Rare Annualized Rate of 400%: Is TradeXYZ Handing Out Money to Oil Bulls?

marsbitОпубліковано о 2026-04-10Востаннє оновлено о 2026-04-10

Анотація

Amidst volatile oil markets due to geopolitical tensions, Trade.xyz’s WTIOIL-USDC perpetual contract exhibited an unusually negative annualized funding rate of -300% to -400%. This meant long positions received approximately 1% of their position value daily from shorts. The anomaly stemmed from the structure of WTI futures curves in extreme backwardation, where near-month (May) contracts traded at a significant premium to far-month (June) contracts. Trade.xyz’s oracle gradually shifts price weighting from near-month to far-month over five trading days during rollover. Anticipating this decline, traders heavily shorted the perpetual, driving the funding rate deeply negative. Three strategies were discussed: 1. Shorting Trade.xyz’s contract while going long on CME’s far-month futures—initially profitable but later eroded by high funding costs. 2. Shorting far-month futures and longing Trade.xyz’s near-month contract before rollover, which gained traction as arbitrage opportunities emerged. 3. Betting against funding rates via Boros, a rate-trading platform, though limited by low leverage and high slippage. The situation highlights how DeFi traders are adapting to traditional futures mechanics and advanced instruments like rate markets, reflecting the evolving infrastructure of crypto-native trading platforms.

Amid the uncertain situation of the Iran war, the crude oil market is experiencing significant volatility.

At the same time, a rare phenomenon has appeared on Trade.xyz's WTIOIL-USDC crude oil perpetual contract: the annualized funding rate has stabilized between -300% and -400%. This means that any trader willing to go long at this moment can receive profits equivalent to 1% of their principal daily from the shorts.

The market doesn't give away money for no reason. To understand this反常的 negative funding rate, we need to start with the basics of futures trading.

Rollover

Crude oil futures are a series of contracts arranged by delivery month. Contracts for May delivery, June delivery, July delivery, each with its own price. When the front month is about to expire, the market must switch from the old contract to the new contract; this action is called rollover.

Under normal circumstances, back-month contracts imply that oil merchants will store the oil for several additional months, incurring extra storage costs. Therefore, the delivery price should logically be higher. The market phenomenon where future contracts are more expensive than the near month is called Contango. Conversely, the situation where the near month is more expensive than the far month is called backwardation. This usually occurs when there is a current shortage, and everyone wants to get the oil immediately.

During this rollover period for Trade.xyz's crude oil, the crude oil futures market was in this near-high, far-low structure.

From late March to early April 2026, the WTI crude oil curve was in an extreme state of backwardation. As shown in the chart above, the price of the May contract (front month) remained consistently higher than the June contract (back month), with the spread widening to over $14 at one point.

The WTIOIL-USDC perpetual contract on Trade.xyz has its oracle pegged to this front-month May contract.

But we won't be trading this May contract forever. It must be rolled over to the next June contract. So how is the rollover accomplished?

According to the Tradexyz documentation, the oracle will take 5 trading days to gradually shift the price weighting from 100% front-month contract to 100% back-month contract.

Against the backdrop of "backwardation," this means the oracle price on Tradexyz will drop from the front-month price to the back-month price over 5 trading days.

Market participants familiar with this mechanism have a clear expectation of the contract price after the rollover. Everyone knows it will fall, so they naturally rush to short. Shorts accumulate, the funding rate turns negative, and shorts start paying longs.

From an arbitrage-free principle perspective, this is normal. The spread between the front and back month gives short sellers a profit. The funding rate will reduce this profit. The larger the spread, the higher the negative funding rate the market charges.

Once the negative funding rate reaches a certain level, this seemingly obvious arbitrage opportunity will be eroded. The cost for short sellers will completely cover the profit.

Strategies

How to make money in such a market context? Here are three common strategies.

1. Short the crude oil contract on Tradexyz at the current price, while simultaneously going long the back-month contract on CME.

This seems like a risk-neutral strategy to stably earn the spread, but it fails to consider several factors.

Suppose you short Trade.xyz's WTI contract at $95.352 on April 8th, while going long the June futures contract at $87.75, each with a notional principal of $10,000. If both sides eventually converge, you could theoretically get a spread of $7.60, about $797 in profit. But on April 8th, the daily funding rate for the short position was already 1.42%. Based on the remaining 6 days until rollover completion, the funding fee would cost $851. At this point, the net profit is only -$53. This doesn't even include transaction fees and slippage.

Abraxas capital implemented this strategy starting on March 19th, after the last rollover was completed. Their Brent crude oil position on tradexyz accounted for 20% of the open interest in that market and yielded huge profits early on when the funding rate remained relatively neutral. However, as more arbitrageurs flooded in, the funding fee has devoured 80% of their arbitrage profits.

The massive position also means they find it difficult to exit and are forced to pay passively.

2. Short the back-month futures contract, go long the xyz front-month contract, and close the position before the rollover begins.

This trade is almost the counterparty to Strategy 1, betting that the market is over-arbitraged. After April 1st, this strategy could indeed yield profits.

3. Short the funding rate for the xyz contract on Boros before the rollover begins.

Boros is a market developed by the Pendle team specifically for trading rates (funding rates). In Boros's crude oil contract market, what is traded is the market's expectation of the funding rate for Trade.xyz's crude oil contract over the coming period. If users believe the negative funding rate will deepen further, they can short the market's funding rate contract.

However, limited by slippage costs, position limits, transaction fees, and extremely low capital efficiency (only supporting 0.2x leverage), this trade also struggles to achieve the ideal high returns.

Conclusion

The rise of RWA trading platforms like Trade.xyz is forcing a group of "crypto traders" to become "futures traders." DeFi players are also starting to learn the CME rollover calendar, calculate front-back month spreads, and make decisions based on the funding rate curve on Boros.

Trading platforms are continuously iterating, and market participants are also adapting to new infrastructure.

Пов'язані питання

QWhat is the annualized funding rate for the WTIOIL-USDC perpetual contract on Trade.xyz, and what does it imply for traders?

AThe annualized funding rate for the WTIOIL-USDC perpetual contract on Trade.xyz is between -300% and -400%. This means that traders who take a long position at this time can receive a profit equivalent to approximately 1% of their principal daily, paid by the short sellers.

QWhat market structure is causing the extreme negative funding rate on Trade.xyz's crude oil perpetual contract?

AThe extreme negative funding rate is caused by a market structure called backwardation, where the near-month futures contract (May) is trading at a higher price than the far-month contract (June). This creates an expectation that the price will drop during the rollover period, leading to a surge in short positions and negative funding rates.

QHow does the rollover mechanism work for the WTIOIL-USDC perpetual contract on Trade.xyz?

AAccording to Trade.xyz's documentation, the oracle takes five trading days to gradually shift the price weighting from 100% of the near-month contract to 100% of the far-month contract. During this rollover period in a backwardated market, the oracle price is expected to drop from the higher near-month price to the lower far-month price.

QWhat was one of the strategies mentioned for profiting in this market, and what was its drawback?

AOne strategy was to short the crude oil contract on Trade.xyz while simultaneously going long on the far-month futures contract on CME. The drawback is that the high negative funding rate can consume most of the potential profits from the price difference. For example, a calculation showed that funding fees could cost $851 over six days, nearly erasing the $797 theoretical gain from the price spread, not including transaction costs and slippage.

QWhat is Boros, and how can it be used to trade in this context?

ABoros is a market developed by the Pendle team专门 for trading rates (funding rates). On Boros's crude oil contract market, traders can speculate on the expected funding rate for Trade.xyz's crude oil contract. If a trader believes the negative funding rate will deepen, they can short the funding rate合约 on Boros. However, this strategy is limited by slippage, position caps, trading fees, and low capital efficiency (only supporting 0.2x leverage).

Пов'язані матеріали

Anthropic and OpenAI Have Single-Handedly Severed the Logic of Pre-IPO Stock Tokenization

The pre-IPO stock token market is experiencing significant turmoil following strong statements from AI giants Anthropic and OpenAI. Both companies have updated their official policies, declaring that any transfer of their company shares—including sales, transfers, or assignments of share interests—without prior board approval is "invalid" and will not be recognized in their corporate records. This means buyers in such unauthorized transactions would not be recognized as shareholders and would have no shareholder rights. A major point of contention is the use of Special Purpose Vehicles (SPVs), which are legal entities commonly used by pre-IPO token platforms to pool investor funds and indirectly acquire shares from employees or early investors. The companies explicitly state they do not permit SPVs to acquire their shares, and any such transfer violates their restrictions. They warn that third parties selling shares through SPVs, direct sales, forward contracts, or stock tokens are likely engaged in fraud or are offering worthless investments due to these transfer limits. This stance directly threatens the core model of many pre-IPO token platforms, which rely on SPV structures. The announcement revealed additional risks within this model, such as complex "SPV-within-SPV" layering that obscures legal transparency, increases management fees, and creates a chain reaction risk of invalidation. Following the news, tokens like ANTHROPIC and OPENAI on platforms like PreStocks fell sharply (over 20%). The market reaction highlights a divergence: while asset-backed pre-IPO tokens plummeted, purely speculative pre-IPO futures contracts, which are bilateral bets on future IPO prices with no claim to actual shares, remained relatively stable as they are unaffected by the transfer restrictions. The industry is split on the implications. Some believe the fundamental logic of pre-IPO token trading is broken if leading companies reject SPV-held shares, potentially causing a domino effect. Others, like Rivet founder Nick Abouzeid, argue that buyers of such unofficial tokens always knowingly accepted the risk of non-recognition by the company. The statements serve as a stark risk warning and a corrective measure for a market where valuations for some AI-related pre-IPO tokens had soared to irrational levels, far exceeding recent funding round valuations.

marsbit49 хв тому

Anthropic and OpenAI Have Single-Handedly Severed the Logic of Pre-IPO Stock Tokenization

marsbit49 хв тому

Anthropic and OpenAI Personally Sever the Logic of Pre-IPO Crypto-Stocks

The pre-IPO token market has been rocked by strong statements from Anthropic and OpenAI. Both AI giants have updated official warnings, declaring that any sale or transfer of their company shares without explicit board approval is "invalid" and will not be recognized on their corporate records. This directly targets Special Purpose Vehicles (SPVs), the common legal structure used by pre-IPO token platforms. These platforms typically use an SPV to acquire shares from employees or early investors, then issue blockchain-based tokens representing a claim on the SPV's economic benefits. Anthropic and OpenAI's position means that if an SPV's share purchase lacked authorization, the underlying asset could be deemed worthless, nullifying the token's value. Anthropic explicitly warned that any third party selling its shares—via direct sales, forwards, or tokens—is likely fraudulent or offering a valueless investment. The crackdown highlights risks in the popular SPV model, including complex multi-layered "Russian doll" SPV structures that obscure legal ownership, add fees, and concentrate risk. If one layer is invalidated, the entire chain could collapse. Following the announcements, tokens like ANTHROPIC and OPENAI on platforms like PreStocks fell sharply (over 20%). In contrast, purely speculative pre-IPO prediction contracts remained stable, as they involve no actual share ownership. The move is seen as a corrective measure amid a market frenzy where some pre-IPO token valuations (e.g., Anthropic's token hitting a $1.4 trillion implied valuation) far exceeded recent official funding rounds. Opinions are split: some believe this undermines the core logic of pre-IPO token trading if top companies reject SPVs, while others argue buyers always assumed this legal risk when accessing unofficial channels. The statements serve as a stark warning and a potential catalyst for market de-leveraging and clearer boundaries.

Odaily星球日报52 хв тому

Anthropic and OpenAI Personally Sever the Logic of Pre-IPO Crypto-Stocks

Odaily星球日报52 хв тому

The Waged Worker Driven to Poverty by AI Subscriptions

"AI Membership: The Hidden Cost Pushing Workers Toward 'Poverty'" The widespread corporate push for AI adoption is creating a hidden financial burden for employees. Companies, from giants like Alibaba to small firms, are mandating AI use, often tying token consumption to KPIs, but frequently refuse to cover the costs. Workers are forced to pay for subscriptions out of pocket to stay competitive and avoid being replaced. Front-end developer Long Shen spends up to 2000 RMB monthly on tools like Cursor and ChatGPT Plus, seeing it as a necessary 3% salary investment to handle 90% of his coding tasks. While it boosted his performance and led to promotions, he now faces idle time at work, pretending to be busy. Designer Peng Peng navigates strict company firewalls by using personal devices and accounts for AI image generation tools like Midjourney, spending hundreds monthly without reimbursement, while her boss demands faster, more numerous revisions. The pressure creates workplace anxiety and suspicion. Programmer Li Huahua, after a friend's experience of raised KPIs following AI success, fears being branded a "traitor" for using it yet worries about falling behind if she doesn't. The dynamic allows management to demand results without understanding the tools or covering expenses, treating employees like AI "agents." While some, like entrepreneur Jin Tu, find high value in paid AI, building entire systems and winning competitions, for most, it's a trap. Free tools like Kimi and Doubao are introducing fees, closing off alternatives. The initial efficiency gains individual advantage, but as AI becomes ubiquitous, the personal edge disappears, workloads increase, and a cycle of dependency begins. Workers like Long Shen realize they cannot maintain AI-generated code without AI, making stopping harder than continuing to pay. The tool promising liberation is instead becoming a compulsory, costly chain in the modern workplace.

marsbit1 год тому

The Waged Worker Driven to Poverty by AI Subscriptions

marsbit1 год тому

SK Hynix's Trillion-Won Empire: The Successors

"SK Hynix's Trillion-Won Empire and Its Heirs" explores the unconventional succession narrative within SK Group, South Korea's second-largest conglomerate, following SK Hynix's dramatic market rise. Unlike traditional chaebol scripts prioritizing the eldest son, ownership, and political marriages, Chairman Choi Tae-won's three children from his first marriage are charting distinct paths. The eldest daughter, Choi Yun-jeong, is considered the most visible candidate. With a background in biology, consulting, and a PhD, she holds executive roles at SK Bioscience and SK Inc.'s growth strategy unit, focusing on biopharma and new businesses. Her marriage is to an AI infrastructure entrepreneur, not a traditional chaebol heir. The second daughter, Choi Min-jeong, took a unique route by voluntarily serving as a South Korean naval officer, including a tour in the Gulf of Aden. She later worked on policy and strategy for SK Hynix in Washington D.C. before co-founding an AI-driven healthcare startup in San Francisco. She married a former U.S. Marine Corps officer, connecting the family to U.S. defense and policy networks. The son, Choi In-geun, who has Type 1 diabetes, followed a more classic preparatory path with a physics degree and a stint at SK E&S but left to join McKinsey's Seoul office. He remains publicly silent and holds no SK shares, defying the traditional "crown prince" archetype. Their paths unfold against the backdrop of their parents' high-profile, contentious divorce and a record-setting asset division lawsuit. The article argues that as SK Hynix becomes a geopolitical asset in the AI era, the conventional rules of chaebol inheritance are changing. The heirs are being groomed not simply to take over, but to navigate a complex global landscape defined by AI, biotech, geopolitics, and policy, forging legitimacy through their own expertise and networks rather than birth order alone.

marsbit1 год тому

SK Hynix's Trillion-Won Empire: The Successors

marsbit1 год тому

Торгівля

Спот
Ф'ючерси

Популярні статті

Як купити WAR

Ласкаво просимо до HTX.com! Ми зробили покупку WAR (WAR) простою та зручною. Дотримуйтесь нашої покрокової інструкції, щоб розпочати свою криптовалютну подорож.Крок 1: Створіть обліковий запис на HTXВикористовуйте свою електронну пошту або номер телефону, щоб зареєструвати обліковий запис на HTX безплатно. Пройдіть безпроблемну реєстрацію й отримайте доступ до всіх функцій.ЗареєструватисьКрок 2: Перейдіть до розділу Купити крипту і виберіть спосіб оплатиКредитна/дебетова картка: використовуйте вашу картку Visa або Mastercard, щоб миттєво купити WAR (WAR).Баланс: використовуйте кошти з балансу вашого рахунку HTX для безперешкодної торгівлі.Треті особи: ми додали популярні способи оплати, такі як Google Pay та Apple Pay, щоб підвищити зручність.P2P: Торгуйте безпосередньо з іншими користувачами на HTX.Позабіржова торгівля (OTC): ми пропонуємо індивідуальні послуги та конкурентні обмінні курси для трейдерів.Крок 3: Зберігайте свої WAR (WAR)Після придбання WAR (WAR) збережіть його у своєму обліковому записі на HTX. Крім того, ви можете відправити його в інше місце за допомогою блокчейн-переказу або використовувати його для торгівлі іншими криптовалютами.Крок 4: Торгівля WAR (WAR)Легко торгуйте WAR (WAR) на спотовому ринку HTX. Просто увійдіть до свого облікового запису, виберіть торгову пару, укладайте угоди та спостерігайте за ними в режимі реального часу. Ми пропонуємо зручний досвід як для початківців, так і для досвідчених трейдерів.

190 переглядів усьогоОпубліковано 2024.12.11Оновлено 2026.04.28

Як купити WAR

Обговорення

Ласкаво просимо до спільноти HTX. Тут ви можете бути в курсі останніх подій розвитку платформи та отримати доступ до професійної ринкової інформації. Нижче представлені думки користувачів щодо ціни WAR (WAR).

活动图片