Conversation

It's unclear on priors which is better -- is the native thing "I want to sell at prices x, y, z" or "I want to sell continuously in range w". For composability -- you can do that with CLOBs too! See raydium.io for instance.

Quote Tweet

Will Sheehan

@wilburforce_

Mar 23, 2021

Was waiting for this take - In v3 you can spread an order/lp across a range, not possible natively in a LOB The upshot is that it *composes*, something that limit order books are bad at purpose built for DeFi twitter.com/SBF_FTX/status…

9:17 PM · Mar 23, 2021Twitter Web App

Replying to

and

I agree that it’s unclear, but the continuous range is a + for composability and not as bolted on imo - we’ll have to see the emergent effects though!

Replying to

and

Continunous prices just means infinitesimal small tick sizes... no? Very small tick sizes might be good for some market participants (queue priority is not important) bad for others.

Replying to

and

Continuous buying/selling is better. It doesn’t expose your hand

Replying to

and

Yeah, this is generally an odd take wrt having a low variance prior that continuous fills are a *positive* You'd usually agressively cancel deep orders (unless you like Q bigly) as you start to get filled at touch depending on the output of your fill rate / toxicity models....

Show more replies