Artículos Relacionados con AMM

El Centro de Noticias de HTX ofrece los artículos más recientes y un análisis profundo sobre "AMM", cubriendo tendencias del mercado, actualizaciones de proyectos, desarrollos tecnológicos y políticas regulatorias en la industria de cripto.

SEC Proposes Repealing 20-Year Core Rule: The Biggest Barrier to Tokenized US Stocks Is Disappearing

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has voted to propose repealing Rule 611 of Regulation NMS, the "order protection rule" that has been a cornerstone of U.S. equity market structure since 2005. This move, while a story of traditional finance, represents a major potential policy shift for tokenized U.S. stocks, removing a key structural barrier. Rule 611 mandates that trading centers cannot execute trades at prices inferior to protected quotes displayed on other exchanges. This framework is fundamentally incompatible with Automated Market Makers (AMMs) used in decentralized finance (DeFi). AMMs execute trades along bonding curves with price slippage and cannot comply with the rule's real-time, price-by-price requirements, meaning any tokenized stock liquidity pool would be in violation. The proposed repeal would replace the prescriptive rule with a principles-based "best execution" obligation on broker-dealers. This allows brokers to route orders to on-chain liquidity pools like AMMs, fulfilling their duty through periodic review rather than per-trade enforcement. The proposal is backed by significant historical context. SEC Chair Atkins, who voted against Reg NMS in 2005 alongside Commissioner Glassman, is now acting on his decades-old dissent. They argued Rule 611 would distort markets and push liquidity into dark pools rather than improve transparency—a prediction validated by current SEC data showing nearly half of trading now occurs off-exchange. The SEC's proposal explicitly connects to the crypto industry, citing academic work that Rule 611 has prevented innovation like AMMs and atomic settlement in stock markets. The process has been deliberate, following public roundtables and comments. While tokenized securities face other regulatory hurdles, this repeal is seen as a critical first step in clearing the path for next-generation market structure innovation.

marsbit06/15 09:09

SEC Proposes Repealing 20-Year Core Rule: The Biggest Barrier to Tokenized US Stocks Is Disappearing

marsbit06/15 09:09

SEC Market Structure Proposal Draws Attention From Tokenized Stock Advocates

The SEC has proposed eliminating two key equity market structure rules, Regulation NMS Rules 611 and 610(e), which govern order routing and the display of quotes. While the proposal is aimed at simplifying traditional markets and reducing costs, it has drawn attention from advocates for tokenized stocks. The reason is that current rules, which require checking the best prices across venues, are difficult to reconcile with on-chain trading models like automated market makers (AMMs). A more flexible structure could theoretically make it easier to design compliant blockchain-based systems for trading tokenized equities. However, the proposal is not specifically about crypto, and tokenized stocks would still need to meet numerous other securities regulations. The change is now open for public comment and faces a lengthy process before any final adoption.

bitcoinist06/12 22:06

SEC Market Structure Proposal Draws Attention From Tokenized Stock Advocates

bitcoinist06/12 22:06

Understanding Bound in One Article: The "Multi-signature + Timelock" Escape Mechanism and the Off-Chain Matching Black Box

**Title**: Understanding Bound: The Escape Mechanism of "Multi-Sig + Time Lock" and the Off-Chain Matching Black Box **Summary**: Bound Exchange, evolved from the earlier radFi platform, introduces a novel approach to Bitcoin trading by combining self-custody security with exchange-like speed. Its core mechanism relies on a 2-of-2 multi-signature (multi-sig) address for user deposits. One private key is held by the user via a passkey, and the other is held by Bound. This setup requires both keys to sign any transaction, preventing Bound from unilaterally accessing user funds (non-custodial). To address the risk of Bound becoming unavailable, a 3-month timelock is integrated into the Bitcoin script. After this period, users can withdraw their assets with just their single signature, ensuring an escape hatch. For trading, Bound operates a concentrated liquidity AMM. However, as Bitcoin L1 lacks smart contracts, the AMM curve, liquidity management, and trade price calculations occur off-chain in Bound's backend database. On-chain Bitcoin transactions serve only as final settlement receipts for pre-determined amounts. This creates a centralization point: the critical sequence of trade execution—which determines the exact price along the curve for each order—is managed off-chain by Bound in a non-transparent "black box." While the 2-of-2 setup protects user本金 (principal), the pricing and ordering of trades introduce potential operational MEV risks, as the order processing is invisible and unverifiable on-chain. In practice, users can also connect external wallets (like Unisat) for fully self-custodied trading, but this requires manually signing every transaction. The platform currently supports deposits of BTC and Runes only.

marsbit05/25 09:11

Understanding Bound in One Article: The "Multi-signature + Timelock" Escape Mechanism and the Off-Chain Matching Black Box

marsbit05/25 09:11

Perspective: Tokens on alt.fun are double-layered leverage

**Title:** Tokens on alt.fun are Double-Layered Leverage **Summary:** Tokens on alt.fun (like ALT) are not simple 5x leveraged bets on HYPE. Instead, they represent a **double layer of leverage**. The core mechanism involves HyperSwap V2 pools. After "graduation," these tokens are paired not with USDC, but with **HYPE5L**—a 5x long leverage token (LT) issued by BounceTech that tracks HYPE. Therefore, an alt.fun token's price in USDC is determined by multiplying two independent factors: 1. **AMM Exchange Rate:** The pool's ratio between the alt token and HYPE5L, driven by trading activity on alt.fun. 2. **LT Net Asset Value (NAV):** HYPE5L's value, which moves at approximately 5x the daily return of HYPE. This creates a compounding effect: * If HYPE rises 1%, HYPE5L's NAV rises ~5%. Profit-taking HYPE5L holders may then buy alt tokens, increasing demand and pushing the AMM exchange rate higher. The alt token's total gain thus exceeds 5%, potentially reaching 8-15%. * Conversely, if HYPE falls, losses are amplified beyond 5x due to combined NAV decline and AMM selling pressure. During crashes, large sell orders may fail due to non-atomic redemption paths, potentially trapping later sellers. In contrast, platforms like pump.fun pair tokens with stable assets like SOL, applying only the AMM amplifier to a 1x underlying asset. Alt.fun's use of a pre-leveraged quote asset (HYPE5L) fundamentally shifts the risk profile, creating a **second-order product with floating, often higher, effective leverage (typically 8-15x)** that is not clearly communicated in the interface. This results in amplified gains in strong trends but significantly magnified losses and unique liquidity risks during downturns.

marsbit05/18 10:16

Perspective: Tokens on alt.fun are double-layered leverage

marsbit05/18 10:16

Has Hook Summer Really Arrived? sato, Lo0p, FLOOD Ignite the New Narrative of Uniswap v4

"Hook Summer" Arrives? Sato, Lo0p, FLOOD Ignite Uniswap v4 Narrative Amidst a slight market recovery, attention within the Ethereum ecosystem has shifted to Meme coins built on Uniswap v4's Hook protocol. Following ASTEROID, tokens like sato, sat1, Lo0p, and FLOOD have become market focal points, with market caps ranging from millions to tens of millions, bringing concentrated liquidity to a narrative-dry market. Uniswap v4 Hooks are "plugin smart contracts" that allow developers to inject custom logic at key points in a liquidity pool's lifecycle (initialization, adding/removing liquidity, swaps, etc.), making the AMM programmable. Recent representative projects include: * **sato**: Market cap peaked over $38M; uses a v4 curve mechanism for minting/burning, locking ETH as reserve. * **sat1**: Market cap briefly exceeded $10M, positioning as an "optimized sato," but later declined significantly. * **Lo0p**: Market cap neared $6.6M; a "lending AMM protocol" allowing users to borrow ETH against deposited LO0P tokens without immediate selling pressure. * **FLOOD**: Market cap approached $6M; channels trading reserves into Aave v3 to generate yield, which is retained in the pool. The emergence of these Hook-based tokens could drive long-term growth for the Uniswap ecosystem by attracting users and liquidity to v4 pools. Combined with Uniswap's activated fee switch (partially used to burn UNI), the long-term outlook for UNI appears positive. However, short-term UNI price appreciation is not directly guaranteed. Factors include the sustainability and lifecycle of these new tokens, their price volatility, overall market conditions, and regulatory pressures. Currently, Uniswap v4's TVL ($595M) lags behind v3 and v2, indicating Hook adoption still requires time to mature. In summary, the Hook ecosystem serves as "long-term nourishment" for UNI, but acts more as a "catalyst" than a direct "booster" in the short term. Note: These are early-stage experimental tokens and may carry unknown risks.

marsbit05/11 06:42

Has Hook Summer Really Arrived? sato, Lo0p, FLOOD Ignite the New Narrative of Uniswap v4

marsbit05/11 06:42

Has Hook Summer Truly Arrived? sato, Lo0p, FLOOD Ignite the New Uniswap v4 Narrative

With the broader market showing signs of recovery, a new wave of interest has emerged around Ethereum-based meme coins. Following ASTEROID, tokens like sato, sat1, Lo0p, and FLOOD, built upon the Uniswap v4 Hook protocol, are capturing market attention. Their market capitalizations range from millions to tens of millions of dollars, injecting much-needed focused liquidity into a market lacking narratives. This article explores whether this trend signifies an incoming "Hook Summer" and its potential impact on UNI's price. Hooks are essentially plug-in smart contracts for Uniswap v4 liquidity pools, allowing developers to inject custom logic at key points in a pool's lifecycle (like initialization, adding/removing liquidity, swaps). This transforms the AMM into programmable building blocks. Key highlighted projects include: * **sato**: Peaked over $38M market cap. It utilizes a v4 curve for minting/burning; buying locks ETH as reserve to mint new tokens, while selling redeems ETH from the reserve and burns tokens. * **sat1**: Market cap briefly exceeded $10M, promoted as an "optimized sato," but later declined significantly. * **Lo0p**: Reached nearly $6.6M. It's a lending AMM protocol where buying LO0P tokens locks them as collateral, allowing users to borrow ETH from the pool reserve at 40% LTV, aiming to improve capital efficiency for idle ETH in LPs. * **FLOOD**: Peaked near $6M. Its mechanism directs asset reserves from buys into Aave v3 to generate yield, with fees and interest retained in the pool to potentially influence the token's price long-term. In the long term, the development of the Hook ecosystem can attract users and liquidity to Uniswap v4, benefiting UNI's fundamentals—especially combined with the recent activation of the protocol fee switch, where a portion of fees is used to burn UNI. However, in the short term, these Hook-based tokens are unlikely to directly drive significant UNI price appreciation. Their impact is moderated by factors like token sustainability, price volatility, and broader market and regulatory conditions. Currently, Uniswap v4's TVL ($595M) still trails behind v2 and v3, indicating adoption and growth will take time. The article concludes that while the Hook ecosystem provides long-term "nourishment" for UNI, its short-term role is more of a "catalyst" than a "booster." Readers are cautioned that these are early-stage experimental tokens and may carry unknown risks.

Odaily星球日报05/11 06:30

Has Hook Summer Truly Arrived? sato, Lo0p, FLOOD Ignite the New Uniswap v4 Narrative

Odaily星球日报05/11 06:30

Why Does the Automated Market Maker (AMM) Mechanism Fail in the Prediction Market Field?

The article explores why Automated Market Makers (AMMs), particularly the x*y=k model popularized by Uniswap, fail in prediction markets despite their success in decentralized finance (DeFi). AMMs excel in DeFi by enabling permissionless liquidity provision and continuous trading for tokens that fluctuate indefinitely. However, prediction markets involve binary outcomes where assets settle to either $1 or $0 at expiration. This structural difference causes inherent flaws: liquidity providers (LPs) inevitably suffer losses as pools automatically rebalance toward the losing side upon settlement—making "impermanent loss" permanent. Additionally, AMMs distort price discovery for probability-based markets due to slippage and low liquidity. Early prediction platforms like Polymarket and Augur experimented with AMMs but abandoned them for Central Limit Order Books (CLOBs), which better handle precise probabilistic pricing and binary settlements. The article concludes that while AMMs revolutionized token swaps, their mechanics are mismatched for prediction markets, requiring alternative infrastructure that accommodates binary outcomes and mandatory settlement.

marsbit04/14 13:18

Why Does the Automated Market Maker (AMM) Mechanism Fail in the Prediction Market Field?

marsbit04/14 13:18

The V5 That Never Came: Uniswap Stuck in an Innovation Dilemma

ChainCatcher author Gu Yu analyzes Uniswap's perceived slowdown in innovation. Despite its history of rapid iteration—from V1 in 2018 to V4 in 2023—the protocol has not announced a new version since. V4 introduced Hooks, a programmable plugin system allowing custom functions like dynamic fees and MEV protection, but its mainnet launch was delayed to January 2025 due to security audits. V4’s TVL peaked at $1.2 billion but has since fallen to $650 million, only 40% of V3’s TVL. Uniswap expanded to new blockchains and API partnerships but faced challenges with newer initiatives: its appchain, Unichain, saw TVL drop from $900 million to $36 million, and its token auction product (CCA) entered a crowded market. High-profile departures and a 74% drop in UNI token price over the past year reflect operational and growth struggles. A proposal to enable fee mechanisms and burn tokens briefly boosted UNI’s price, but Uniswap’s annualized revenue remains behind competitors like PancakeSwap and Aave. The article concludes that Uniswap’s situation mirrors broader DeFi stagnation but notes its strong security record and leading position in decentralized trading. The future of V5 and its role in driving the next DeFi wave remain uncertain.

marsbit04/11 04:13

The V5 That Never Came: Uniswap Stuck in an Innovation Dilemma

marsbit04/11 04:13

‘Wrong approach’ – Crypto lobby rejects Wall Street’s tighter DeFi rules for tokenized securities

The Blockchain Association (BA) has strongly opposed a proposal from Citadel Securities and traditional finance (SIFMA) calling for stricter regulation of DeFi protocols that handle tokenized securities. In a letter to the SEC, the BA argued that applying existing securities laws, which are designed for intermediaries, to neutral decentralized infrastructure is the "wrong approach." While affirming that tokenized securities are still securities, the BA emphasized that the SEC should consider how modern blockchain technology works before regulating, rather than automatically classifying DeFi infrastructure as exchanges or brokers. This pushback aligns with earlier criticism from the DeFi Education Fund (DEF). Citadel and SIFMA, however, maintain that all platforms handling tokenized securities must be under regulatory oversight to ensure a level playing field and investor protection, regardless of whether they are custodial or decentralized. The outcome hinges on the SEC's decision, which could potentially be challenged in court if it is not codified by the CLARITY Act.

ambcrypto04/08 04:32

‘Wrong approach’ – Crypto lobby rejects Wall Street’s tighter DeFi rules for tokenized securities

ambcrypto04/08 04:32

DeFi vs. SEC: Should ‘non-custodial platforms’ be treated like exchanges?

DeFi Education Fund (DEF) argues that non-custodial DeFi protocols, AMMs, and their developers should not be regulated as exchanges or intermediaries, as they don’t perform exchange functions or control user assets. They oppose SIFMA’s push for SEC regulation based on function rather than decentralization. SIFMA and Citadel Securities advocate for regulating DeFi platforms handling tokenized securities to ensure investor protection, citing risks and scams. DEF suggests Wall Street’s stance may be motivated by business interests, as DeFi disrupts traditional intermediaries. The SEC faces the challenge of balancing innovation and regulation in its upcoming framework.

ambcrypto04/02 09:08

DeFi vs. SEC: Should ‘non-custodial platforms’ be treated like exchanges?

ambcrypto04/02 09:08

活动图片

Project Updatesright-arrow

Indepth Researchright-arrow