fiddy.dime - priv/acc 🦡

ADL is a relic of isolated margin systems copied from @BitMEX. It doesn’t work for options, and at best is a terrible experience for cross-margin users. Paradex deliberately chose not to implement ADL. It breaks cross-platform hedges, adds a lot of unpredictability to users’ risk management, and fails for complex assets and portfolio-margin setups. There’s also no guarantee of finding profitable ADL counterparties under cross margin, without further amplifying liquidations. @DeribitOfficial also operates without ADL. Socialized loss (SL) is a far better experience for users and scales easily to more complex assets and margin types 👇 Portfolio-Level Integrity ADL operates at the single-market level, without considering the user’s overall account exposure. The trader who is high on the ADL queue due to a highly profitable/leveraged position on one market isn't necessarily profitable on an account level. Example: BTC = $100,000, ETH = $4,000 Insurance Fund (IF) = $100,000 collateral + short 40 BTC perps. Alice has a $4M BTC-ETH spread on, i.e. +40 BTC perps (long) and –1,000 ETH perps (short) → Both BTC and ETH rally +5% → BTC to $105,000, ETH to $4,200. Under a normal scenario, Alice’s BTC and ETH positions offset, leaving her with flat PnL. But the insurance fund’s bankruptcy price is $102,500. To protect the fund, ADL is triggered and forces Alice’s BTC leg to be closed at $102,500 as it cannot afford a loss that is higher than $100,000. Alice realizes BTC profits based on a 2.5% move while her ETH short continues to lose 5%, leaving her with a $100,000 loss. This can, in theory, lead to an unfair liquidation of Alice's account. "Ethena" Risk The same is true for a trader that could be holding the opposite position on a different exchange. If the position is subject to ADL, it closes the profitable leg, leaving the user with a naked losing leg. This destroys the intended hedge and amplifies risk exposure. @ethena smartly negotiated this provision away for it's trading on CEXs but that now means the risk of ADL is being unfairly borne by the exchange's other users. Smart for Ethena but not scalable for the exchange. Given the potential market exposure imposed on affected accounts, ADL often triggers a forced unwind of positions, leading to fire-sale behavior that further amplifies market volatility and erodes liquidity. This mechanism is particularly unsuitable for exchanges with options, where users frequently hold multiple correlated instruments on the same underlying asset for hedging or risk-neutral strategies. In such environments, forcibly closing a single profitable leg through ADL can break portfolio hedges, destabilize the portfolio and, by extension, the market. To our knowledge, NO EXCHANGE discloses how cross-instrument exposures are handled under ADL. Conditional + Reversible Under a SL mechanism, losses are conditional, deferred (not immediately realized) and give users a choice. They are applied only upon withdrawal, and only if the platform is still experiencing a solvency deficit at that time. If the market rebounds, or if the insurance fund grows (either through profitable liquidations or additional allocations) and covers the deficit, the shortfall is erased and no SL is applied. By contrast, ADL crystallizes losses instantly and doesn’t give the user a choice. If a sudden market move causes insurance fund depletion, the system immediately closes profitable positions via deleveraging. Those users now permanently lose their realized profits. SL introduces time, and recovery potential into the loss-allocation process while giving users a choice. It penalizes only those who exit during insolvency, while long-term users benefit if solvency is later restored. Fair + Predictable Risk Distribution ADL targets specific traders (often highly leveraged and profitable ones), forcibly closing their positions to cover the platform shortfall. It penalizes traders for system-level insolvencies outside their control. SL by comparison avoids arbitrary targeting and maintains fairness. All users share the risk evenly and only when a persistent shortfall exists. Transparency ADL is a complex, queue-based mechanism that is very hard to anticipate for users. In contrast, a SL adjustment is a simple, transparent function of the insurance fund shortfall relative to the platform’s TVL. As it affects users only when they withdraw, it ensures predictability and transparency in the loss allocation. Compute Efficient = "Chain Friendly" SL simplicity makes it straightforward to implement on-chain in a trustless manner. There is less compute complexity which means cost and throughput constraints are alleviated. ADL’s dynamic queue logic is computationally heavy as it requires scanning all accounts on the platform, making it very expensive and error-prone. It also adds congestion to a system that is likely to already be congested when ADL is triggered. October 10 = Wake Up Call If your CEX can’t guarantee portfolio integrity under stress, it’s the architecture that’s broken. Switch to DEXs with intelligent loss-allocation that protects hedges, distributes risk fairly while staying conditional and predictable. Paradexio

now HYPE RFQs 🔥

@DanDeFiEd Even @nicolas4vx?

Love this World Cup. Makes it much easier to spot the French and unfollow them.

RFQs on @paradex are heating up. Pretty soon we will be the most liquid place to trade options on chain.

welcome soldier!!

Zverev has got it in his head that Jannik is better than him. he's already lost at that point. If he wants to win he has to believe he is better. Technically, there's not a lot separating the two. The few breakpoints could have gone zverev's way. Dude has too much negative self-talk, even after he loses points, you can tell from the body language. @AlexZverev you gotta stop this negative talk bro, you are better than Jannik. We believe in you.

be a champion of life through the journey of poker

@skinsmonkey crazy

ZywOo’s 200 IQ Secret Tactic 🤯

dime terminal is going to eat options trading. i’ve been using it for my own trading and it’s been a game changer. between traveling and running a company day to day, i would never have put on half these trades. a lot of the time, it’s the simple things like roll mechanics that i just don’t want the hassle of thinking through. having an agent handle that is going to change options trading forever.

Nice work @D2_Finance! Soon you will be able to do all the legs of this strategy on @paradex

@0x_tiago @tradfi Why wouldn't he say that. He's just talking his own book, it's good for his stock

@tradfi Dev is talking about price

*SK HYNIX CEO: MEMORY CHIP SHORTAGE MAY PERSIST PAST 2030 $SKHYV

@0x_tiago @ethena When not if

Yield opportunities are the foundation of my on-chain options thesis After @ethena democratized the basis trade, most of the edge vanished, compressing returns to near rfr levels This chart tracks the evolution of defi vanilla yield since January 2024: in a clear downtrend that is now finding an equilibrium There are more than $140B in option-selling ETFs in tradfi with the largest fund from JP Morgan paying ~8% annually on over $44B in aum. It is a matter of time before defi-native (or even tradfi) operators start deploying premium-selling strategies at scale

RFQs heating up !!🔥 Follow along here 👉 t.me/paradexrfqtape

can't scale asset management on chain without privacy VTFs are the answer programmable private personal (curated)

the biggest chads in the option market all around a poker table only on @tradeparadigm

@Halcyon_Waters can't DM sir^^

UPDATE: #BTC daily 30d risk reversal against spot over last 3 months

70% of the GigaVTF is options yield strategies 7d APR is trending 8% you know what to do

@VoloCommander it's still $10m and theres 4k people in it which is greater than 0 and high enough to directly invalidate your claim that no one uses us :D

@fiddybps1 which decreased from 100 million to 10 million I remember perfectly well what happened, and you can see for yourselves that the statistics are currently at rock bottom.

You can have 1,000 VTFs, but if no one uses them, what's the point? Features don't matter without adoption. Users and liquidity are what count.