Rift vs. NEAR Intents
Rift Research
Last updated
TLDR: Rift is an aggregator with best price execution. It includes NEAR Intents and all other supported venues in its routes. Rift adds 0 fee on the route, so you are guaranteed at least as good a rate as going to NEAR Intents directly. If NEAR Intents has the best route, Rift gives you that route with no added fee.
Rift is an aggregator on Bitcoin, Ethereum, Arbitrum, Base, Hyperliquid, RobinhoodChain, Tempo, XLayer, Ink and Pharos. NEAR Intents is a solver network that sources liquidity across a wide set of assets and chains.
Short version
| Dimension | Rift | NEAR Intents |
|---|---|---|
| Role | Aggregator | Intent + solver network |
| Fee | Zero added fee on every route | Solver spread |
| Chains / assets | Bitcoin, Ethereum, Arbitrum, Base, Hyperliquid, RobinhoodChain, Tempo, XLayer, Ink and Pharos | Broad, including non-EVM and long-tail pairs |
| Settlement | Native | Native |
| Trust model | TEE | Atomic via intents.near verifier + solver capital |
| Best for | Best price execution on supported chains | Pairs and chains outside Rift’s set |
Where each wins
NEAR Intents wins when:
- You need assets or chains Rift does not support
- Solvers can source better liquidity on unusual pairs
- You want a pure intent/solver experience rather than an aggregator
Rift wins when:
- Your route is on Rift’s supported chains
- You want best price execution across multiple venues, including NEAR Intents, with zero added fee
Key differences
NEAR Intents competes as a venue/rail. Solvers bring capital and fill after the user deposits.
Rift is an aggregator. It includes NEAR Intents in its venue set. When NEAR Intents wins, Rift routes through it and you receive that rate with no added fee.
When to use which
- Use NEAR Intents for long-tail or non-supported-chain routes Rift cannot reach.
- Use Rift for routes on its supported chains when you want best price execution at zero added fee.