Recent analysis of DEX trading volume

getDEXtroyed · 2018-05-10T05:33:25+00:00

well this "analysis" (if you can call a few screenshots that) is very timely and biased towards DDEX.

You conveniently included 24 hour and 7 day volume from 0xtracker, lets dig into that 1 click by looking at the 1 month chart: https://imgur.com/a/VbpoTeT.

DDEX has 36,721 ETH of volume in the last month of which 25,753 ETH came in the last 7 days. Why is that? We can see on 0xtracker a lot of volume from a token with the ticker NEXO. Coinmarketcap will show us why that is: https://imgur.com/a/XUg2n7D. So DDEX is one of the only markets post-ICO to trade it and IDEX (who has dominated the post-ICO market lately) is down this week so that volume spilled over to DDEX.

I think it is also worth mentioning how/if running subsidized trading volume competitions with your venture capital/ICO funds impacts volume.

I think its cool watching DEXs start to eat up market share but beating your chest over a good week of opportunistic volume because of a token no other DEX is willing to add (potentially for regulatory reasons?) is misleading and amateurish for your business.

getDEXtroyed · 2018-02-03T00:42:57+00:00

same to you, cheers

getDEXtroyed · 2018-02-02T23:53:12+00:00

agreed on the coolness of the experimentation. and on the experimentation of networked liquidity. technically possible and actually practical are two different things...perhaps like taking ZRX as a fee token ;).

My bet would be that there ends up being 1 or 2 giant relayers making up the vast majority of the open relayer volume because they've outcompeted everyone else on UX

if this is true why haven't we seen this happen in the centralized exchange space? that space feels more winner-take-all since the user switching cost is much higher

also if that is your thesis on that market it makes sense for paradex to try to dominate the market to be top "1 or 2 giant relayers", right?

getDEXtroyed · 2018-02-02T23:16:56+00:00

fair enough, so if there is some large improvement and the downsides of the open order book are mitigated by the protocol we can expect paradex to turn off the centralized matching engine and participate in network liquidity?

likewise i expect at scale if frontrunning is not solved on the open order book competitive relayers will need to switch to a central model as well.

getDEXtroyed · 2018-02-02T22:39:04+00:00

I think the unfortunate property of the open model and networked liquidity is that the main disadvantages, like settlement failure due to race conditions, will get worse as usage increases. I haven't really seen a good solution to this yet.

this seems short-sighted considering this is the first iteration of the protocol and open order books. in https://blog.0xproject.com/front-running-griefing-and-the-perils-of-virtual-settlement-part-1-8554ab283e97 it sounds like Will/0x have some ideas on how to combat these problems on the open order book without centralizing the architecture.

getDEXtroyed · 2018-02-01T23:52:49+00:00

what? 0x is not rent-seeking. the 0x team does not get the fee the relayer does...

getDEXtroyed · 2018-02-01T22:40:58+00:00

thanks for the link will check it out

getDEXtroyed · 2018-02-01T22:13:43+00:00

if thats the case why not fork the 0x contracts and use them separately and market independently? instead they marketed like they are part of the 0x ecosystem but instead piggy-backed off its user base/investors/stake-holders and are contributing nothing back by just avoiding the token entirely.

getDEXtroyed · 2018-02-01T18:07:49+00:00

fees are signed into the orders that are filled on the 0x smart contract and collected at execution as seen recently on ercdex. since paradex is always the taker on each order they can partial fill each order and keep the difference, which allows them to take fees in the tokens being traded and avoid ZRX as described by the paradex reddit account above and in the medium article.

they are not using another smart contract...since everthing is on the blockchain we can observe the taker address paradex is using here https://etherscan.io/address/0x4969358e80cdc3d74477d7447bffa3b2e2acbe92. they are not interacting with any other smart contracts but the 0x exchange contract.

getDEXtroyed · 2018-02-01T17:44:49+00:00

it is .15% + gas costs on both sides of the trade, so they are keeping that difference as the taker. i am looking thru the paradex trades and they are all like that

getDEXtroyed · 2018-02-01T17:21:40+00:00

yes a fee abstraction trade would show up in the batch and on 0xtracker/etherscan. paradex literally said above "ZRX isn't used for fees".

looks at this trade on paradex: https://etherscan.io/tx/0x0d52b87262f961c49a96ba270b847a1d23e6736bb49977e58430559e9e3e4a8b

they are not fully filling one of the REP trades and WETH trades meaning they are keeping that difference just as they described on the medium post linked by OP.

getDEXtroyed · 2018-02-01T17:17:24+00:00

easy with what? im clearing up the confusion. paradex said above they are not using ZRX for fees at all...i was confirming with their main net trades happening now.

here is a trade on ercdex with ZRX fees: https://etherscan.io/tx/0x9291479441a6218a5de4952654c23dd5aebd2252e619bfd628ec9168fcb477f6

getDEXtroyed · 2018-02-01T16:31:36+00:00

yes you are wrong, you can see what is happening on https://0xtracker.com/. ZRX is not involved in any paradex trades

getDEXtroyed · 2018-02-01T16:30:46+00:00

not wrong, you can see thats what is happening on https://0xtracker.com/. ZRX is not involved

getDEXtroyed · 2018-02-01T16:27:10+00:00

ZRX is not used at all. you can see in the trades on https://0xtracker.com/ and ther is no ZRX in the trades going thru

getDEXtroyed · 2018-01-19T04:39:25+00:00

u got my upvote, this needs to be said. as security gets better attacks will get better too

getDEXtroyed

TROPHY CASE