Visit us at https://is.gd/Fnl0R7
Tag: starting
Visit us at https://is.gd/P71WZq
Visit us at https://is.gd/8GcagG
Visit us at https://is.gd/xBS2Ta
The core idea of Uniswap V3 is liquidity concentration. Liquidity providers can provide liquidity in a certain range and increase the utilization rate of funds.
Original title: “Uniswap-V3 Technical White Paper Guide”
Written by: Star Li
Uniswap V3 attracted widespread attention as soon as it was announced. Compared with V2, the logic and code are more complicated. The core of V3 is to provide liquidity (centralized liquidity) through the market range to solve the problem of capital utilization when LP provides liquidity. What is the capital utilization rate? How does V3 derive the formula for calculating interval liquidity? How to understand liquidity? How to calculate the swap fee? This article starts with a detailed analysis of the V3 technical white paper.
First, give some official information about V3 from Uniswap:
It is recommended to carefully review the technical white paper first, then look at the smart contract code, and finally check the official introduction. After understanding the technical white paper, the code is very easy to understand. The first chapter of the technical white paper summarizes the technical characteristics of Uniswap V3. The core concept is “Concentrated Liquidity”.
Fund utilization
First look at the fund utilization rate of Uniswap V2:
The figure above shows the change curve of the amount of x/y in the fund pool. The current price in the fund pool is at point c, and it is assumed to fluctuate between price point a and price point b. Sliding from point c to point a consumes the maximum y_real, sliding from point c to point b, the maximum consumption is x_real. In other words, if the current price c point oscillates between point a and point b, only x_real and y_real need to be consumed at most. In theory, it is enough to provide x_real and y_real. In fact, as shown in the figure above, at the price point c, x and y that are greater than x_real and y_real are provided. Obviously, it can be seen that the funds of x-x_real and y-y_real will never be used in this case, which is also called idle funds.
In this case, the capital utilization rate is x_real/x or y_real/y. If the price fluctuation is very small, the capital utilization rate is very low. Uniswap V3 is an attempt to solve the problem of low capital utilization. The idea is relatively simple. All funds can only be added to a certain range, only to the range of possible price fluctuations. How to add liquidity in a certain interval and provide swap function is the focus of Uniswap V3. Let’s start with Virtual Reserves.
Virtual Reserves
Uniswap’s transaction uses a product fixed model (x*y=k). The so-called virtual fund pool (Virtual Reserves) refers to a fund pool that is still on a fixed product curve and only provides a certain range of liquidity:
The dark green curve in the figure is the product fixed curve satisfied by the virtual capital pool. In fact, the curve of required funds is orange in the figure. The orange curve formula is as follows:
You can imagine that the virtual fund curve is translated on the x/y axis, so that the a/b point and the x/y axis coincide. That is, a certain amount of funds can achieve the effect of a “virtual” transaction curve.
How to calculate the provision of a virtual fund pool in a certain interval starts with a deep understanding of liquidity.
Liquidity (Liquidity-L)
The fixed product transaction model satisfies the two token amounts in the fund pool: x y = K. If K=L^2 is set, x y = L^2. L is what we call liquidity. The following formula is derived from the fixed product trading model:
Given L and sqrt(P), the capital requirements x and y can also be derived.
According to Formula 6.6, when the liquidity remains unchanged (without adding or deleting liquidity), liquidity can be regarded as the change in the amount of funds per unit of “price fluctuation”. “Price fluctuation” is quoted because it is actually a change in sqrt(P).
This is the core formula of Uniswap V3 (6.7), which uses relative values (the relative value of funds and prices) to calculate liquidity . The so-called liquidity is the amount of funds per unit of “price change”. In the case of a certain trading volume, if the liquidity is good, the price change will be small, and if the liquidity is not enough, the price fluctuation will be large.
Special attention is paid to the fact that the liquidity in an interval is different from the universal liquidity of V2. The focus of liquidity in a range is on the “range.” The liquidity in different intervals is not comparable. The difference between the liquidity of V2 and the liquidity of the interval is as follows:
The liquidity of V2 is “universal”, with the same liquidity at all price points. The liquidity of V3 is composed of a series of liquidity in different intervals. Relatively speaking, the liquidity around the current price is relatively high. The liquidity provider LP can only obtain transaction fees if it provides liquidity for trading. In order to obtain more transaction fees and increase the utilization rate of funds, liquidity providers will provide funds within a reasonable range of price fluctuations. In other words, only the liquidity provider in this interval can obtain the handling fee incurred in a swap transaction in a certain interval. In order to calculate the handling fee obtained in each interval, the concept and calculation method of Tick are introduced.
Tick
Providing liquidity in intervals brings many complicated situations: overlapping coverage of intervals and intervals. Because the liquidity in different intervals is not comparable, a certain transaction fee cannot be mixed into the liquidity, and it will be withdrawn when the liquidity is deleted. To solve this problem, Uniswap V3 introduced the concept of Tick. Transaction costs are settled in real time and recorded separately, and are not mixed into working capital. Although the entire range and the range of liquidity are not comparable, but at a specific price point (on a price slice), the liquidity is comparable. Uniswap V3 divides the entire price range (negative infinity to positive infinity) into ticks (price points):
The price of the latter price point is one ten thousandth of the price of the previous price point.
Each tick also has a unique serial number. The interval (Position) can be represented by two ticks. Logically, the transaction fee can be calculated one by one tick, and the transaction is allocated on each tick according to the proportion of liquidity. Let’s first look at the calculation of swap in a Tick range.
SWAP in Tick
Suppose there is a small amount of y, and swap is x. Through the formula in 6.13, the price change caused by the change in y can be calculated.
Then use the formula in 6.15 to calculate the amount of x exchanged.
Uniswap V3 sets different transaction fees for the same trading pair: 0.05%, 0.3% and 1% (other fees can also be added). If it is exchanged from Y for X, the transaction fee shall be deducted before the exchange is carried out.
Only one fee rate is supported in the same transaction pool. In other words, different price ranges are supported in a trading pool, but they are all at the same rate. If you need to add a transaction pool with different transaction fees for the same transaction pair, you must create a new transaction pool.
Next, I will explain in depth the calculation logic of adding/removing liquidity and transaction fees.
Add/remove liquidity
The addition/removal of liquidity in V3 is the addition or removal of liquidity in a certain range under the current price situation. All liquidity addition/removal of liquidity uses the following formula:
Note that price changes do not refer to the size of the interval, but to provide liquidity in a certain interval, relative to the current price, the price change corresponding to the “corresponding capital change”.
Divided into three situations, the relationship between the liquidity range you want to add and the current price.
- The current price is in the liquidity price range (il <= ic <iu)
Because the price is within the range, if the price slides to il, you need to provide y funds. If the price slides to iu, you need to provide the corresponding x funds. So, for delta_Y, the price change is sqrt(P)-sqrt(p(il)); for delta_X, the price change is 1/sqrt(P)-1/sqrt(p(iu)).
- The current price is below the liquidity price range
Because the current price is much lower than il, even if it slides from the current price to iu, only x funds are needed, not y funds. So, in this case, delta_Y = 0. Because sliding from il to iu requires funds in the entire range of x, for delta_X, the price change is 1/sqrt(il)-1/sqrt(p(iu)).
- The current price is higher than the liquidity price range
Similar to the first case, the analysis will not be repeated.
Swap transaction fees
The most complex logic of Uniswap is to calculate and allocate transaction fees. The corresponding transaction fees need to be withdrawn before adding and removing liquidity.
Total liquidity on Tick
There can be multiple intervals on a tick. When calculating transaction costs, you need to amortize these costs to all the total liquidity in multiple intervals on this tick. Record delta_L on the Tick at the boundary of each interval (the sum of the liquidity of all intervals with this Tick as the boundary).
There is a global state: liquidity, which saves the total liquidity of the current price corresponding to Tick. When the price fluctuates and crosses a certain Tick, liquidity will increase or decrease (depending on the direction of price fluctuations). For example, the price crosses the interval from left to right. When it crosses the first tick of the interval, the liquidity needs to increase. When it passes the last tick, the liquidity needs to decrease, and there is no increase in liquidity for the middle tick. And decrease (delta_L is 0).
Transaction fee rate on the interval (Position)
To calculate the transaction cost rate in an interval, the total cost rate is used to subtract the cost rate outside the interval. Record feeGrowthOutside on the boundary Tick of an interval. The so-called feeGrowthOutside is the total expense rate in the “other” direction. The other direction is relative to the direction passing through the current tick. When the price crosses a tick from left to right, feeGrowthOutside refers to the expense ratio of all intervals to the left of the tick. Simply put, it is the expense ratio of all intervals in the opposite direction of the price going. feeGrowthOutside is denoted by fo. Because fo is the total expense rate of the two directions of a Tick, the sum of the expense rates of the two directions must be equal to fg (the global expense rate). So when passing through a tick, the fo on the tick needs to be flipped:
When an interval is created, the fo of Tick on the boundary of the interval needs to be initialized:
If the current price is greater than the Tick price, because even if the current price is within the set range, the previous costs will not be allocated. Therefore, you can simply assume that all costs occur below the Tick price, that is, fo= fg. If the price of Tick is greater than the current price, the price has not passed through Tick, because it is assumed that all the expenses incurred before occur below the Tick price, and there is no cost above the Tick, so fo=0. On the basis of understanding these logics, in the process of swap, as the price fluctuates, in an interval, the expense rate exceeding the highest Tick and the expense rate below the lowest Tick can be calculated in the following way:
Take the calculation of the fee rate lower than the lowest Tick as an example. If ic>=i (the current price is higher than the lowest Tick), all fee rates below the Tick are fo (as defined). If ic
On the basis of the obtained expense rate, the expense rate can be calculated by multiplying the interval liquidity by the expense rate.
to sum up
The core idea of Uniswap V3 is liquidity concentration. Liquidity providers can provide liquidity in a certain range to increase the utilization rate of funds. The transaction fee obtained in a certain interval is divided equally by all liquidity providers in that interval. Uniswap V3 designed interval granularity-Tick, and deduced the process of liquidity addition/removal and fee calculation. On the basis of this, Uniswap V3 also updated the realization of the price oracle machine.
[Blockchain Today reporter Jeong Seung-won] After rumors about the decision to accept cryptocurrency by PayPal, an online payment giant, spread to the news, PayPal CEO Dan Schulman said in an interview with Reuters on the 30th (local time), “Rumor “This is true and an official statement will be released immediately.” This was reported by Cointelegraph.
The new system provides a cryptocurrency payment service, and it is expected that customers will be able to pay for goods and services from approved vendors using the stored coins. It is known that this system will deliver coins quickly at the point of sale, and sellers will receive the amount corresponding to the coin directly in fiat currency.
The calculation service is expected to support all four cryptocurrencies supported by PayPal: Bitcoin (BTC), Ethereum (ETH), Litecoin (LTC), and Bitcoin Cash (BCH). Customers paying with cryptocurrency are not charged a transaction fee for their purchase and can only use one coin per purchase.
“We believe that now will be a turning point for cryptocurrencies to become a legitimate source of funding for trading in the real world with millions of merchants in the asset class where they primarily buy, hold and sell.” Revealed the idea.
When PayPal first announced its intention to enter the cryptocurrency space in October 2020, Galaxy Digital CEO Mike Novogratz said Wall Street’s reaction to the news and related “worldwide shootouts”. Have been called. PayPal has been trying to enter the industry in early March through an acquisition transaction of Curv, a digital asset security company estimated to be worth $200 million.
The news from PayPal came 24 hours after Visa announced that it would pilot a new payment system using stablecoins on the Ethereum blockchain. In this simulation, sellers who have agreed to the fiat currency transaction of customers using USDC stablecoins will participate.
contact@blockcast.cc
Blockcast.cc ©
Bitcoin has been the best performing major cryptocurrency by far, with most large altcoins severely underperforming it throughout the past few days and weeks.
While many investors allocated serious capital to altcoins in hopes of smaller tokens being a higher beta play that outperform BTC, the benchmark cryptocurrency’s massive upswing has sucked all the oxygen out of the room.
Until its momentum stalls and investors rotate capital away from BTC and into altcoins, there’s a strong possibility that it will continue outperforming the aggregated cryptocurrency market.
One trader is now pointing to the lack of intense selling pressure that Bitcoin is now facing as its price rallies above $28,000 as a positive sign. This exhaustion amongst sellers seems to hint that it may be gearing up for another leg higher that sends it to fresh all-time highs.
While speaking about this, one prominent trader explained that he is watching for BTC to “send” higher in the coming hours. He specifically notes that the fact no sellers are showing up at the crypto’s highs seems to indicate that price discovery is about to continue.
This may place some short-term pressure on altcoins, as they typically struggle to rise in tandem with the benchmark cryptocurrency.
Bitcoin Rockets Past $28,000 as Bulls Target Fresh All-Time Highs
At the time of writing, Bitcoin is trading up just under 3% at its current price of $28,100. This is around where it faced some serious selling pressure throughout the past week.
A break above its $28,500 highs could result in a continuation of the price discovery that the cryptocurrency has been undergoing as of late.
These highs were visited overnight, but the selling pressure here was significant and caused it to see a rather intense short-term selloff.
Lack of Aggressive Selling Above $28,000 Points to Imminent Upside
One trader explained that the lack of aggressive selling above $28,000 bodes well for Bitcoin and may indicate that upside is imminent for the cryptocurrency.
“BTC looks like it wants to send. No sellers showing up at the highs. I’m not short anymore, nor ‘hedged’, seems like price discovery is about to continue…”
Image Courtesy of SalsaTekila. Source: BTCUSD on TradingView.
If Bitcoin does continue seeing price discovery in the near-term, it may be poised to visit the psychologically important $30,000 level, as this is where everyone expects there to be some resistance.
Featured image from Unsplash. Charts from TradingView.
Image Credit: Refer to Source
Author: Refer to Source Cole Petersen
Starting from the traditional clearing model, discuss the necessity and complexity of the business clearing of cryptocurrency institutions
The recent sharp appreciation of multiple cryptocurrencies, led by Bitcoin, has once again attracted a lot of attention from the cryptocurrency-related industries, and more and more institutions have begun to enter the market. Today I want to talk about the most important part of the business of these institutions-liquidation.
For people in the traditional financial market, clearing and settlement is not unfamiliar, but in order to let many friends who are not born in financial background have a concept, to give a simple example, A and B have several transactions with each other, A I bought a commodity from B today, and sold another commodity to B tomorrow. After several transactions have occurred, then A and B will enter the clearing and settlement link. Clearing refers to the calculation of multiple transactions between two people together. In the end, it is clear whether A should pay B or B should pay A. How much money should be paid can be calculated clearly; Settlement is It is the actual transfer of funds. When the transfer of funds is completed, the clearing and settlement will also end, and the rights and obligations between A and B are clarified. The purpose of clearing and settlement is to repay, collect and pay the claims and debts of two or more parties (the actual situation is more multi-party participants). The professional meanings of the terms clearing and settlement are very similar. Generally speaking, clearing is to prepare for settlement. Settlement is usually a process of transferring funds and financial assets after the end of the settlement.
The term “clearing” is widely used in scenarios with multiple dimensions, such as companies, banks, securities, derivatives, etc. However, there are significant differences in the clearing business in different fields, the various systems supporting the clearing are also very different, and the involved parties are also different (including buyers, sellers, custodian banks, etc.). In terms of the above-mentioned dimensional scenarios, banks are cleared around payment instructions, securities are cleared around netting, and derivatives are cleared around positions. Taking derivatives liquidation as an example, the entire liquidation process includes: receiving and confirming transaction information, evaluating counterparty risks, calculating margin, managing collateral, managing funds to be settled and owner (or creditor) rights and interests, and other issues that may affect risk management and Event handling of settlement arrangements, etc.
Traditional financial markets favor the central counterparty clearing model
The traditional financial market has a history of hundreds of years, and various businesses have matured. Clearing is in various business lines (such as FOF fund business, securities PB business, seller OTC transaction business, etc.) and various roles (such as buyer, Sellers, custodian banks, etc.) exist, but considering space reasons, the author selects one of the representative “over-the-counter derivatives” liquidation to make an overview.
In the earliest OTC market, a non-standard bilateral clearing model was adopted, and clearing only occurred between the two parties to the transaction. The non-standard model is naturally inefficient. Either party to the transaction needs to invest high costs for liquidation. There is always a huge credit risk in bilateral liquidation, especially when there are multiple counterparties, the resulting credit risk will make the entire OTC derivatives market very fragile, and the default of one participant may even bring systemic risks. .
Later, at the end of the 20th century, due to the over-the-counter credit risk crisis that broke out at that time, a “standardized bilateral clearing model with market makers as the core” was born. Standardization of contracts not only improves market efficiency, but also reduces credit risk. The emergence of the market maker system has fundamentally changed the situation where transaction risks are entirely borne by both parties to the transaction, and has become an important driving force for the standardized bilateral clearing model. The vast majority of traders only need to use the market maker as the counterparty, and the market maker then goes to the market to hedge their own risk exposure. The trader transfers the credit risk of OTC derivatives transactions to the market maker. Compared with the earliest non-standardized bilateral clearing model, the efficiency and safety of the entire OTC derivatives trading market have been significantly improved. But if the market maker itself defaults or is very risky, it will also bring a devastating blow to the market.
Therefore, the bankruptcy of Enron in 2001 sounded a wake-up call for the over-the-counter derivatives market. In 2002, the ICE exchange tried a new clearing model for the first time, and this model has continued to today’s over-the-counter financial derivatives market, which is the Central Counterparty (CCP) clearing model. . The essence of this model is that the clearing house acts as the counterparty to provide unified on-exchange clearing for over-the-counter transactions, but the contract itself is still an over-the-counter transaction. The clearing house intervenes in the clearing as the legal counterparty of the market trader to ensure the smooth completion of the transaction. CCP itself does not provide a quotation, but only provides clearing and settlement services. This model has changed the development trajectory of the entire financial OTC derivatives market.
Institutional business in the cryptocurrency market is also inseparable from liquidation
It is mentioned in the article “An article to understand the market structure and asset types of cryptocurrency institutions” that the currency circle has various institutional roles for different businesses and various types of assets. In fact, these institutions are inseparable from liquidation of various assets involved in different businesses. such as:
For the exchange, as a liquidity pool, the most important module is liquidation except matching. Whether Taker obtains liquidity from the exchange or Maker injects liquidity into the exchange, the final liquidation process is completed by the exchange itself. In the traditional market, the exchanges actually take into account the division of labor, and generally separate the clearing business to a professional clearing house for processing. In the currency circle, the exchange is equivalent to assuming the two roles at the same time.
For FoF funds, such as institutions such as Bixin, it can also be extended to various buyer roles. When they invest in various funds and teams, whether it is after the performance accrual or the risk calculation in the event, they are actually liquidation. It’s just that the delay and accuracy requirements are slightly different. In the performance accrual, the clearing system must help buyers and customers to calculate various rights and obligations; in the event of risk control, the clearing system must timely calculate changes in margin, net value, etc., so that the next decision can be made in a timely manner.
For seller institutions, when they sell or provide financial products (such as loan products) to various customers, whether it is the risk management of the product or the final settlement of the product, it is also inseparable from the clearing system. The seller provides a loan. During the loan period, the seller needs to pay attention to issues such as pledge rate and interest. When the loan is over, the seller also needs to transfer the repayment and settlement funds and assets between the two parties.
For over-the-counter derivatives trading institutions, clearing is even more important. Because generally the positions of over-the-counter transactions will be large, if two institutions are worried about the other’s credit risk, then no one can bear the liquidation. At present, there is an institution in the currency circle called Paradigm, which plays two major roles: one is to find counterparties for over-the-counter trading institutions, which can actually be understood as providing OTC liquidity; the other is to solve the problem of liquidation. The big problem is that Paradigm uniformly places the positions of both parties in the transaction on the exchange (currently Deribit and bit.com) for matching and delivery. At the same time, the exchange assists in the clearing work, which greatly improves security. This is actually very close to the central counterparty clearing model of the traditional market.
There are also institutions like custodian banks, wallets, etc., if transactions, financial management and other scenarios are involved, the clearing module will also be involved.
The clearing system involves complex assets, product categories and participants, and requires high stability and accuracy
After we know that the various business lines, roles and scenarios in the current currency circle are inseparable from liquidation, we naturally know that the liquidation system also has some corresponding characteristics:
The first is that there are many asset classes involved. In the currency circle, in the broad sense of “assets”, there are various mainstream currencies & non-mainstream currencies, loans, funds, derivatives, mining machines, Defi assets, etc. The liquidation involved in each type of asset has its own unique content.
Second, even for a single category of assets, complex products will produce complex liquidation procedures. Taking FOF funds as an example, the priority of fund funds, the hierarchical structure of funds, the rules of fund redemption, and the final commission method, will all complicate liquidation.
Then, clearing involves many parties, including exchanges, OTC counterparties and OTC platforms that provide target liquidity, funders provide liquidity of funds, and third-party platforms such as wallets, exchange wealth management platforms and mining pools provide sales. The custodian bank provides financial guarantees, as well as terminal customers, which are all parties involved in the business, and naturally the clearing system needs support.
For example, in the example mentioned above, Paradigm provides OTC liquidity for two institutions and injects liquidity into the Deribit exchange. At the same time, they hand over the liquidation to Deribit. This liquidation involves four roles: trading Both organizations, Paradigm, and Deribit Exchange itself. If you add other spot liquidity providers (Derbit has no spot), as well as end customers, at least six parties are involved, which requires the clearing system to clearly distinguish their rights and obligations.
Finally, the clearing system has high requirements for stability and accuracy. For example, for over-the-counter derivatives institutions, when they manage a large number of their own positions, the clearing system actually calculates the risk value, margin and other parameters in real time for the institution to make decisions and operations. At this time, the clearing system The stability of the system requires higher requirements. When the final position is closed for delivery, the clearing system must calculate the institution’s equity clearly, so it will naturally have a relatively high standard for accuracy.
Institutions that play a clearing role should focus more on the core of the business rather than the system
At present, the institutions that play the role of clearing and settlement in the currency circle are basically the parties that provide the core of the business, such as the operator of the fund, and the seller/service party of various financial products. Of course, as the future market becomes more and more compliant, there will be custodians/clearing institutions to share part of the clearing and settlement responsibilities. However, whether it is the party that provides the core business or the custodian bank/clearing house, what they do from the perspective of liquidation is very similar, and the merger is discussed.
With the above understanding of the characteristics of the clearing system, many institutional friends should be able to realize that it is precisely because of these characteristics that the complexity of the clearing system is very high, so do you need to develop it yourself?
The author believes that if there are already mature system suppliers in the market, a mature procurement plan is better than all self-research.
First, the organization should focus on the most critical part, and the most critical is not the system.
In terms of business attributes, basically only institutions similar to high-frequency quantitative funds (pursuing Alpha) need to build their own systems. Because the core logic for them to gain revenue is to be able to grab market opportunities as quickly as possible, for this reason they even write their strategies on the chip.
But for most organizations, the essence of their business is to pursue better Beta:
Funds (similar to grayscle, etc.)
Through compliance, reputation, risk control capabilities (to ensure the security of the storage of coins), and sales capabilities (to find large institutions interested in BTC), to obtain long-term & steady growth of the business.
Seller (structured products, lending and other financial service providers, etc.)
Such as FBG, Matrixport, Bixin, and some mining pools, all provide similar financial services. These institutions obtain long-term & steady growth in their business through reputation, sales ability, product design ability (a deep understanding of customers’ financial needs), risk control ability (fund security + position risk management ability), etc.
Companies that pursue beta, no matter how good the system is, without sales, credibility, and financial product design capabilities, business development will not be good. Although the system does not determine the upper limit of business development, it is essential. The accuracy, stability, real-time, applicability, etc. of the system are also very important, otherwise, after the organization reaches a certain scale, the business cannot be effectively carried out.
Secondly, independent system suppliers are superior to institutional self-research in breadth and depth. Because the system provider will serve a large number of institutions responsible for clearing, it will cover various assets, processes and participants in breadth; there are a large number of customer feedback in depth, and naturally will have better performance in terms of stability and accuracy .
Furthermore, considering the time cost, product, development, and testing team management costs, and direct R&D costs, a mature solution is definitely better than self-research.
The 1Token system is mature and stable, which can save energy and cost for the organization
The 1Token CAM system provides front-, middle- and back-office software system support for medium and large financial institutions in the global currency circle.
At present, the leading financial institutions in the domestic field, such as Bixin’s FOF fund, Matrixport’s FOF fund, FBGOne’s seller business, and BitLink’s quantitative trading system, are all customers of the CAM system. Clearing modules are included in these product lines.
The CAM system has three coverages:
Cover all major modules, including trading, clearing, risk control, quotation, transfer/wallet, authority module, etc.
Cover all major types of assets in the currency circle, including funds, (structured) derivatives, lending/allocation, Defi assets, computing power/mining machines, etc.;
Covers various institutions, including currency circle buyers, sellers and custodian banks. Specific business lines such as FOF/MOM, PB, structured product sellers, lending platforms, mining pools, institutional miners, manual/quantitative funds, OTC liquidity providers, etc.
In terms of breadth:
The 1Token team has experience in the development of systems such as lending, allocation, and derivatives in the traditional market, and has experience in systems such as quantitative funds, institutional brokers, and institutional miners in the currency circle.
Scivantage (acquired by refinitiv), the company where the 1Token core team previously worked, is a well-known financial system provider in the traditional American market. Its services include Bank of America, Deutsche Bank, vanguard, Scottrade and other well-known seller institutions in the traditional market.
Through the accumulation of nearly 10 years, the 1Token system module covers the front, middle and back offices of various assets, and can quickly support the customization of needs.
In depth:
Among the various modules, the most demanding system stability is the risk control/clearing and transaction execution system. 1Token’s self-use brokerage system and quantitative fund system have carried an average daily trading volume of 1 billion RMB+ for three consecutive years, with the highest peak value reaching 5 billion RMB+, which fully demonstrates the robustness of the system.
Considering that 1Token CAM’s customers are basically medium and large financial institutions and are very concerned about data security, the system supports localized deployment to protect data privacy.
Ethereum has been struggling to break above $600 throughout the day, with the selling pressure proving significant.
Each break above this level has caused it to see inflows of selling pressure that have slowed its growth and caused it to see slight rejections at this level.
It is important to note that bulls are still firmly in control of the aggregated market, and Ethereum’s mounting momentum is unlikely to end anytime soon while Bitcoin and the entire altcoin market rests firmly in buyers’ control.
One trader is noting that $600 is the last key resistance level until $800, with a sustained break above this level likely leading ETH to see gains of 30% or more in the days and weeks ahead.
This would allow the cryptocurrency to fully erase its trend of underperformance against Bitcoin that has been plaguing the ETH/BTC pair over the past few weeks.
It could also further fuel the second wave of DeFi hype driving this fragment of the market higher over the past few days and weeks.
Ethereum Struggles to Break Last Key Resistance Level
Ethereum is in the process of breaking above its last key resistance level, with the selling pressure found at $600 proving to be quite significant.
At the time of writing, ETH is trading up just under 6% at its current price of $590. It has made multiple attempts to break above $600, with each one resulting in serious inflows of selling pressure.
If it rejects this level, it could see a prolonged consolidation phase before it can advance higher.
The selling pressure here may continue hampering Ethereum’s price action in the near-term, but once it is shattered, the crypto may see its next leg higher.
Analyst: ETH Doesn’t Face Any Intense Resistance Until $800
While sharing his thoughts on where Ethereum might trend in the near-term, one analyst explained that once $600 breaks, there’s virtually no resistance until $800.
“I repeat, there is no resistance on ETH from here until $800, literally nothing, that is all.”
Image Courtesy of @Smartcontracter. Source: ETHUSD on TradingView.
The coming few days should provide serious insights into where the aggregated market will trend next.
If Ethereum can post a high time frame close above $600, it could see some immense momentum and extend its ongoing parabolic rally.
Featured image from Unsplash. Charts from TradingView.
Image Credit: Refer to Source
Author: Refer to Source Cole Petersen
Bitcoin and the entire crypto market have seen some intense strength throughout the past day, which has come about as a result of news regarding Square’s acquisition of Bitcoin worth $50 million that will be held on their balance sheets.
Investors and analysts alike have been viewing this rapidly growing trend as being highly bullish for Bitcoin, as corporate adoption could boost BTC’s technical strength and allow it to see significantly further upside.
The cryptocurrency is now on the cusp of breaking above a key technical level that previously sparked multiple selloffs.
If it is able to shatter this level, it could be poised to see some notable downside in the days and weeks ahead.
One trader is pointing to three factors that he believe suggest that upside is imminent for the cryptocurrency.
He notes that the floating supply is being rapidly chewed up by large buy-side orders – possibly stemming from other companies and large investors looking to gain exposure to Bitcoin. This could catch suppliers off-guard and cause them to re-enter their positions.
Bitcoin Rallies on News on Square Buying Bitcoin
Multi-billion-dollar public company Square – which is headed by Twitter founder Jack Dorsey – made headlines yesterday with their decision to purchase $50 million worth of Bitcoin to be held on their balance sheet as a reserve asset.
This news was significant and suggested that MicroStrategy’s unorthodox approach to storing their capital may be becoming a trend.
There’s not any explicit evidence of other companies doing the same, but it is important to note that private companies could be buying and holding BTC without having to announce it to anyone.
Analyst: These 3 Factors Could Drive a BTC Buying Frenzy
While speaking about what he thinks could drive Bitcoin higher in the near-term, one analyst pointed to three specific events that could indicate a move higher is imminent.
He notes that the circulating supply is being absorb by large buyers, which may cause sell-side suppliers to fomo back into their positions. Subsequent companies who want to purchase BTC will have to do so by pulling from a lower supply pool.
“A few thought on BTC here: 1. The float is being absorbed 2. The suppliers who introduced supply could be caught off sides and need to pick inventory back up 3. Each subsequent company will have to buy from a lower supply pool. We need a HH on 1D to confirm. Conditions are there,” he said.
These three trends could be what fuels Bitcoin’s next parabolic run, but it hinges on the possibility that more companies turn to BTC to be used as a reserve asset.
Featured image from Unsplash. Pricing data from TradingView.
Image Credit: Refer to Source
Author: Refer to Source Cole Petersen
WWW.BLOCKCAST.CC 