A trader can achieve a more favorable Solana (SOL) swap price compared to a passive pool depositor who is vulnerable to traders capitalizing on outdated quotes, as indicated by a preprint released on Sept. 29.
In the realm of SOL/USDC fills during quiet market conditions, propAMMs, which are pools managed by professional operators, exhibited a reference-relative execution cost proxy of 0.26 basis points, while public automated market makers (AMMs) showed a significantly higher proxy of 2.59 basis points.
The study, covering the period from Sept. 1, 2025, to Aug. 31, 2026, evaluates fills based on notional values against Bybit’s size-weighted USDT microprice at the top-of-book, converted to USDC/USDT midpoint. The authors of the study have affiliations with ETH Zurich and Category Labs.
Swappers aim to obtain more tokens for the same input, while depositors provide the inventory against which others trade and must be compensated for the risks associated with that inventory. While low execution costs may attract swappers, they may not necessarily make a compelling case for depositors.
The study on Solana reveals that propAMMs had two-second gross maker markouts of +0.37 basis points, whereas public AMMs had markouts of -0.22 basis points. Quiet-flow execution measures how much a trader sacrifices against a relatively stable reference, requiring less than 1 basis point of movement in the reference from five seconds before to one second after a fill.
When an external market fluctuates before a pool updates its prices, arbitrageurs may exploit the discrepancy in prices, leading to a correction through trades against the existing liquidity in the pool.
Overall, the study emphasizes the importance of evaluating returns and risks associated with being a depositor in a pool, while swappers can benefit from liquidity managed by operators who actively mitigate pricing risks.
The article also discusses the significance of quote reliability and execution quality in the context of different market participants. It delves into the complexities of routing paths, market-making logic, and the impact of competition on pricing and execution outcomes.
In essence, the research underscores the need for a comprehensive assessment of returns and risks for both swappers and depositors in order to make informed decisions in the evolving landscape of decentralized finance.
