Arbitrage in automated market makers

One of the most interesting applications of blockchain is given by the automated market makers (AMMs). In the paper, we discuss how arbitrage activity between the AMMs and the other exchange nodes can affect the volumes of assets in liquidity pools of constant function AMMs. In particular, we argue that arbitrage superimposes to the constant function in determining the liquidity volumes within the same AMM and across different AMMs. Yet, despite representing an additional condition in the model, equilibrium arbitrage is typically not unique because it may depend on several elements, such as the amount of liquidity in the system and the number of exchange nodes. Hence, the paper discusses how the constant function and arbitrage jointly determine the relationship across the assets’ liquidity volume in the pool but not a unique value for such volumes unless further constraints are introduced. Therefore, a platform interested in predicting the pool’s liquidity volumes may face indeterminacy as to which equilibrium would prevail. Though arbitrage has been discussed in related literature, equilibrium indeterminacy does not seem to have been pointed out.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Frontiers in Blockchain
Published
2024-10-14
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3389/fbloc.2024.1455070
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Financial Markets and Investment Strategies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.54
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Arbitrage in automated market makers

Nicola Dimitri
1 citations
Frontiers in Blockchain
Financial Markets and Investment Strategies
0.54
article

Arbitrage in automated market makers

Nicola Dimitri
article en
1 citations

Abstract

One of the most interesting applications of blockchain is given by the automated market makers (AMMs). In the paper, we discuss how arbitrage activity between the AMMs and the other exchange nodes can affect the volumes of assets in liquidity pools of constant function AMMs. In particular, we argue that arbitrage superimposes to the constant function in determining the liquidity volumes within the same AMM and across different AMMs. Yet, despite representing an additional condition in the model, equilibrium arbitrage is typically not unique because it may depend on several elements, such as the amount of liquidity in the system and the number of exchange nodes. Hence, the paper discusses how the constant function and arbitrage jointly determine the relationship across the assets’ liquidity volume in the pool but not a unique value for such volumes unless further constraints are introduced. Therefore, a platform interested in predicting the pool’s liquidity volumes may face indeterminacy as to which equilibrium would prevail. Though arbitrage has been discussed in related literature, equilibrium indeterminacy does not seem to have been pointed out.

Frontiers in BlockchainVol. 7
University of Siena (IT)
Openalex Percentile: Top 30%
Financial Markets and Investment Strategies
0.54
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.