ModelsAgree
← All leaderboards

Across Protocol

What ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini & Grok actually say · August 2026

Visit across.to

The verdict

Across Protocol appears in 3 AI-ranked categories — best position #1 for cross-chain intent infrastructure for swap developers.

Positioning brief — for the Across Protocol team

Why the models put Across Protocol at #1 for cross-chain intent infrastructure for swap developers

  • fast relayer-funded fills Claude · Gemini · GPT · Grokfast relayer-funded fills
  • co-authored ERC-7683 Claude · Gemini · GPT · Grokit co-authored ERC-7683
  • strong capital efficiency Gemini · GPTstrong capital efficiency
  • battle-tested intent-based bridging stack Claude · GrokThe most battle-tested intent-based bridging stack

What would move the rank — the models’ fix lines, unified

  • EVM-centric GPT · Claude · Gemini · GrokEVM-centric — weak fit if you need Solana, Bitcoin, or Cosmos routes
  • long-tail tokens can lack relayer liquidity Claude · Grokexotic long-tail tokens can lack relayer liquidity, forcing fallback paths.
  • production API use requires credentials GPTproduction API use requires credentials and an integrator ID.

Restructured from verbatim model output · nothing invented · every quote machine-verified

GPT #2Claude #1Gemini #1Grok #2

The most battle-tested intent-based bridging stack — its relayer/settlement model (fills in seconds, optimistic settlement via UMA) has years of mainnet volume, it co-authored ERC-7683 so integrations track the emerging standard, and its SDK/API plus "Across Settlement" let swap developers embed cross-chain fills without running solvers; assumes the developer targets EVM chains, where its coverage and solver depth are strongest.

Gemini Leads in capital efficiency and fast execution speed (fills in ~2-second average) within EVM L2s. Its co-creation of the ERC-7683 standard ensures a massive, interoperable solver network.

GPT Excellent execution on supported routes, with fast relayer-funded fills, native assets, strong capital efficiency, ERC-7683 alignment, destination actions, and a clean unified Swap API; near-tied with LI.FI when EVM-centric price and speed matter more than breadth.

Grok Pioneer of intent-based cross-chain (ERC-7683 co-author), proven high volume/fast EVM-to-EVM settlements (seconds via relayers/optimistic model), battle-tested security (high TVL, no exploits), solver competition; excellent for swap devs focused on reliable major asset transfers with strong developer docs and integration primitives.

Where Across Protocol falls short, per the models

  • GPT Its roughly two-dozen-chain footprint and EVM emphasis make it less suitable for broad non-EVM coverage, and production API use requires credentials and an integrator ID.
  • Claude EVM-centric — weak fit if you need Solana, Bitcoin, or Cosmos routes, and exotic long-tail tokens can lack relayer liquidity, forcing fallback paths.
  • Gemini Lacks native, non-EVM chain support (like Solana or Bitcoin) without relying on wrapper contracts or external bridge integrations.
  • Grok Primarily EVM-focused and strongest for specific high-liquidity pairs; less ideal for broadest non-EVM or volatile token depth.

Top alternatives per the models: LI.FI · deBridge · Relay · UniswapX

#1🌉 Best crypto bridge4/4 models · updated 2026-06-25
GPT #1Claude #1Gemini #1Grok #5

Best overall for routine transfers among major EVM chains: intent-based relayers deliver fast native-asset fills, pricing is usually competitive, and optimistic settlement avoids wrapped-token fragmentation; narrowly leads deBridge for typical EVM users

Claude Best-in-class for the most common practitioner need — fast, cheap canonical transfers between Ethereum and EVM L2s; intents/relayer model fronts capital for near-instant fills, top-tier capital efficiency and lowest fees, security anchored by UMA's optimistic oracle, no user-facing wrapped-asset risk; near-tie with Circle CCTP for the everyday USDC/ETH case, edged ahead on multi-asset coverage and usability.

Gemini Offers unmatched speed and cost efficiency for L2-to-L2 transfers using an intent-based architecture and UMA's optimistic oracle. It bypasses lock-and-mint risks entirely, delivering near-instant execution with low slippage.

Grok Solver-based optimistic model delivers fast, low-fee native asset transfers with audited reliability and strong performance for EVM chains.

Where Across Protocol falls short, per the models

  • GPT Coverage is less compelling outside its supported EVM-centric routes, and large transfers can be constrained by relayer liquidity
  • Claude EVM-centric — no first-class Solana/Cosmos/other non-EVM support, and very large transfers can be gated by available relayer liquidity.
  • Gemini It is optimized purely for token bridging and cannot handle generalized, programmable cross-chain message passing or state orchestration.
  • Grok Primarily focused on EVM-to-EVM with less broad non-EVM support; relies on relayer incentives and oracle for disputes.

Poll history — On this board 2 of 2 polls since Jun 25 · now #1

#5#1

Top alternatives per the models: Chainlink CCIP · deBridge · Wormhole · Axelar

Claude #1Gemini

The canonical intents settlement layer for cross-chain — co-author of ERC-7683, the emerging cross-chain intents standard, so building on it means building on the interface others converge to; solver network delivers fast, capital-efficient fills, and the SDK exposes a clean intent-submission/settlement flow rather than raw bridging. Near-tie with Li.Fi for the top spot — pick Across when you want native intent settlement semantics, Li.Fi when you want breadth of routes.

Where Across Protocol falls short, per the models

  • Claude Centered on transfer/bridge-style intents and largely EVM; it is not a full smart-account or non-EVM chain-abstraction toolkit, so complex multi-step "do X on chain B with funds from chain A" flows need composition on top.

Top alternatives per the models: Biconomy · Particle Network · NEAR · LI.FI

Head-to-head — how the models call it

Watch Across Protocol

Boards re-poll weekly and the models change their minds. One short email only when Across Protocol's standing moves — a rank change, a rival overtaking, or new reasoning from the models. Nothing otherwise.

Embed your ranking badge

Across Protocol ranks #1 for best cross-chain intent infrastructure for swap developers by AI-model consensus. Put the badge in your README, docs or site — it updates automatically as the models re-rank.

Across Protocol — ranked #1 for Best cross-chain intent infrastructure for swap developers by AI models on ModelsAgree
Markdown (README)
[![Across Protocol — ranked #1 for Best cross-chain intent infrastructure for swap developers by AI models on ModelsAgree](https://modelsagree.com/badge/across-protocol.svg)](https://modelsagree.com/best/best-cross-chain-intent-infrastructure-for-swap-developers?utm_source=badge&utm_medium=embed&utm_campaign=badge-across-protocol)
HTML
<a href="https://modelsagree.com/best/best-cross-chain-intent-infrastructure-for-swap-developers?utm_source=badge&utm_medium=embed&utm_campaign=badge-across-protocol"><img src="https://modelsagree.com/badge/across-protocol.svg" alt="Across Protocol — ranked #1 for Best cross-chain intent infrastructure for swap developers by AI models on ModelsAgree" height="28"></a>

Rankings are computed from what the models answer, re-polled on demand · raw reasoning shown verbatim · methodology