KNC less prominent

Bottom line

Pick Matcha (0x) for a clean ui on proven infra; pick KyberSwap for top eth share + native btc routing.