Momentum vs Pact: Sui liquidity or Algorand routing? (2026)

The main difference is where each DEX operates and how it handles trading. Momentum is Sui-native and uses a ve(3,3) design, with concentrated liquidity, vaults, xSUI and a bridge presented in its app. Pact is built on Algorand and combines an AMM with a swap aggregator that routes trades across Algorand DEXs, including competitors. Its pool options include traditional AMM and stable-swap pools, alongside concentrated liquidity that is described as being in testing. Both have an ease-of-use score of 7/10 and a features score of 7.5/10. Momentum’s overall score is 7, compared with Pact’s 6.8. Those scores are close; chain support and the specific tools you need are more useful decision points.

Momentum has about $3.5 million in TVL, compared with Pact’s roughly $0.9 million. Both are modest in size, and neither figure guarantees that a particular pool can handle a large trade without price impact. Pact’s aggregator aims to find the cheapest execution across Algorand DEXs, but its liquidity is concentrated largely on Algorand. Momentum focuses on Sui and describes itself as a concentrated-liquidity DEX; providers can set price ranges, but positions may need active management and can suffer impermanent loss. Neither publishes exact swap fees or pool fee percentages. Pact offers multiple fee tiers, but the actual rates are not published. Momentum also does not publish its veMMT reward rates. Check the trade or pool screen and review expected price impact and costs before confirming.

Momentum’s feature set is geared toward Sui liquidity and token incentives. Its app includes sections for veMMT locking, xSUI, vaults, a bridge, dashboards and portfolios. The ve(3,3) model is intended to align traders, liquidity providers and token holders, but its incentives depend on token emissions and voter behavior, which can change. Pact is more focused on Algorand trading and liquidity strategies. It offers traditional AMM and stable-swap pools, multiple fee tiers, farms for LP tokens and analytics. Projects can also create reward programs. Its concentrated liquidity pools are described as being in testing, so do not treat that feature as established. Pact also has developer SDK documentation. Choose based on the tools you expect to use rather than the length of each feature list.

Both protocols have two audits listed, but neither publishes the auditor names or a summary of findings. That means the audit count alone does not show what was reviewed or whether issues were found. Both are non-custodial: you connect your own wallet and retain control of your keys, while remaining responsible for approvals and wallet security. Smart-contract risk applies to both, and liquidity providers on either DEX can face impermanent loss. Momentum also carries risks from its token incentives and ve(3,3) mechanics. Pact’s public reporting can refer to unrelated products with the same name, so verify that you are using Pact’s official app before connecting a wallet. No incidents are mentioned for either protocol, and neither has a stated regulatory status.

Choose Momentum if you use Sui and want a DEX with concentrated liquidity, vaults and a bridge grouped in one app. Its TVL is higher than Pact’s, though it is still modest, and its fee tiers and veMMT reward rates are not published. Choose Pact if you are on Algorand and value an aggregator that routes across Algorand DEXs, plus a range of pool types and farms. Its smaller TVL may make it less suitable for large swaps in thin pools, and its concentrated-liquidity feature is still described as testing. Neither is a clear choice for users seeking published fee rates or detailed audit findings. First confirm that the protocol supports your chain and that the relevant pool has suitable liquidity.