Not true, it needs volume, people trading then liquidity comes in. Liquidity without volume is worthless, and volume creates liquidity - it's worth to do amm on token with high volume.
Pooling is basically amm and it's not going to work without volume.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
I think it's a chicken and egg conundrum.
If I want to trade, I'd choose an Exchange with good amount of liquidity. and if I want to provide liquidity, I'll opt for pools with low liquidity but high volume :)
Posted Using LeoFinance
no.
If you add 1M$ liqudity to swap.eos on engine it will change nothing.
If you add liquidity to dec it will decrease profit shares for other liquidity providers. Doesn't affect volume at all, people not going to trade it more cause you added x to liquidity, it can affect price initially but nothing more.
Volume comes from people interested in trading(buying/selling) not from liquidity.
Am providing 10k hive liquidity on DEC and much more on uniswap, and from my experiments there are maybe 3 coins on engine that can generate profit on liquidity. And any next L provider will decrease profit. Basic V/L formula :)
Generally i don't see how pooling could co-exist with engine itself :)
maybe with 0 fees and farming token that will give shares from 1% deposits/withdrawals...
Alternative pairs could be interesting and doable on pooling, like you can have everything to btc in pooling and ignore hive, so it would be complete new layer on engine and it would get a lot of btc deposits = profits from 1% to share with liquidity providers