The largest NEAR Intents referral sources and affiliates by sampled cross chain swap volume.
Top referral sources
| Referral source | Volume | Swaps |
|---|---|---|
| swapkit | $5.0M | 8,413 |
| zodl | $3.0M | 211 |
| new.inten...ral.near | $2.9M | 472 |
| lifi | $2.8M | 1,795 |
| rango | $2.3M | 2,655 |
Top affiliates
| Affiliate | Volume | Swaps |
|---|---|---|
| buybacks....ure.near | $5.9M | 3,241 |
| zodlswaps.near | $3.0M | 211 |
| lifi_int.near | $2.8M | 1,795 |
| trustswapkit.near | $1.7M | 5,293 |
| swapkit.near | $1.7M | 2,277 |
Referrals vs affiliates, explained
Both identify the application that routed a swap — the wallets, aggregators, and interfaces that plug into NEAR Intents. The referral tag is set by the routing interface itself (SwapKit, Rango, LI.FI, and peers); affiliates are fee recipients attached to swaps. Together they map the distribution layer: NEAR Intents is infrastructure, and this leaderboard shows who actually brings the users.
The concentration is informative. A protocol whose volume flows through many independent interfaces has real integration demand; the spread across 5 tracked referral sources here — from cross-chain aggregators to Telegram bots — is one of NEAR Intents' quieter strengths. Interface-level attribution like this is data most explorers don't publish at all.
Frequently asked questions
- Which app routes the most NEAR Intents volume?
- swapkit currently leads with $5.0M in sampled routed volume.
- How do affiliates earn on NEAR Intents?
- Interfaces can attach an optional affiliate fee to swaps they route; solvers quote all-in prices that include it. The leaderboard ranks recipients by the volume of swaps carrying their tag.
- Can my app integrate NEAR Intents?
- Yes — the protocol is permissionless to integrate, and routing SDKs like SwapKit and LI.FI already carry it. Integrations appear on this leaderboard automatically once they route volume.