Conversation

2) I think it's a good direction to go in; liquidity is currently much less gamed than volume
1
6
4) Some examples of weird things: a) CMC reports similar liquidity for HitBTC BTC/USDC and Coinbase BTC/USD, but Coinbase has 2x the size on the orderbooks and a muuuch tighter spread.
1
8
4) Another weird thing: b) Stablecoin/stablecoin markets count too much. E.g. Binance's 4 highest "liquidity" markets are all stable/stable. c) Binance BTC/USDT seems much more liquid to me than HitBTC BTC/USDC but has nly 2/3 the "liquidity" score
1
5
5) It is much better than their volume metric: only about 30% of the top exchanges by liquidity are fake, vs literally 95% fake for volume. But that says more about their volume metric than their liquidity metric.
1
7
6) The liquidity metric still does no better than the "just rank exchanges by age" metric. The important _spot_ exchanges are almost all either Binance's age or older.
1
4
8) I refuse to believe that the $35 wide HitBTC BTC/EURS market deserves higher weight than the Binance BTC/USDT market.
1
8
9) I suspect that this mysterious liquidity algorithm is putting too much weight on lower volume coins. It seems implausible to me that Binance/Huobi/OKEx should only be getting a few % of their total liquidity from their BTC/USDT markets worth 30% of their volume.