Current Liquidity

Ok, feature request: some way to force fund placement when new funds arrive on exchange.

1 Like

Then you have a fill factor of 1000NBT for T1?
The rest are in T2?

you’re thinking the alp bot. This is Nubot, it works differently.

ok, then we have a problem when checking Alix’s T1 report!
It’s not “trustful” any more!

Yah, the nubot is using the parametric order book so the funds look spread out on the buy side and concentrated on the sell side.

I limited the order size to 1,000 USD value in the config to limit risk for Nu funds due to device or internet access issues.
If I’d let NuBot place all funds on orders, and my RaspberrPi crashed, or my internet access had an outage, the orders wouldn’t be shifted when the price moves, posing a risk to the funds.

Approximately 6.5 BTC have already been sold.
I’m going to withdraw the NBT to the T4 FLOT sell side address (BqyRzFtWXDmjxrYpyJD42MLE5xc8FrB4js), if there are no objections.

@JordanLee, would you prefer receiving the NBT instead to have some funds for propping up sell side on demand?
It has become quite obvious that the decentralized design of the FLOT doesn’t make it the ideal role to balance T1 liquidity…

1 Like

your nubot now reports the funds in the wallet’s liquidity section?
I think Tier2 buy side is increased.
order value is not updated according to btc’s value. nubot problem?

@assistant liquidity

“total” : {
“buy” : 62287.0776,
“sell” : 89811.054
“tier” : {
“1” : {
“buy” : 15991.9895,
“sell” : 13068.2555
“2” : {
“buy” : 9197.53,
“sell” : 30356.4344
“3” : {
“buy” : 35393.627,
“sell” : 38634.0

My NuBot on Poloniex is configured to broadcast liquidity:

nud getliquiditydetails B | grep "BFGMPykfKxXZ1otrCZcsbnTwJjKHPP9dsP" -A 17
    "BFGMPykfKxXZ1otrCZcsbnTwJjKHPP9dsP" : {
        "1:NBTBTC:poloniex:0.3.2a_1449088964364_c6087a" : {
            "buy" : 0.0,
            "sell" : 0.0
        "1:NBTBTC:poloniex:0.3.2a_1449605416734_d024e4" : {
            "buy" : 0.0,
            "sell" : 0.0
        "2:NBTBTC:poloniex:0.3.2a_1449088964364_c6087a" : {
            "buy" : 0.0,
            "sell" : 0.0
        "2:NBTBTC:poloniex:0.3.2a_1449605416734_d024e4" : {
            "buy" : 1.31,
            "sell" : 10200.3012

All 25 BTC have been traded for NBT and rest on the account (10,200 NBT).
According to my traade history on Poloniex, the last BTC was traded at
2015-12-09 01:17:52 (the time seems to be UTC)

The funds are now NBT and stable in USD - NuBot reports the USD value :wink:

1 Like

Well, now the pisture is the opposite. I would expect all the buy walls to be zeroed after BTC rally, but no.
Very strange speculator’s behavior since BTC has an increased trend!

I have not yet sent the NBT to the FLOT address.
I would have liked to wait until @JordanLee’s could offer his view on that, because I suggested sending the NBT to him.
So the NBT are still in my account and I could use them for sell side, although that’s really not what this gateway idea was meant for.
But if I transfer the NBT to @JordanLee or FLOT just to make them trade the funds for BTC or send them directly back, that leads to the same situation for the orders on Poloniex.
The difference - if they could be traded for BTC - is, that at the moment the funds are Nu property, but would be LP property, if they were traded for BTC.

Operating this way is a step back in terms of decentralized liquidity providing.
But that’s the general issue Nu needs to deal with: decentralization necessarily means lower speed.
I’ve sketched it here in this post regarding T3 already:

I’d like to have some feedback. What to do with the NBT on my Poloniex account?
According to terms there’s not much room for doing anything else but sending them to FLOT or @JordanLee even if that means they will end up on my NBT entry gateway.
Anything else in my view requires at least a motion.

edit: to make this convoluted post a little bit more clear:
if @JordanLee would request to receive the NBT to trade them for BTC to an LP I’d send them the NBT as soon as possible.
If @JordanLee would request to receive the NBT to send them back to the NBT entry gateway, the shortcut would be to put them there directly.
I’m leaving out the FLOT because of the significantly reduced speed of multisig operations.

Lets hear from JL.
As a shareholder i would vote to use these NBT in sell wall asap.
This is a funny situation you get into.
You have become a T1+T2 LP operating with T4 funds :smile:

I don’t consider it funny. It’s more like a pain.
At the moment everything is like it was meant to be: BTC got injected in the NBT exit gateway and got traded for NBT.

I know what I need to do, based on terms, but I also know what needs to be done based on the liquidity situation.
I dearly hope we can find an intersection of those to views before the 6,000 NBT on sell side are gone.

This is a situation in which fixed compensation would provide an incentive to bolster the sell side orders up. The compenation per NBT on sell side would be quite big now - if we already had fixed compensation.
Another measure to treat situations like this, could be some discretion or terms for ALP operators to temporarily increase compensation for a low side. This would work with fixed reward and fixed compensation schemes.

The LP busines is not brand new, but I think we still need to learn a lot.

1 Like

Is it possible to run a another nbt/btc pool on polo with fixed cost once @Nagalim works out the kinks?

It isn’t up to me, but I believe the vast majority of shareholders would favour this course of action under the circumstances.

I love the gateway idea masterOfDisaster has pioneered. It could be improved by adding prompt payment from a gateway operator for funds received, according to specific agreements.

I was very happy to see FLOT fund this week’s buyback directly. It is becoming apparent that having them perform every tier 4 liquidity adjustment is suboptimal because the reaction time is too long and the need for adjustments too frequent. Ideally, a number of people acting individually will take on the role of being tier 3 liquidity providers. FLOT could deal occasionally with these liquidity providers to balance them, and they could interact nimbly and in a redundant manner with the market.

1 Like

It isn’t up to me as well. If the both of us agree that the (Nu owned) funds would end in the sell wall, I’m fine with doing that and using the shortcut.

The sell side situation on Poloniex has improved (T1 went up from 6,000 NBT to approx. 7,500 NBT).
Will keep an eye on it as good as I can.
If the sell side situation gets dire, I’ll put the funds on sell side. 10,200 NBT are available for that.

I will only refrain from doing so, if either @JordanLee or the FLOT ask for receiving the NBT.

1 Like

Now I understand the feature request from @Nagalim .

My apologies for not seeing this issue coming, I created a new ticket and will design and implement a solution soon, I see if I can squeeze it in 0.4.1 . So far NuBot has been tested and designed to work under the “no manual interaction with exchange” circumstances .

Report any other concern improvement now that the situation has changed.

1 Like

And it works great. This issue did only become transparent with buy and sell side under close inspection.
The issue is not only related to the gateway function I created with NuBot, but also with orders that are completely filled.

It would really be great to make NuBot place orders anew if they are completely filled (even if the price doesn’t change) or filled to a threshold (which will make the change more complex).
Thank you for including it in the road map!

what would you say if you act like a T3 custodian and sell me some NBT to put in polo? :stuck_out_tongue:
All my NBT are sold!