601
中文 (Chinese) / Re: bitCNY/bitUSD的进化
« on: May 19, 2019, 06:00:43 am »如果债仓中抵押的BTS也可以挂单卖出,那么借款者的腾挪余地会更大,会吸引更多的BTS回归内盘,会从整体上降低系统风险。
债仓打包再融资吗?
平多而已。
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
如果债仓中抵押的BTS也可以挂单卖出,那么借款者的腾挪余地会更大,会吸引更多的BTS回归内盘,会从整体上降低系统风险。
债仓打包再融资吗?
而BTS现在的这种DPOS节点见证人体系, 很明显属于"养老院"性质, 好坏的都能混口饭吃, 只要出块没问题, 跟各个大票仓混好关系就都不是事, 即使被撤了, 也无所谓.
如果是YOYOW的节点模式,喂价加入作为考核项,POS超级节点+DPOS超级节点的喂价就可以互相制约。
按我从各api拿到的最新数据,
鼓鼓现在日兑换量几十万cny,zb的bitcny/qc交易对几十万量,aex的bitcny/cnc交易对几万量。
加起来也就百来万。
虽然内盘 bts/bitcny 交易量大过千万,但是,这个量不是直接的bts按cny计价价格,
用bitcny/cny的直兑价来换算,有效成交量就要按少的算,结果就只有两百来万,喂价权重不高。
实际上承兑商手续费也是跟着行情走的,
内盘拉的狠了,承兑商会降充值手续费;内盘砸的狠了,承兑商会提高充值手续费。
鼓鼓这种类似场外交易的app改费率不如挂单竞价那么及时,不是撮合交易也更容易操纵。
zb和aex的bitcny交易对和内盘之间是有机器人搬砖的,内盘拉或者砸太多了,bitcny折价和溢价会传导过去。
这些可以作为参考,算一部分权重,但如果作为唯一数据源,就有新的风险:
比如,在zb和aex的 bitcny市场插根针,在鼓鼓用非正常手续费自买自卖等等,不用多少成本就可以影响喂价了。
确实存在这样的问题。但是ZB、AEX的交易量也不是用法币直兑的呀,况且还作假。为了避免操纵,所以设了一个平均价的偏离顶,5%,这样不就好了么。
你可以观察一下ok的期货,期货的爆仓价就是以其期货盘的实时价格算的,哪怕贴水很大(期货价与实物价相差很大),仅在交割的时候用实物价交割。为什么呢?就是要多空公平博弈啊,不能用外盘控制内盘啊。我们这个内盘也是一个杠杆市场,外盘价就是实物价,我们的喂价等于控制内盘无时无刻不在交割,这样在内盘还炒个毛线啊。设一个偏离顶,就是等于达到偏离顶了就交割,内盘总有了博弈的空间。
I can sell you BTS for 6.2 cents like gdex-witness feeds if you want
Thanks.
You're still ignoring the fact that there is a huge volume of poorly collateralized shorts out there, which means while BTS goes down the DEX price is permanently driven towards MSSR because of constant margin calling. Deriving the feed price from that skewed DEX price is what I'm primarily worried about, because it creates a dangerous feedback loop.
Also, I suspect that Chinese investors mostly do not invest in BTS, but they invest in BTC or other cryptos and use bitCNY/BTS merely as a vehicle. (I may be wrong of course.)
If large amounts of CNY enter the system that way, they will accept a worse-than-fair (less BTS per CNY and higher recharge rate) price, whereas when investors want to exit into CNY they will pay more BTS per CNY and accept a higher withdraw rate. Either way, the MagicWallet price will be skewed relative to the feed price. In a healthy market environment these differences would be resolved through arbitrage. Arbitrage is difficult here because of the general difficulty of investing CNY into cryptos. This only means that we must accept bigger differences, because with higher potential profits arbitrage will kick in at some point.
It is still debatable if the MagicWallet price reflects the fair price better than an external CEX. I see your logic there. At the very least though, the effect of margin calls on the DEX price must be taken into account.