StellarX provides a wallet interface to Stellar’s order books and liquidity pools. Ultra Stellar currently lists it among its products, while the published user agreement still carries a 15 February 2019 date and names Diamond Ltd. Trading an issued asset therefore requires two separate checks: the interface’s terms and the issuer’s redemption, identity and transfer conditions.[4][2][1]
Markets & services
Sections ↑Trading and funding surfaces
| Item | Published terms |
|---|---|
| Order books | Access to Stellar’s public marketplaceSource 4Source 2Source 7 |
| AMMs | Pool swaps and liquidity participationSource 4Source 2Source 7 |
| Assets | Stellar-native and issued token representationsSource 4Source 2Source 7 |
| On/off ramps | Bank, card and crypto routes advertised by Ultra Stellar; provider conditions applySource 4Source 2Source 7 |
Order book versus liquidity pool
| Item | Published terms |
|---|---|
| Order-book execution | Depends on available counterparties and pricesSource 7 |
| AMM execution | Draws on pool balances and its pricing ruleSource 7 |
| Routing | Native path payments can use pools when their rate is betterSource 7 |
| LP position | Receives a share of pool economics and bears changing asset exposureSource 7 |
Asset identity and disclosure
| Item | Published terms |
|---|---|
| Ticker | A label alone is insufficient to identify an issued assetSource 2 |
| Issuer account | Identifies the specific claim and its issuerSource 2 |
| Asset information | StellarX says issuer-supplied information may be incompleteSource 2 |
| Interface inclusion | Does not mean StellarX has verified backing or approved the assetSource 2 |
Fees & commercial terms
Sections ↑Costs to separate
| Item | Published terms |
|---|---|
| Interface | Published trading guidance promotes zero transaction feesSource 2Source 5Source 7 |
| Network | Stellar still charges XLM for ledger inclusionSource 2Source 5Source 7 |
| Native AMM | 0.30% pool charge on relevant swapsSource 2Source 5Source 7 |
| Issuer/ramp | Deposit, redemption and conversion fees vary by providerSource 2Source 5Source 7 |
Network-fee calculation
| Item | Published terms |
|---|---|
| Minimum inclusion rate | 100 stroops, or 0.00001 XLM, per operationSource 5 |
| Multiple operations | Inclusion charge scales with operation countSource 5 |
| Busy network | Effective fee can rise during surge pricingSource 5 |
| Smart contracts | Resource charges apply in addition to inclusion feesSource 5 |
Illustrative cost arithmetic
| Item | Published terms |
|---|---|
| One classic operation at the minimum | 0.00001 XLM inclusion feeSource 5Source 7 |
| Five classic operations at the minimum | 0.00005 XLM inclusion feeSource 5Source 7 |
| 1,000 tokens entering a 0.30% pool-fee calculation | 3 tokens as the pool fee componentSource 5Source 7 |
Network-fee gift in the dated agreement
| Item | Published terms |
|---|---|
| Status | Discretionary reimbursement, not an unconditional promiseSource 1 |
| Published limit | Up to 5,000 successful operations per weekSource 1 |
| Timing | Batched gifts can be delayed by weeksSource 1 |
| Change rights | Programme, scope and eligibility can change or stopSource 1 |
Deposits, withdrawals & settlement
Sections ↑Wallet funding requirements
| Item | Published terms |
|---|---|
| Native balance | Stellar publishes a 1 XLM basic account minimumSource 6Source 5Source 9 |
| Additional entries | Trustlines and other account entries can require extra reservesSource 6Source 5Source 9 |
| Transaction fees | Spendable XLM must also cover the applicable feeSource 6Source 5Source 9 |
| Reserve distinction | A required balance is different from an irreversible trading chargeSource 6Source 5Source 9 |
Issued-asset withdrawal checks
| Item | Published terms |
|---|---|
| Destination | Must support the same Stellar asset and issuerSource 2Source 4 |
| Redemption | Governed by issuer or anchor termsSource 2Source 4 |
| Off-chain payout | May need KYC, banking details and a minimum amountSource 2Source 4 |
| Completion | Blockchain settlement alone does not prove cash reached a bank accountSource 2Source 4 |
Path-payment failure examples
| Item | Published terms |
|---|---|
| Too few offers | Insufficient conversion liquidity can prevent paymentSource 3 |
| Destination/trustline | Recipient must be able to hold the assetSource 3 |
| Minimum received | A strict-send path fails when the destination amount is too smallSource 3 |
| Fee | Transaction and operation-result codes identify the actual failureSource 3 |
Custody & asset handling
Sections ↑Responsibility for assets
| Item | Published terms |
|---|---|
| Private key | Controlled through the user’s wallet arrangementSource 2Source 7 |
| StellarX | Guidelines say it stores neither secret keys nor assetsSource 2Source 7 |
| Issuer | Responsible for the underlying promise of an issued tokenSource 2Source 7 |
| Pool | Holds supplied liquidity under the network’s AMM rulesSource 2Source 7 |
Issuer controls
| Item | Published terms |
|---|---|
| Authorisation | Issuers can require approval of a trustlineSource 9Source 8 |
| Revocation | Applicable issuer flags can restrict asset useSource 9Source 8 |
| Clawback | Available only for appropriately enabled assets/trustlinesSource 9Source 8 |
| XLM | Native XLM has no issuing account and cannot use issuer clawbackSource 9Source 8 |
Recovery and market controls
| Item | Published terms |
|---|---|
| Lost credentials | StellarX says it cannot recover access when necessary secrets/recovery information are lostSource 2Source 1 |
| Compromised keys | An attacker may transfer assets irreversiblySource 2Source 1 |
| Suspicious tokens | Interface can disable access to a tokenSource 2Source 1 |
| Network effect | Hiding a token in one interface does not remove it from StellarSource 2Source 1 |
Client eligibility & restrictions
Sections ↑Published access restrictions
| Item | Published terms |
|---|---|
| Age | At least 18; higher local minimum may applySource 1Source 2 |
| Named exclusions | 2019 agreement lists Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Sudan, Syria and CrimeaSource 1Source 2 |
| Other checks | Asset issuers and funding providers have separate conditionsSource 1Source 2 |
| Document date | The list is the interface’s published contractual text, not a current summary of sanctions lawSource 1Source 2 |
Support & contacts
Sections ↑Published contacts and appropriate enquiry
| Item | Published terms |
|---|---|
| Product support | [email protected]Source 1Source 2 |
| Legal terms | [email protected]Source 1Source 2 |
| Issuer problem | Contact the issuer for backing, redemption or transfer restrictionsSource 1Source 2 |
| Key recovery | Support cannot replace missing signing credentialsSource 1Source 2 |
Authorisations & registrations
Sections ↑Permissions and protection scope
| Item | Published terms |
|---|---|
| Product affiliation | Ultra Stellar lists StellarX as a productSource 4Source 1Source 2 |
| Agreement jurisdiction | Published 2019 document selects Bermuda law/arbitrationSource 4Source 1Source 2 |
| Financial permission | Neither fact identifies a current exchange or custody authorisationSource 4Source 1Source 2 |
| Asset protection | No universal reserve guarantee or compensation scheme follows from using StellarSource 4Source 1Source 2 |
Operator & entity scope
Sections ↑Operator chronology
| Item | Published terms |
|---|---|
| Published agreement | Diamond Ltd., 15 February 2019Source 1Source 4 |
| Current corporate page | StellarX appears in Ultra Stellar’s product listSource 1Source 4 |
| Company footer | Ultra Stellar LLCSource 1Source 4 |
| Unresolved point | Inspected sources do not explain the contractual succession between these namesSource 1Source 4 |
- Operator
- Listed in Ultra Stellar’s product family; published 2019 agreement names Diamond Ltd.
- Exchange model
- Decentralised
- Service scope
- Wallet interface to Stellar’s native decentralised order books and AMMs, with tokenised fiat/crypto access and third-party on/off ramps.
- Client types
- Retail clients; Professional clients
- Pricing publication
- Public and quoted pricing
- Other names
- StellarX DEX; StellarX trading platform
- Headquarters
- Current contracting-company domicile not resolved by the inspected disclosures
- Covered jurisdictions
- Stellar interface; geographic and issuer restrictions apply
- Pricing scope
- StellarX advertises no trading commission. Native network charges, a 0.30% native AMM pool fee where applicable, and issuer/ramp costs still affect the transaction. Network-fee gifts in dated terms are discretionary.
- Funding scope
- Wallet funding and transfers use Stellar assets. Bank/card conversion and redemption depend on external providers and asset issuers, including their fees, minimums, KYC and permitted countries.
- Custody and asset handling
- Published guidelines say StellarX holds neither assets nor secret keys. Issued assets remain dependent on their issuer; AMM deposits have pool exposure.
- Client eligibility
- Age and geographic restrictions appear in the dated agreement. Asset issuers and funding providers can impose separate identity and residency requirements.
- Support
- Published agreement lists [email protected] and [email protected]; those contacts form part of the dated legal disclosure. Wallet recovery is limited by control of the secret key and recovery credentials.
- Authorisation and registration scope
- Neither the product-family listing nor the 2019 Bermuda-law agreement establishes a current financial-services permission. Any issuer or on/off-ramp licence has its own entity and scope.
Exchange metadata checked 27 Oct 2026Source 1Source 2Source 3Source 4Source 5Source 6Source 7Source 8Source 9
Covered contracting entities
Ultra Stellar LLC
- Jurisdiction
- Jurisdiction not stated on the inspected corporate page
- Covered services
- Current corporate website identifies StellarX as a product; footer names Ultra Stellar LLC
- Client and location scope
- Product and third-party service terms apply.
Diamond Ltd.
- Jurisdiction
- Bermuda law and arbitration in the 2019 agreement; incorporation not independently confirmed
- Covered services
- Named provider in the published 15 February 2019 StellarX agreement
- Client and location scope
- Historical legal document; current contractual succession is not established.
Additional Information
Sections ↑The most useful comparison is the amount that can be received and redeemed for the exact asset and issuer. A low network fee cannot compensate for poor market depth, an expensive off-ramp or an issuer that will not redeem for the holder’s country. A token trade, a pool deposit and a bank payout should therefore be evaluated as separate operations.[2][4][7]
Sources & further reading
- StellarX user agreement dated 15 February 2019 StellarX · Accessed 27 Oct 2026
- StellarX trading guidelines — key custody, asset verification and charges StellarX · Accessed 27 Oct 2026
- Stellar strict-send path payment errors and trust-line failure modes Stellar Development Foundation · Accessed 27 Oct 2026
- Ultra Stellar product list and company footer Ultra Stellar · Accessed 27 Oct 2026
- Stellar transaction fees: inclusion, resources and surge pricing Stellar Development Foundation · Accessed 27 Oct 2026
- Stellar account minimum balance and native token Stellar Development Foundation · Accessed 27 Oct 2026
- Stellar native AMM operation and 0.30% pool fee Stellar Development Foundation · Accessed 27 Oct 2026
- Stellar asset clawback controls and trustline scope Stellar Development Foundation · Accessed 27 Oct 2026
- Stellar issuer authorisation flags Stellar Development Foundation · Accessed 27 Oct 2026
This profile reports dated public information, including exchange-published services and terms. It does not independently test or guarantee trading, custody, pricing or withdrawals. Inclusion is not an endorsement. Permissions and protections apply only to the named legal entity, service and client category; check the current official records and your contract.