Futures
Access hundreds of perpetual contracts
CFD
Gold
One platform for global traditional assets
Options
Hot
Trade European-style vanilla options
Unified Account
Maximize your capital efficiency
Demo Trading
Introduction to Futures Trading
Learn the basics of futures trading
Futures Events
Join events to earn rewards
Demo Trading
Use virtual funds to practice risk-free trading
Launch
CandyDrop
Collect candies to earn airdrops
Launchpool
Quick staking, earn potential new tokens
HODLer Airdrop
Hold GT and get massive airdrops for free
Pre-IPOs
Unlock full access to global stock IPOs
Alpha Points
Trade on-chain assets and earn airdrops
Futures Points
Earn futures points and claim airdrop rewards
Promotions
AI
Gate AI
Your all-in-one conversational AI partner
Gate AI Bot
Use Gate AI directly in your social App
GateClaw
Gate Blue Lobster, ready to go
Gate for AI Agent
AI infrastructure, Gate MCP, Skills, and CLI
Gate Skills Hub
10K+ Skills
From office tasks to trading, the all-in-one skill hub makes AI even more useful.
GateRouter
Smartly choose from 40+ AI models, with 0% extra fees
Recently, I discussed some fundraising situations for quantitative funds. The most impressive one was a strategy focused on Aerodrome liquidity market making, with an annualized return of over 60%. More importantly, this scheme experienced virtually no significant drawdowns, and risk control was quite solid.
Because the fundraising party could control the risk, they took a substantial share of the profits, taking 45% of the returns, leaving the LP with just over 30% annualized. Honestly, this number is still quite good in the current market.
On the other hand, arbitrage strategies in the market are quite interesting. Many quantitative teams doing arbitrage only earn about 10 or so percentage points per year, and reaching 20% is considered quite good. The gap is so large—on one side, the liquidity advantage and clear profit model of market making; on the other, the arbitrage space itself is narrowing year by year.
I’d like to hear your thoughts on this—have you come across reliable quantitative strategies? Especially those that can consistently generate good returns while keeping drawdowns manageable. Have these types of strategies become more competitive in the past two years?
Market making is indeed more attractive than arbitrage, but a 45% cut is really harsh.
Arbitrage is getting more competitive, and there really aren't many good opportunities left anymore.
I agree that arbitrage is becoming more and more difficult, but 60% returns... brother, if it could really be consistently achieved, big funds would have already gone all in, right?
Arbitrage has long been highly competitive now, with bots executing instant trades, so individuals have no chance at all.
I'm actually interested in understanding more about Aerodrome's liquidity. Can someone break down the specific logic?
Almost no 60% drawdown? That would require a very stable model, which seems a bit unrealistic.
Market making is indeed more attractive than arbitrage, but where exactly are the risks? Has it been tested during market crashes?
I just want to know how long this strategy can be held. Once the liquidity pool dries up, is it game over?
Arbitrage is getting more and more competitive, it feels like it's reaching the limit.
It's really hard to find stable strategies nowadays; most are monopolized by large institutions.
Aerodrome's liquidity market making is indeed more aggressive than arbitrage; is such a big gap reasonable?
An annualized 30% sounds good to LPs, but I still have some doubts.
In the past two years, the quant track has become extremely competitive; small players really can't get in.
Solid risk control strategies are everywhere; the key is whether the profit share can be negotiated.
Arbitrage is indeed becoming more and more competitive, the room for profit is so limited.
The liquidity opportunity with Aerodrome is real, but a 45% split is really harsh.
A 30% LP yield is definitely noticeable now, but I'm worried the strategy might fail later.
The biggest risk in quantitative strategies is sudden drawdowns; no matter how good the risk control is, it can't prevent a black swan.
I've come across a few, but truly stable ones are few and far between; most just look good in the early data.