PancakeSwap vs Raydium
Zero of fourteen models named PancakeSwap first on the direct prompt; zero named Raydium. PancakeSwap was named by fourteen of the fourteen models and Raydium by ten and PancakeSwap carries 30 labels and Raydium 14, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in one category this edition.
Raydium
criticized challengerNamed in one category this edition.
Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all fourteen models, for a mid-market B2B company; rank is within the category; every quote names the model and the prompt it came from. Both figures come from the digital employee experience page.
By framing
PancakeSwapFirst choices, of fourteen modelsRaydiumAcross every category in the October 2026 Edition, PancakeSwap and Raydium were named in the same answer fifteen times, of the 62 answers naming PancakeSwap and the 25 naming Raydium. In those answers Raydium took the first choice zero times and PancakeSwap four.
Every model, every framing
| Model | DirectRA | ParaphraseRA | ComparativeRA | Budget-constrainedRA | Scale-constrainedRA | NegativeRA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | | RA | ||||
| GPT-5.4 mini | | |||||
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | RA | | ||||
| Perplexity Sonar | | | ||||
| Grok 4.1 Fast | RA | | RA | |||
| Mistral Small | | |||||
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | | | RA | |||
| Llama 4 Maverick | ||||||
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | RA | RA | ||||
| Kimi K2 | | | RA | |||
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | RA | |||||
| MiniMax M2.5 | | RA | ||||
| GPT-6 Luna | ||||||
| Muse Glimmer 30B | | | |
PancakeSwapRA Raydium first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, PancakeSwap on the left and Raydium on the right.The direct prompt
Neither was named
14 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.Bold names in an answer are the products the judge labeled a first choice; a model naming several gives each of them that label. The full answer text for every row is in the record.
By buyer segment
PancakeSwap9%#2 of 9PancakeSwap10%#2 of 12PancakeSwap0%#– of 7What the models said about PancakeSwap
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Four of five in this category shown.
“Projects can launch on platforms like Uniswap or PancakeSwap without rigorous vetting” Muse Glimmer 30B · negative prompt · soft negative
“the cheapest, low‑barrier path is to deploy your token on BNB Chain (PancakeSwap) or Polygon (QuickSwap)” MiniMax M2.5 · budget prompt · first choice
“Stick to well-established, heavily used DEXs like Uniswap, PancakeSwap, Jupiter, or Raydium” Qwen 3.7 Flash · negative prompt · first choice
“PancakeSwap stands out as one of the best DEX platforms for a company with a limited budget.” Grok 4.1 Fast · budget prompt · first choice
What the models said about Raydium
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.
“Raydium: ~93% of liquidity pools exhibit rug pull patterns” Kimi K2 · negative prompt · hard negative
“up to 93% of its ~388,000 analyzed liquidity pools were flagged as suspected rug pulls” DeepSeek V4 Flash · negative prompt · soft negative
“Ultra‑cheap, but development environment is different (Rust) & tooling less EVM‑like” MiniMax M2.5 · budget prompt · soft negative
“Best for Ultra-Low Fees & Speed: Solana Ecosystem ... Platform: Raydium (for liquidity pools) or Jupiter (for swapping/execution).” Qwen 3.7 Flash · budget prompt · first choice
“Stick to well-established, heavily used DEXs like Uniswap, PancakeSwap, Jupiter, or Raydium” Qwen 3.7 Flash · negative prompt · first choice
“Raydium offers fast execution and low transaction costs of fractions of a cent on Solana, combined with deep liquidity.” Claude Haiku 4.5 · budget prompt · alternative
Comparisons are drawn for the top eight products in each category, each against each. The output is the models' output; nothing here is a recommendation by the index.