Which DEX has lower slippage on large swaps?

On TON-USDT (>$5K) STON.fi wins thanks to pool depth — roughly $50–65M TVL vs $3–8M on DeDust. For stable swaps and stTON-TON, DeDust wins via stable pools with a 0.04% fee and very low slippage.

Was DeDust really DDoSed?

Yes, in August 2025 DeDust suffered a series of DDoS attacks; the frontend was unreachable for 6–14 hours across several days. The smart contract kept working — power users traded via CLI or third-party aggregators. DeDust has since hardened CDN and Cloudflare. Reminder that DEX frontend is not the DEX contract.

What audits does STON.fi have?

STON.fi V1 was audited by CertiK with a public report. V2 was audited by CertiK + Trail of Bits. No major exploits since launch. A handful of UI-side bugs were caught and fixed without loss of funds.

Can users from Russia trade on these DEXs?

Yes. Both DEXs are decentralised and work via any TON Connect wallet. The frontends sit behind Cloudflare, which can be throttled on Russian ISPs; STON.fi has a slight loading lag on RU IPs. Fallbacks: swap.coffee aggregator, TONCO, in-wallet swap modules.

Where is jetton listing faster?

On STON.fi listing is automatic — anyone can create a pool by paying gas. DeDust is similar, but inclusion in the main Featured Pairs list is editor-curated. Technically both DEXs can trade any jetton if you know the contract address.

STON.fi vs DeDust: TON DEX deep comparison 2026

TL;DR. STON.fi wins on large volatile pairs through depth and reach. DeDust wins on stable pairs (USDT-USDC, stTON-TON) thanks to concentrated stable pools at 0.04% fee and native limit orders. Both DEXs are audited and reachable from Russia. DeDust has a DDoS history (August 2025) — no funds lost, but the UI was cut for hours. For any large trade always price-check via the swap.coffee aggregator — 0.5–1.5% improvements are real.

What we compare

The parameters that actually shape a DEX user’s experience:

Liquidity depth — TVL per pair and resulting slippage.
Fees — fee tier, governance-token cashback.
Pool structure — volatile/stable/concentrated, limit orders.
Jetton listing flow — automatic vs curated.
UI/UX — speed, clarity, mobile.
RU-IP availability — frontend uptime, Cloudflare throttling, gateway blocks.
MEV defense — sandwich, frontrunning.
Audit history and incidents.

Baseline table

Parameter	STON.fi	DeDust
TVL (DeFiLlama, May 2026)	~$50–65M	~$3–8M
Cumulative volume	~$3.7B	~$0.6B
Unique users	5.3M+	0.6M+
Base fee	0.30% V1, variable V2	0.20% volatile, 0.04% stable
Stable pools	Present, less optimised	Core advantage
Limit orders	No	Yes
Audit	CertiK + Trail of Bits	Trail of Bits + ChainSecurity
Open source	Partial	Partial
Gov token	STON	DUST
Mobile UI	Good	Acceptable
RU-IP reach	Cloudflare edge	Cloudflare edge
Incidents	UI bugs, no losses	Frontend DDoS Aug 2025

Depth and slippage

The number that matters most. Fresh slippage test (May 2026, TON → USDT swap):

Trade size	STON.fi	DeDust
$500	0.05%	0.18%
$2 000	0.15%	0.6%
$5 000	0.4%	1.6%
$10 000	0.9%	3.5%

On standard pairs (TON-USDT, TON-NOT, TON-CAT) STON.fi is clearly deeper. On DeDust, swaps over $2K on non-stable pairs start to hurt.

Reverse picture on stable pairs (USDT-USDC, stTON-TON):

stTON → TON swap	STON.fi	DeDust stable pool
$5 000	0.6%	0.06%
$10 000	1.2%	0.1%
$50 000	4%+	0.4%

DeDust stable pools are simply the best option with no real alternative.

Fee structure

STON.fi V1: flat 0.30% on every pair.

STON.fi V2: variable 0.05–1% by pool type. Concentrated liquidity Uniswap V3-style but TON-adapted.

DeDust: two pool types. Volatile — 0.20% base. Stable — 0.04% base. Limit orders priced separately from standard fee tiers.

In absolute terms STON.fi V1 charges more on TON-USDT. V2 is competitive. DeDust is cheaper on volatile by default, offset by smaller depth.

Limit orders

DeDust supports native limit orders — rare in AMM-land, implemented via off-chain orderbook + on-chain execution. Useful when you:

Want to sell TON at a specific price and walk away.
Scale a large entry instead of clapping into one trade.
Run cross-pool arbitrage.

STON.fi has no native limit orders — TONCO or third-party bots fill the gap.

Jetton listing

STON.fi. Anyone can create a pool on any pair by paying gas to deploy. No mandated minimum liquidity, but a pool without $1K+ depth is dead. UI auto-detects pools by jetton address.

DeDust. Mechanically similar. But inclusion in the Featured Pairs list is editorial. The DeDust team gatekeeps the main UI surface.

If you are minting a jetton and want immediate visibility — STON.fi gets you there faster.

RU-IP reach

As of May 2026 both DEXs are reachable from Russia via direct IP and Cloudflare. Roskomnadzor does not block either — neither is a VPN/anonymiser, neither is a custodial financial service.

That said:

If the frontend hangs under Cloudflare throttling on a Russian residential ISP, fallback paths exist — swap.coffee, TONCO, Tonkeeper in-wallet swap.
In a worst case the contract can be invoked via CLI or third-party UI — DEXs are decentralised, the frontend is not the blockchain.

MEV (sandwich, frontrunning)

Less acute on TON than on Ethereum. TON has no classic mempool — transactions enter the shardchain directly without a public queue. This kills classic sandwich attacks at the architectural level.

That said, large trades (>$10K) can still face HFT-bot reaction via cross-DEX arbitrage. Not sandwich strictly, but a similar effect on price.

What each DEX does:

STON.fi: standard slippage limit, no MEV-specific defenses.
DeDust: same. Stable pools are inherently less vulnerable due to low price sensitivity.

For large trades the better play is a private TONCO window with slippage ≤0.3% rather than agonising over DEX choice. See MEV on TON.

Audits and incident history

STON.fi:

V1: CertiK, 2022 report, no criticals.
V2: CertiK + Trail of Bits, 2024 reports.
4+ years operating — several UI bugs, no fund losses logged.

DeDust:

Trail of Bits + ChainSecurity, 2023 reports.
Several public bug bounties paid out.
Frontend DDoS August 2025 — UI down ~30 hours cumulative across a week, contracts kept operating, no funds lost.

UI / UX

STON.fi. Clean, minimal, mobile-friendly. History, portfolio, pool analytics. Integrated into Tonkeeper and MyTonWallet via TON Connect — swap from the wallet.

DeDust. Slightly more trader-oriented, more charts and tools. Limit orders, pool analytics, advanced settings. Mobile works but feels less polished.

Beginners → STON.fi. Active traders → DeDust.

Decision tree

Standard swap TON ↔ USDT/NOT/CAT under $5K → STON.fi. Depth + UX win.

Stable swap stTON ↔ TON, USDT ↔ USDC → DeDust stable pool. 0.04% fee, fractional slippage.

Limit order → DeDust. Native.

Trade over $10K → aggregator swap.coffee or TONCO, not a single DEX direct.

Minting a new jetton, want exposure → STON.fi.

Want LP farming with juiced APR → STON.fi (STON incentives historically heavier).

Practical recommendations

Never accept >2% slippage. Split the trade or use an aggregator.
Verify jetton address before swapping. Both DEXs can list spoof tokens with similar tickers — eyeball TVL and holder count.
Don’t leave approval permissions on DEX forever. Token approvals are visible and revocable in Tonkeeper settings.
LP positions = impermanent loss risk (see yield farming on TON). Don’t quote APR without IL.
During a frontend DDoS, check the protocol’s Twitter first — confirm before routing through an aggregator backup.

Large-swap checklist

Trade > $5K? Price-check across three venues (STON.fi, DeDust, swap.coffee).
Final slippage <1%?
Gas buffer 0.5 TON in wallet?
Jetton contract address verified via tonscan?
Tx hash saved for accounting?

Sources

DeFiLlama: STON.fi, DeDust
STON.fi audit reports — guide.ston.fi
DeDust audit reports — docs.dedust.io
tonscan.org — contract address verification