Project X vs Turbos: fees, liquidity and chain (2026)

Project X and Turbos serve different ecosystems, so the first decision is usually which chain you use. Project X is a Hyperliquid DEX with swap, liquidity and portfolio sections in one interface. Turbos is built for Sui and centers on concentrated-liquidity pools, where providers allocate capital within chosen price ranges. Project X has substantially more TVL: about $36.7 million versus about $3.0 million for Turbos. That difference may matter when assessing available liquidity, but TVL does not guarantee a particular trade will execute with low slippage. Turbos has the longer listed history, operating since 2023; Project X has been listed since July 2025. Both have an ease-of-use score of 7/10, but their features and supported assets are tied to separate networks.

Project X advertises 0% fees on swaps, which is its clearest cost advantage on paper. The project does not explain whether that claim applies to every pool and pair or whether it could change, and it does not publish how liquidity providers earn returns. Network gas, price impact and slippage can still affect the cost of a trade. Turbos does not publish its fee levels, so there is no confirmed fee figure to compare with Project X's advertised rate. Sui transactions also incur network gas. Before confirming a swap on either DEX, inspect the costs and estimated price impact shown in the app. For liquidity provision, check the pool's terms and potential returns carefully; Turbos uses concentrated liquidity, while Project X does not publicly describe its pool types or reward structure.

The main feature distinction is how the two platforms approach liquidity. Turbos offers concentrated-liquidity pools, letting providers focus capital within selected price ranges rather than spreading it across the entire curve. That can improve capital efficiency, but it also means providers should understand the risks and how their chosen range works. Project X offers a liquidity tab, but its pool types and reward structure are not publicly described. Its interface also includes a portfolio view and a Cashdrop section; the project does not explain what Cashdrop is, so read its in-app description before participating. Turbos has liquidity guides and staking providers are listed for its TURBOS token. Project X has no token listed. These differences make Turbos more specific for Sui liquidity strategies, while Project X presents a simpler set of general DEX tools.

Neither DEX has audits listed, so neither offers publicly documented audit coverage in these details. Project X has no publicly named security reviews, bug bounties or insurance, and Turbos also has no audits listed. Both are described as non-custodial, meaning the platforms do not hold user funds in the way a custodial exchange would. That does not remove smart-contract risk: bugs, pool manipulation and risky token listings can still cause losses. Liquidity providers also face impermanent loss, and Turbos' focus on low-cap Sui tokens brings elevated risks of scams, thin liquidity and sharp price moves. Project X is younger, while Turbos has been listed since 2023; age alone is not a security guarantee. Check each project's documentation and the specific pool and token details before committing funds, and avoid treating TVL or non-custodial design as proof of safety.

Choose Project X if you already use Hyperliquid and want a straightforward swap, liquidity and portfolio interface. Its much higher TVL and advertised 0% swap fees are meaningful points in its favor, but its fee model, liquidity-provider rewards and Cashdrop terms are unclear, and it has no audits listed. Choose Turbos if you use Sui and specifically want concentrated liquidity, or want to explore its Sui-native token and staking options. It has operated longer, but its TVL is smaller, fee levels are not published and audits are not listed. Neither is an obvious universal winner: chain compatibility should decide first, then compare the exact pool, token and transaction costs you intend to use. For both, treat low-cap assets and unaudited contracts cautiously.