how do you even account for the risk between something like USD on coinbase (close to 100% safe) and Tether or USDC as the medium of trade on other exchanges? It's not a simple question lol I'm just curious about what the big quant possibility is here
-
-
Replying to @eriz35
I think volume is falling because volume is correlated with retail interest, which is correlated with price. Price is down so volume is down too! As you point out it's hard to do cross-exchange arb with a pure taking strategy because bid/offer is wide and commissions are high.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @macrocephalopod @eriz35
To arb spot effectively you ideally want to get filled passively on one of the legs, so you collect spread and pay a reduced fee. You then cross spread to hedge on the other exchange. But getting filled passively requires volume!
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @macrocephalopod @eriz35
Volume helps in two regards - first it creates opportunities (e.g. a big trade on one exchange pushes up the price there) and second it gives better passive entry opportunities. Lower volume means less profit for arbs.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @macrocephalopod @eriz35
Stablecoin unpeg risk is hard. You could either try to maintain a flat delta to USDT naturally (but that means a lot of opportunities are not available to you) or you could explicitly borrow USDT and sell it for USD as a hedge, but borrowing USDT is expensive.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @macrocephalopod @eriz35
I don't think there is an easy solution!
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @macrocephalopod
this is extremely helpful, thanks. So the idea isn't to "make markets" but rather piggyback off real interest/volume in trading of the asset and take advantage of inefficiencies in the platforms and big traders' methodologies?
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @eriz35
You can also just make markets on one exchange, which I understand can also be quite lucrative. The arb strategy is not quite providing liquidity, it’s more like moving liquidity from where it’s supplied to where it’s demanded.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @macrocephalopod @eriz35
Could be a structural reason for it, eg disjoint market participants on the two exchanges for regulatory reasons or whatever — so anyone who can trade on both is able to transport liquidity between them and get paid for it.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @macrocephalopod
i'm a complete neophyte when it comes to market structure so tell me if this is incorrect: the big opportunity is in arbing liquidity across the asset class, not so much the price itself?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
I don't know if that's the only big opportunity but it is certainly a big one (similarly arbing liquidity across time e.g. cash/futures or term structure arbitrage, or across counterparty credit quality, can be lucrative, but there are risks obv)
-
-
Replying to @macrocephalopod @eriz35
Many people (e.g. Alameda) seem to do pretty well by taking on big deltas at the right time as well, so there are clearly opportunities in flat price trades too!
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @macrocephalopod
that sort of gets to the core of my thought re: stablecoins. He's obviously making a killing but is essentially stockpiling stablecoins, which carries long term and structural risk in exchange for scalping easy money off the inefficiencies in daily market trading
0 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.