The arbitrage idea for the PIPPIN token has been a bit stuck recently. After doing some calculations, I found that the problem is significant—earning only a little over two hundred dollars in funding fees in a whole day, while the losses on the other side exceed seven hundred. When tallying this up, the fees and slippage eat up the profits, effectively invalidating the strategy.
The previously heard "double eat" mechanism also didn't deliver the expected results. In the current market environment, funding fees are becoming increasingly slim, and the rates for mainstream coins like XRP are also weakening. It seems not all arbitrage opportunities can withstand practical testing, so I need to keep exploring new ideas.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
21 Likes
Reward
21
6
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
ForkItAllDay
· 17h ago
The fee directly cuts into the profits, this is the reality.
View OriginalReply0
VCsSuckMyLiquidity
· 17h ago
Bro, this trick is already everywhere, and the transaction fee eats away immediately, breaking the strategy.
---
The funding fee has dropped so much, still hoping PIPPIN will turn things around?
---
Dual eating mechanism? Sounds mysterious, but in practice, it's all traps.
---
Can a 700 yuan loss teach you anything, brother?
---
Honestly, it’s just that the market has no money left; no one can expect to scalp anymore.
---
I gave up on this idea three months ago; why am I only realizing it now?
---
XRP fees are weakening, mainstream coins are no good, and small coins are even less likely.
---
Two hundred yuan in, a thousand yuan out— isn’t that just charity?
---
Keep pondering? Better to switch directly, don’t stubbornly hold on.
---
Slippage + transaction fees combined kill arbitrage strategies outright.
View OriginalReply0
IntrovertMetaverse
· 18h ago
The transaction fee directly kills the game, what's the point of playing anymore?
View OriginalReply0
AllTalkLongTrader
· 18h ago
Arbitrage sounds great in theory, but in practice, it's a disaster.
View OriginalReply0
SelfSovereignSteve
· 18h ago
Arbitrage really is just armchair strategy; as soon as you get on the battlefield, you're headshot by transaction fees.
I've also looked into the PIPPIN approach, and it turns out to be a money-losing venture; the fee rates simply can't support it.
With the funds and fees gone, what's the point of arbitrage anymore... It's time to change your approach, brother.
View OriginalReply0
NFTPessimist
· 18h ago
Arbitrage sounds great in theory, but in practice it's all pitfalls.
Transaction fees eat up your profits immediately, PIPPIN this time is a lesson learned.
Funding fees are already razor-thin, plus slippage... Honestly, I can't quite see where the profit would come from.
The arbitrage idea for the PIPPIN token has been a bit stuck recently. After doing some calculations, I found that the problem is significant—earning only a little over two hundred dollars in funding fees in a whole day, while the losses on the other side exceed seven hundred. When tallying this up, the fees and slippage eat up the profits, effectively invalidating the strategy.
The previously heard "double eat" mechanism also didn't deliver the expected results. In the current market environment, funding fees are becoming increasingly slim, and the rates for mainstream coins like XRP are also weakening. It seems not all arbitrage opportunities can withstand practical testing, so I need to keep exploring new ideas.