Which unfortunately is useless for evaluating the liquidity situation on Poloniex.
Current NuBot configuration puts several orders on the book (if sufficient funds are on the account).
Parametric order book could be enabled again. Settings are
It would be great if NuLagoon (MLP!), would start to manage some liquidity related tasks like supporting T1 on Poloniex. They get paid for it. I don’t. Sorry - no resilience left.
edit: i tried to put some buy wall in 1% spread in my ALP bot. But it was gone in seconds.
The only wall right now is MoD’s gateway which has a much higher spread not even shown in ALIX.
ALPs cannot help in Polo this time
Yeah, liquidity tends to be gone in a split second when there’s a sudden dip, which I figure is a bot nibbling on arbitrage opportunities.
In a more ideal world we should let Poloniex walls have high spread and let the traders trade with each other in between, but I don’t like the fact that BTC volatility is translated into NBT volatility on CMC in times like that.
If that can be avoided then it will definitely be good to have high spreads. We’ll need to expand fiat pools, and shift NBT/BTC to off-exchange places where the volatility can’t be gamed so much.
The bigger picture will look like this:
Set Poloniex spreads to 2-5%. Or generally large spreads that can still sustain some amount of volume. Perhaps sell-side can be tighter but buy-side to be looser to adjust for ALP expectations.
Hopefully this sends more people to NuLagoon Tube (and potentially similar services), which have smaller spreads that can’t be gamed so easily.
Implement our own Shapeshift replacement for NuDroid that doesn’t rely on exchanges.
Have multiple NuSafe custodians on multiple exchanges, ready to supplement fiat pair ALPs.
With only 25% of liquidity on the buy side, I am activating as a back up to FLOT operations.
Didn’t @henry create some NuLagoon Tube pairs for FLOT? If so, couldn’t I send BTC to the BTC address and have NBT transferred to FLOT? Are the address pairs documented somewhere?
@zoro and other Poloniex liquidity providers: I can buy NBT for 1.005 with BTC. Just post here or PM me to arrange a trade.
13 BTC was sent to @masterOfDisaster’s gateway twice for a total of 26 BTC. 12.9038 BTC was exchanged fro 5000 NBT. When all these transactions confirm, the Poloniex walls should be balanced.
As mentioned above, I would still like to get details on FLOT addresses set up on Tube, if anyone has the info.
You are aware that they aren’t gateways any more? They are supporting the peg even better.
There are currently 70 BTC buy side support at 1% offset, not being displayed by ALix, but being broadcast:
Sat Jan 23 19:25:33 UTC 2016
status of (former) sell side gateway:
nud getliquidityinfo B | grep BETwD8nSjtj9ADSvej2na34xmsMYwPRymv -A 2
"BETwD8nSjtj9ADSvej2na34xmsMYwPRymv" : {
"buy" : 16076.57,
"sell" : 2103.8263
status of (former) buy side gateway:
nud getliquidityinfo B | grep BFGMPykfKxXZ1otrCZcsbnTwJjKHPP9dsP -A 2
"BFGMPykfKxXZ1otrCZcsbnTwJjKHPP9dsP" : {
"buy" : 13423.95,
"sell" : 6719.3857
If BTC drops, it’s rather for the sell side I fear.
If ALP pull the funds from the sell side like they did from the buy side, the NuBots will only have 10,000 NBT in total.
I hope the offset of 1% helps in that direction as well.
In order to make this liquidity visible we are going to need an ALix site showing T1+T2 from the various Nubots. In that way it would be easier for FLOT and operators to check the Nubots’ “secret” liquidity that T1 ALix cannot report.
Sun Jan 24 11:57:18 UTC 2016
status of (former) sell side gateway:
nud getliquidityinfo B | grep BETwD8nSjtj9ADSvej2na34xmsMYwPRymv -A 2
"BETwD8nSjtj9ADSvej2na34xmsMYwPRymv" : {
"buy" : 13082.98,
"sell" : 5127.7376
status of (former) buy side gateway:
nud getliquidityinfo B | grep BFGMPykfKxXZ1otrCZcsbnTwJjKHPP9dsP -A 2
"BFGMPykfKxXZ1otrCZcsbnTwJjKHPP9dsP" : {
"buy" : 20070.39,
"sell" : 10187.1611
Do you recognize how smooth liquidity provision has become?
The recent daily trading volume was still tens of thousands of USD daily, of which over 80% was on Poloniex.
The ALP was rarely zero, but some thousand USD value were still traded by the NuBots.
Now you might to glimpse how hard I had to fight to keep the peg - with almost no ALP support and a trading volume of up to $200,000 daily.
Back then we already had NuBots with market aware offsets, albeit in a manual way.
With CRFC to create T1.1 and NuBots on T1.2 and T2 the peg is safer than it is without it.
Market aware dynamic offsets might make that even more effective and at the same time cheaper.
It already works with static offset and some ALP (I haven’t touched the config of the NuBots for 2 days now).
Or do you remember the last emergency call to FLOT to deposit funds at the NuBot accounts?
Outlook
Please read and discuss this
Parts of it might be more controversial than others.
The part that deals with providing liquidity with a combination of ALP on T1.1 and NuBots on T1.2/T2 might be able to find consensus.