Cross-chain feels magical the first time you use it. You hit swap, your tokens leave one chain, then minutes later they appear on another. Between those two moments lies a mesh of validators, routers, liquidity pools, and relayers that all expect to be paid. If you use Anyswap or its successor stack under the Multichain brand, the fee picture can look murky until you break it down piece by piece.
I have bridged stablecoins, governance tokens, and NFTs across EVM and non‑EVM networks long enough to see the same pain points repeat. Most users underestimate not just how many fees exist, but how they stack in edge cases, how gas spikes hit different chains at different times, and how route choice can quietly double your cost. This guide unpacks the fee components you’ll encounter when using the Anyswap bridge, the Anyswap exchange interface for swaps, or related Anyswap DeFi routes that move assets across networks.
A quick note on naming: Anyswap rebranded to Multichain in 2021. Many users and older docs still say Anyswap, and the habit stuck. You’ll see both terms below, because the fee structures people ask about often reference “Anyswap cross‑chain” or “Anyswap protocol,” even though the production routers and UI may wear Multichain branding today.
The layers of cost in an Anyswap cross‑chain move
A cross‑chain transfer is not a single “fee.” It is a bundle of line items that trigger as your transaction leaves Chain A, gets validated and relayed, and then mints or releases funds on Chain B. On a clean run with no routing detours, you will usually see these components:
- Source chain gas: paid in the native token of the network you are sending from. This covers the contract call to lock, burn, or message the bridge. Expect small on L2s like Arbitrum or Optimism, larger on Ethereum when blocks are busy. Protocol or bridge fee: a percentage or flat fee the Anyswap protocol takes for handling the transfer. Historically, common ranges were 0.1% to 0.25% for many tokens, with minimums to avoid dust economics. Exact figures depend on the token and route. Relayer or validator fee: compensation for the off‑chain work of observing the source chain transaction and submitting proof or messages to the destination chain. This can be rolled into the protocol fee or shown separately, and it can vary with congestion. Destination chain gas: paid implicitly by the bridge or deducted from the amount you receive, depending on the design. Some routes require you to hold the destination chain’s native token to claim, others do not. On EVM L2s this is usually pennies, on Ethereum it can be several dollars during peak hours. Liquidity or slippage costs: optional but common if your route uses liquidity pools for “any token to any chain” swaps. If the asset on the destination chain is a canonical or wrapped variant, and the pool is imbalanced, you may pay with price impact. That is not a line‑item fee, but it reduces the amount you receive as surely as a fee does.
If you perform an Anyswap swap that is not just a bridge, you inherit the same list plus a standard DEX‑style trading fee at the pool where the swap occurs before or after bridging. In practice, if you move USDC from Polygon to BNB Chain and end up with BUSD on arrival, you may pay one trading fee on Polygon, then the bridge fee, then a destination execution cost.
What determines the total you’ll pay
Two users can bridge the same token across the same route and still pay different totals, simply because of timing and configuration. The big knobs:
Network congestion and base fees. Even if protocol fees are stable, gas dominates on Ethereum. If base fees sit at 20 to 40 gwei, a simple bridge call might cost 4 to 10 dollars. When the mempool surges, I have seen users pay 20 to 40 dollars just to originate the transaction, with a similar hit on the destination chain if execution is not subsidized.
Token and route specifics. The Anyswap protocol supports multiple modes: lock‑and‑mint with wrapped tokens, burn‑and‑release for canonical bridged assets, and liquidity‑based swaps. Each token’s fee schedule can differ because the economic risks differ. Wrapped tokens often have lower percent fees but stricter minimums. Exotic or low‑liquidity tokens can have higher fees or pauses entirely.
Minimum fee floors. A 0.1% protocol fee on a tiny transfer can be uneconomic for relayers. So bridges impose minimums, for example a flat 0.5 to 3 USDC equivalent. If you send 10 dollars worth of a token and the minimum fee is 1 dollar, that is 10% effective cost before gas. Micro‑bridging almost always costs more than you expect.
Destination execution model. Some routes batch or subsidize destination gas. Others subtract a standard amount from what you receive to cover the cost to mint or release funds. On gas‑heavy chains, your net amount can vary by a few dollars depending on how the destination call is constructed.
Slippage and pool depth. If the route relies on liquidity pools, your price impact can exceed the nominal fee when the pool is skewed or shallow. Stablecoin pairs usually behave well, but I have seen 30 to 50 basis points of slippage on medium trades during volatile windows. If you cannot see or set slippage tolerance, assume more volatility risk and avoid trading into thin pools.
Benchmarking common scenarios
Numbers fluctuate, but ballpark estimates help with planning. The figures below assume typical conditions and modest volatility. Treat them as guides, not quotes.
Stablecoin from Ethereum to a major L2. On a normal day with 15 to 25 gwei, source gas might run 4 to 8 dollars. Protocol fee commonly around 0.1% to 0.2% with a minimum near 1 to 3 dollars. Destination execution on L2 is usually cents to under a dollar, often covered in the route. Overall: around 8 to 15 dollars on a 1,000 dollar transfer, or 8 to 15 basis points net, plus gas volatility.
Stablecoin from Polygon to BNB Chain. Source gas is cheap, often under 0.10 dollars. Protocol fee again roughly 0.1% to 0.2% with a minimum. Destination execution on BNB Chain might be under 0.30 dollars. Net cost often sits close to the protocol fee floor if the transfer is small. On a 500 dollar move, paying a 1 to 2 dollar minimum plus cents of gas is common.
Volatile token from Ethereum to Avalanche. Add source gas of 5 to 12 dollars during mild congestion. Protocol fee near the standard percent or higher if the token is riskier. If a liquidity pool hop is involved, slippage of 10 to 30 basis points can appear in stressed markets. Net cost on a 1,000 dollar transfer might land between 15 and 35 dollars inclusive of slippage.
Small transfers under 200 dollars. Minimum fees dominate. Even with cheap gas on the source chain, you may pay 1 to 3 dollars for the bridge fee plus execution costs. On Ethereum source, add several dollars of gas. Effective cost can blow past 2 to 5 percent. Unless timing is critical, it often makes sense to batch into a larger transfer.
How the interface shows or hides fees
Different front ends expose Anyswap cross‑chain routes. The Multichain app historically displayed a bridge fee estimate, the receive amount, and sometimes a tooltip that explained the minimums. Gas estimates were visible in your wallet rather than the UI, and destination gas handling was not always explicit.
Wallet aggregators and DEX routers often wrap Anyswap routes. They may show a single net amount you will receive. That is convenient, but you lose the breakdown. When I audit costs for desks or power users, I simulate the transaction on a test wallet first, then check the call data to see whether destination gas is deducted, whether the route uses liquidity pools, and whether the fee percent matches documented schedules.
If the UI does not show the fee percent, compare the send amount with the quoted receive amount for a stable asset, subtract an allowance for destination gas, and derive the implied percent. For example, send 1,000 USDC, receive 998.5 USDC on the destination chain, with an estimated 0.20 dollars of destination gas. Your implied fee is roughly 0.13%. If the token is not stable, this arithmetic gets noisy and you need a pool price snapshot.
The difference between bridging and swapping through Anyswap exchange
Anyswap built bridges first. Then it layered swap functionality to let you arrive with a different asset than you sent. From a user’s standpoint, that feels like one action. Under the hood, you are trading on a source chain pool, paying a DEX‑style fee, then bridging the output. Or you are bridging first, then trading at the destination. Either method can be chosen by the router based on pool depth and gas.
A source‑first swap tends to make sense when source gas is cheap and destination gas is expensive, or when the destination pool is shallow. A destination‑first swap can diminish price impact if the destination pool has better depth. As fees go, you now pay:
- One trading fee in the 0.2% to 0.3% range common to many pools, sometimes less for stables. The bridge fee for the cross‑chain leg. Both gas events: source contract call and destination execution.
This is where many users feel “double fees.” They are, but for different services. If cost matters more than convenience, and you are comfortable managing both ends, you can sometimes beat the bundled route by doing a pure bridge into the destination, then swapping yourself on the best local DEX. That gives you control over slippage and potentially lower trading fees if another DEX route is better.
Token approvals, revocations, and the hidden cost of hygiene
Every first‑time swap or bridge for a given token on a chain requires an approval transaction. That costs gas. On Ethereum, approvals can be a few dollars on quiet days and much more when gas spikes. Two tips:
Use targeted approvals. Instead of unlimited approvals, set the allowance close to the amount you plan to move. It costs the same in gas, but narrows your risk exposure if a contract is compromised. Power users sometimes batch approvals using a transaction builder to shave overhead.
Clean up when you are done. Revoking stale approvals on older router contracts is good hygiene, even though it costs gas. I keep a quarterly maintenance session to scan allowances with a tool and revoke anything I no longer use, especially on large‑cap tokens held in trading wallets.
These costs are not bridge fees, but they are part of the all‑in cost of moving assets cross‑chain safely.
Why certain tokens cost more to move
From a protocol risk perspective, not all assets are equal. For a wrapped token route, the bridge holds collateral or relies on mint rules. Illiquid or fragile tokens increase the chance that a depeg or market shock leaves liquidity providers and relayers exposed during a cross‑chain transfer window. To compensate, fee percentages can be higher, and limits per transaction or per day can be tighter.
Stablecoins are the cheapest to move, assuming they are established variants on both chains. Blue‑chip governance tokens with deep liquidity come next. Meme tokens and newly issued assets, especially those with restrictive transfer taxes or fee‑on‑transfer mechanics, can cost more or be unsupported. If you see unusually high fee quotes on an Anyswap swap route for a token that should be simple, check whether the token uses transfer taxes or has a non‑standard ERC‑20 implementation. Those quirks often ripple into bridges and inflates the operational burden.
Timing strategies that materially cut fees
I have cut cross‑chain costs by a third to a half with nothing more than timing and route selection. The tactics are simple, but they add up:
- Watch gas windows. For Ethereum, UTC late night and early morning hours, especially weekends, tend to be cheaper. If you do not need instant settlement, wait for base fees to settle under your target threshold. Favor chains with light congestion for the source leg. If you can originate from Polygon or Arbitrum with the same net result, you might save enough on source gas to offset a slightly higher route fee. Avoid micro‑transfers. Aggregate into fewer, larger moves to amortize minimums. For recurring payments or weekly portfolio rebalancing, set a floor size below which you do not bridge. Simulate alternative routes. Aggregators sometimes pick convenience over cost. Price check a pure bridge plus local DEX swap against an integrated cross‑chain swap. You might find a 20 to 50 basis point improvement on mid‑sized trades. Respect volatility. When the market whipsaws, slippage protection matters. If stablecoin pools are unbalanced, your “fee” becomes price impact. Wait for pools to heal or use a different pairing.
These habits turn into meaningful savings once your volume grows, and they reduce the annoyance of seeing a third of your transfer evaporate into gas and fees.
Security costs are still costs
Cheap is only good if your funds arrive. Externalized risk often hides as “low fee” marketing. Anyswap and Multichain routes historically balanced speed, decentralization, and throughput using a mix of MPC validators, on‑chain contracts, and liquidity networks. When you evaluate the fee on a given route, ask what you are paying for.
A route that subsidizes destination gas might cap throughput and introduce batching delays in peak periods. A route that offers ultra‑low percent fees can recover revenue by widening spreads in a paired liquidity pool. A route that promises near‑instant finality may require multiple relayers to sign quickly, raising validator compensation and pushing fees up. You pay somehow. If a path seems unusually cheap, look for hidden price impact, token wrapping risk, or throttled limits that could strand you mid‑journey.
From a personal risk budget, I assign a soft premium to battle‑tested routes. If a novel, thinly audited path is 10 basis points cheaper, I usually skip it for size. Gas and fees are recoverable costs. Bridge risk is tail risk.
Edge cases that trip up fee expectations
A few recurring surprises are worth flagging.
Crossing to non‑EVM chains. When moving from an EVM chain to a non‑EVM like Solana, fees reflect different execution environments. The bridge may collect a higher flat fee to cover relayer work and destination account rent or overhead. On the way back, you face a distinct set of costs that do not map 1‑to‑1 with EVM gas.
NFT bridging and special token standards. ERC‑721 and ERC‑1155 bridges add metadata handling, mint or lock logic, and sometimes per‑token surcharges. Expect a higher flat component even for low‑value items. I have paid more to move an inexpensive NFT than it was worth just to consolidate inventory on one chain.
Paused or degraded routes. If a route is under maintenance or liquidity is thin, the interface may still quote a fee but then fail at claim time, forcing a retry or a support process. The cost here is not just fees but time and potential price drift on the token you intend to receive.
Fee‑on‑transfer tokens. These deduct a tax on each transfer. If the bridge contract is not aware of or compatible with that tax, you can end up with a shortfall that looks like a fee but is actually the token’s internal mechanism. Many bridges decline to support these assets for that AnySwap reason.
Wallet settings and priority gas. If your wallet is set to aggressive gas defaults, you may overspend on the source leg, especially during lulls. Check base fee and priority tips manually or use a gas oracle before confirming.
How to audit an Anyswap cross‑chain transfer before you click
A brief checklist helps you avoid surprises without drowning in details.
- Quote sanity check. Enter the amount and compare send versus receive. If the implied percent looks higher than the published schedule for that token, investigate which step adds spread. If the UI shows a minimum fee, consider increasing your size to reduce the effective rate. Gas estimation. Open your wallet’s advanced view and note the base fee and priority tip. If the source gas is more than a few dollars beyond your budget, consider waiting. If destination gas is not explicit, mentally reserve up to 0.50 to 1.50 dollars on L2s and more on Ethereum for medium‑complex claims. Route visibility. If possible, view the route details. Will it swap on source or destination? Which pool or DEX is used? If the details are opaque, run a competing quote with a DeFi aggregator that shows leg‑by‑leg routes. Slippage control. Check if you can set slippage. For stablecoins, 0.1% is often plenty in normal conditions. For volatile tokens, widen a bit, but be wary of more than 0.5% unless you know the pool depth. Approvals. If first time on that contract, factor a separate approval transaction. If you have an old unlimited approval to a deprecated router, consider revoking it and approving the current contract with a tighter allowance.
This process rarely takes more than a minute and pays for itself the first time you avoid a poorly priced route.
Practical examples from real use
Moving 2,500 USDC from Ethereum to Arbitrum on a quiet Sunday. Source gas was 6.20 dollars. The bridge fee quoted 0.12%, which is 3 dollars net of a 1 dollar minimum. Destination execution was covered. Receive amount: 2,490.80, for a total cost just under 9.20 dollars, or 36.8 basis points. If I had waited two hours later when base fees halved, total cost would have dropped to about 24 basis points.
Bridging 300 MATIC from Polygon to BNB Chain during an NFT mint craze. Source gas negligible, under 0.05 dollars. The route switched to a liquidity‑based path with a 0.18% fee and price impact around 0.12%. Destination execution cost about 0.20 dollars. Effective cost sat near 0.50%, which felt high for a small transfer. I should have combined it with a later move.
Swapping 5 ETH on Ethereum to AVAX on Avalanche via an integrated cross‑chain swap. The front end quoted a net receive amount that implied roughly 0.25% total fees, excluding gas. Source gas came to 18 dollars due to transient congestion, destination execution to 1.10 dollars. I compared it to bridging WETH then swapping on Trader Joe. The manual route saved about 0.08% in trading fees but required two transactions and more attention. For that size, I paid the premium for convenience.
How Anyswap’s multichain model influences fees
Anyswap’s core idea was to connect many networks with a uniform set of primitives, rather than Anyswap exchange bespoke bridges for each pair. That design trades some per‑route optimization for breadth. Fees reflect that.
First, the protocol needs sustainable validator incentives across every supported network. Networks with lower activity may require higher minimums to cover fixed relayer costs. Second, wrapped assets and canonical assets coexist. Where a canonical bridge exists with low fees, Anyswap often routes to it or around it, introducing extra steps that still net the user a better experience. Those steps carry costs that must be recouped. Third, upgrades and security reviews across dozens of chains slow down radical fee experiments. The protocol errs on the side of predictable percent fees and minimums rather than razor‑thin promotional pricing that could fluctuate weekly.
From a user perspective, you benefit from consistent expectations. Once you internalize the typical 0.1% to 0.25% bracket and know your source and destination gas ranges, you can forecast total costs within a few dollars most of the time.
When the cheapest option is not Anyswap
Even with good economics, Anyswap is not always the least‑cost route. A few alternatives sometimes win:
Native canonical bridges. Moving ETH to Arbitrum or Optimism via the official bridges can be cheaper in fees, though slower for withdrawals. Stablecoins with official cross‑chain issuers often have favored routes with subsidized costs.
Specialized stablecoin routers. Some protocols specialize in stable‑to‑stable moves with ultra‑low spreads. If you only need USDC on the destination, a stable‑only bridge may beat a generalist like Anyswap on fees.
CEX hop. For large sizes, funding an exchange on Chain A and withdrawing on Chain B can be cheaper and safer from a retail perspective, provided you accept custodial risk for the interim. Withdrawal fees and minimums apply, and timing matters.
I keep these options in mind, especially for non‑urgent stablecoin moves or when Ethereum gas is abnormally high.
Final thoughts on budgeting and best practice
Cross‑chain will always cost something. The trick is to separate what is controllable from what is structural. You cannot change a protocol’s fee schedule in the moment, but you can choose your timing, your route, your trade sizing, and your approval hygiene.
Before any significant move, write down a target all‑in cost in basis points. If you are bridging stablecoins between EVM chains, 15 to 40 basis points is a reasonable target in normal conditions. On Ethereum source during busy hours, raise that to 40 to 100 basis points unless you wait. For volatile tokens where slippage might bite, price‑check alternatives and treat price impact as part of the fee.
The magic feeling of seeing tokens appear on another chain is worth preserving, but it should not come with mystery. Once you understand the Anyswap cross‑chain fee stack and the practical levers you control, your transfers feel less like blind leaps and more like well‑priced logistics. That confidence is the point. You keep more of your assets, and you spend less time guessing what happened to the missing few dollars.