UAMM: Price-oracle based Automated Market Maker
0
🤿
Sign in to get full access
Overview
- Automated market makers (AMMs) are pricing mechanisms used by decentralized exchanges (DEXes)
- Traditional AMM approaches are limited to their own liquidity pool, without considering external markets or managing risk for liquidity providers
- This paper proposes a new approach called UBET AMM (UAMM) that calculates prices by considering external market prices and the impermanent loss of the liquidity pool
Plain English Explanation
Decentralized exchanges (DEXes) allow users to trade cryptocurrencies without a central authority. Automated market makers (AMMs) are the pricing mechanisms these DEXes use to determine exchange rates. Traditional AMM approaches only look at the liquidity in their own pool, without considering what's happening in the broader market or the risks for the people providing that liquidity.
The paper introduces a new type of AMM called UBET AMM (UAMM) that tries to address these limitations. UAMM calculates prices by looking at both the liquidity pool and the prices in the overall crypto market. This helps prevent certain trading strategies, called arbitrage, that can drain value from the liquidity pool. UAMM also tries to minimize the "impermanent loss" that liquidity providers face - the potential for their assets to lose value while locked in the pool.
Overall, UAMM aims to create a more efficient and fair DEX trading experience that protects the interests of both traders and liquidity providers.
Technical Explanation
The paper proposes a new automated market maker (AMM) called UBET AMM (UAMM) that calculates prices based on both the liquidity pool and external market prices. This is in contrast to traditional AMM approaches that only consider the liquidity pool.
The key element of UAMM is determining the appropriate "slippage" amount - the difference between the quoted price and the actual execution price. UAMM sets the slippage based on a desired "target balance" for the liquidity pool, which encourages liquidity providers to minimize their "impermanent loss" (the potential for their assets to lose value while locked in the pool).
By considering external market prices, UAMM eliminates certain arbitrage opportunities that can drain value from the liquidity pool under traditional AMM models. The paper demonstrates that UAMM maintains the desirable properties of a constant product curve (a common AMM pricing model) when computing slippages.
Critical Analysis
The paper presents a novel approach to automated market making that addresses some limitations of traditional AMM models. By incorporating external market prices and optimizing for impermanent loss, UAMM aims to create a more efficient and equitable trading experience.
However, the paper does not explore the potential downsides or challenges of relying on external market data. There may be scenarios where the external prices are not accurate or manipulated, which could create new vulnerabilities. Additionally, the optimization for impermanent loss may have unintended consequences, such as reduced liquidity in certain market conditions.
Further research would be needed to fully understand the real-world performance and robustness of the UAMM approach, as well as its broader implications for decentralized finance (DeFi) ecosystems. Careful consideration of potential risks and edge cases is important when designing new DeFi primitives.
Conclusion
This paper introduces a new automated market maker (AMM) called UBET AMM (UAMM) that calculates prices based on both the liquidity pool and external market prices. UAMM aims to address limitations of traditional AMM approaches by eliminating certain arbitrage opportunities and optimizing for impermanent loss.
While the UAMM concept presents an interesting approach to improving DEX trading, further research is needed to fully understand its real-world performance and potential risks. Ongoing innovation in decentralized finance (DeFi) protocols will be crucial for building more efficient and equitable decentralized exchanges.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
🤿
0
UAMM: Price-oracle based Automated Market Maker
Daniel Jiwoong Im, Alexander Kondratskiy, Vincent Harvey, Hsuan-Wei Fu
Automated market makers (AMMs) are pricing mechanisms utilized by decentralized exchanges (DEX). Traditional AMM approaches are constrained by pricing solely based on their own liquidity pool, without consideration of external markets or risk management for liquidity providers. In this paper, we propose a new approach known as UBET AMM (UAMM), which calculates prices by considering external market prices and the impermanent loss of the liquidity pool. Despite relying on external market prices, our method maintains the desired properties of a constant product curve when computing slippages. The key element of UAMM is determining the appropriate slippage amount based on the desired target balance, which encourages the liquidity pool to minimize impermanent loss. We demonstrate that our approach eliminates arbitrage opportunities when external market prices are efficient.
Read more8/27/2024
0
ZeroSwap: Data-driven Optimal Market Making in DeFi
Viraj Nadkarni, Jiachen Hu, Ranvir Rana, Chi Jin, Sanjeev Kulkarni, Pramod Viswanath
Automated Market Makers (AMMs) are major centers of matching liquidity supply and demand in Decentralized Finance. Their functioning relies primarily on the presence of liquidity providers (LPs) incentivized to invest their assets into a liquidity pool. However, the prices at which a pooled asset is traded is often more stale than the prices on centralized and more liquid exchanges. This leads to the LPs suffering losses to arbitrage. This problem is addressed by adapting market prices to trader behavior, captured via the classical market microstructure model of Glosten and Milgrom. In this paper, we propose the first optimal Bayesian and the first model-free data-driven algorithm to optimally track the external price of the asset. The notion of optimality that we use enforces a zero-profit condition on the prices of the market maker, hence the name ZeroSwap. This ensures that the market maker balances losses to informed traders with profits from noise traders. The key property of our approach is the ability to estimate the external market price without the need for price oracles or loss oracles. Our theoretical guarantees on the performance of both these algorithms, ensuring the stability and convergence of their price recommendations, are of independent interest in the theory of reinforcement learning. We empirically demonstrate the robustness of our algorithms to changing market conditions.
Read more4/30/2024
0
SAMM: Sharded Automated Market Makers
Hongyin Chen, Amit Vaisman, Ittay Eyal
Automated Market Makers (AMMs) are a cornerstone of decentralized finance. They are smart contracts (stateful programs) running on blockchains. They enable virtual token exchange: Traders swap tokens with the AMM for a fee, while liquidity providers supply liquidity and earn these fees. Demand for AMMs is growing rapidly, but our experiment-based estimates show that current architectures cannot meet the projected demand by 2029. This is because the execution of existing AMMs is non-parallelizable. We present SAMM, an AMM comprising multiple shards. All shards are AMMs running on the same chain, but their independence enables parallel execution. Unlike classical sharding solutions, here security relies on incentive compatibility. Therefore, SAMM introduces a novel fee design. Through analysis of Subgame-Perfect Nash Equilibria (SPNE), we show that SAMM incentivizes the desired behavior: Liquidity providers balance liquidity among all shards, overcoming destabilization attacks, and trades are evenly distributed. We validate our game-theoretic analysis with a simulation using real-world data. We evaluate SAMM by implementing and deploying it on local testnets of the Sui and Solana blockchains. To our knowledge, this is the first quantification of ``hot-contract'' performance. SAMM improves throughput by 5x and 16x, respectively, potentially more with better parallelization of the underlying blockchains. It is directly deployable, mitigating the upcoming scaling bottleneck.
Read more9/11/2024
0
Measuring Arbitrage Losses and Profitability of AMM Liquidity
Robin Fritsch, Andrea Canidio
This paper presents the results of a comprehensive empirical study of losses to arbitrageurs (following the formalization of loss-versus-rebalancing by [Milionis et al., 2022]) incurred by liquidity providers on automated market makers (AMMs). We show that those losses exceed the fees earned by liquidity providers across many of the largest AMM liquidity pools (on Uniswap). Remarkably, we also find that the Uniswap v2 pools are more profitable for passive LPs than their Uniswap v3 counterparts. We also investigate how arbitrage losses change with block times. As expected, arbitrage losses decrease when block production is faster. However, the rate of the decline varies significantly across different trading pairs. For instance, when comparing 100ms block times to Ethereum's current 12-second block times, the decrease in losses to arbitrageurs ranges between 20% to 70%, depending on the specific trading pair.
Read more4/23/2024