Tokenized equities trade in dozens of pools that disagree. Vunix reads them as one book, quotes every venue at your actual size, and reverts any fill a single venue would have beaten.
The problem
Sorting a book by price is what “best bid and offer” means. Here is 
NVDA against USDG, sorted exactly that way — beside what each venue can absorb before it moves 1%, and what $10,000 would actually get you there.
| Venue | Advertised price | Depth to 1% | $10,000 fills |
|---|---|---|---|
| v4 · 0.008%not routable | $225.1531 | <$1 | 0.000660 sh |
| v4 · 0.300% | $225.3761 | $35,826 | 44.154 sh |
| v4 · 1.000%not routable | $225.4018 | $38 | 0.5553 sh |
| v4 · 0.037%not routable | $225.7051 | $509 | 40.333 sh |
| v3 · 0.050% | $225.7977 | $513,112 | 44.261 sh |
| v3 · 0.300%not routable | $226.0235 | $2,368 | 42.926 sh |
The venue marked not routable advertises the best price in this book on $0 of depth, and fills 0.000660 shares. Any router that sorts by price sends your whole order into it. This book shows every venue on the chain — including the ones we refuse to trade on, because hiding them would hide what you are being protected from.
Read from chain state at block 53,253,320 on 2026-09-03 07:48 UTC, 2h ago. This table is a snapshot and does not move on its own. The quote in the panel above is not — it calls the router on-chain the moment you ask for it.
What it costs
67,042× apart. The venue on the left is the one advertising 29 basis points cheaper — it works out at $15,146,944 a share against $225.93. Both figures come from the same quoter the router runs on-chain, against live state at block 53,253,320. Vunix quotes every venue and routes to the one that can pay.
1,797 v4 pools touch AAPL across 101 hook contracts, and four contracts are named "NVIDIA · Robinhood Token". Only one is NVIDIA. Assets are identified by ABI, and a venue must be unhooked, under 1% fee, and deep enough to absorb $2,500.
Not spot. Vunix walks each venue’s real liquidity curve tick by tick for the size you are trading, the same way the pool will when it fills you. The identical walk exists in TypeScript and in Solidity, and they agree to the wei.
One venue, or several when splitting genuinely wins. At retail size it usually does not — the cheapest venue is normally the deepest — so the solver picks one place and says so rather than carving the order up for show.
Before executing, the contract re-quotes every registered venue at your size. After executing, it compares. If any single venue would have done better, the transaction reverts and you keep your money.
Across the chain
Every indexed asset quoted on more than one venue, widest disagreement first. The megacaps are tight. The gaps are in the names nobody is watching.
| Asset | Venues | Cheapest | Dearest | Spread | Deepest venue |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SPCX | 4 | $140.86 | $141.99 | 80 bps | $286,577 |
 COIN | 2 | $176.67 | $177.88 | 68 bps | $13,222 |
 AMD | 2 | $455.53 | $458.27 | 60 bps | $18,330 |
 NFLX | 3 | $82.72 | $83.22 | 60 bps | $8,719 |
 PLTR | 2 | $169.27 | $170.16 | 53 bps | $68,417 |
 INTC | 3 | $90.16 | $90.61 | 50 bps | $3,108 |
 META | 3 | $595.46 | $598.24 | 47 bps | $18,847 |
 AAPL | 4 | $324.12 | $325.46 | 41 bps | $159,160 |
 MSTR | 2 | $124.65 | $125.14 | 40 bps | $28,490 |
| NVDA | 6 | $225.15 | $226.02 | 39 bps | $513,112 |
 SLV | 2 | $59.46 | $59.66 | 33 bps | $18,547 |
 GOOGL | 4 | $338.36 | $338.97 | 18 bps | $70,949 |
 GLD | 4 | $405.10 | $405.76 | 16 bps | $318,382 |
 SPY | 4 | $766.20 | $767.37 | 15 bps | $3,398,279 |
 QQQ | 4 | $709.50 | $710.20 | 10 bps | $227,878 |
 TSLA | 2 | $359.08 | $359.37 | 8 bps | $36,741 |
 MSFT | 3 | $497.81 | $498.16 | 7 bps | $48,170 |
 AMZN | 2 | $256.21 | $256.37 | 6 bps | $37,050 |
FAQ
A displayed price is the price for an infinitely small trade. The moment you buy, you move it — and how far depends entirely on how much money is in the pool, which the price does not tell you.
The pools above have quoted within a few basis points of each other while differing by orders of magnitude in what they can absorb.
Precisely this: no single registered venue could have filled your order better. The contract quotes them all at your size before executing, then checks the result. If it was beaten, it reverts.
It is deliberately not a claim of global optimality across every possible split — that is an exponential search. It is the claim you care about and the one a contract can actually prove.
No. One transaction: tokens enter, every leg executes inside a single Uniswap v4 unlock, and the output lands with you — or the whole thing reverts. The router holds nothing at rest, and a test asserts it retains no balance after any fill.
Usually not, and we would rather say so. At $1,000 to $100,000 the split solver earns 0.0 basis points on every asset tested, because the cheapest venue is nearly always also the deepest.
Splitting pays only on orders large enough to exhaust the best venue. The value of routing is picking the right venue, not carving the order up.
The proof covers venues in the registry. If a pool is not on that list, nothing is proven about it — and the list is curated, so you are trusting that curation.
The contract is unaudited. The owner can add and remove venues; entries are validated against the canonical Uniswap factory, so a compromised owner cannot point your order at their own contract, but they can still choose which real pools are routable.
Liquidity concentrates where attention does. Megacaps have deep pools that arbitrage keeps aligned. Thin names have shallow pools nobody bothers to arbitrage — and that is exactly where a fill goes wrong quietly.
One pool. A Uniswap v3 pool at a specific fee tier, or a v4 pool identified by its key. The same pair commonly exists at four fee tiers across both protocols, and each is a separate market with its own price and its own depth.
