MaelleCrypto

The TON ecosystem is expanding through games, digital assets, payment tools and Telegram based services. Each domain introduces its own tokens and workflows, but value still needs to move between them smoothly.
STONfi serves as the connector layer that links these domains. When a project launches a new token, it can integrate STONfi pools to provide liquidity and connect that token to existing assets on TON. When a wallet or application needs to offer conversions, it can rely on STONfi routing instead of building its own exchange.
As more projects follow this pattern, STONfi becomes a shar

TON gives a lot of raw power: fast blocks, parallel chains, cheap transactions, flexible wallets. On its own, this is just an execution environment. STONfi turns that environment into something most users can understand: swap, pool, farm.
At the bottom, every STONfi pool is a simple contract with balances and a curve. On top of that sit routing, farming and SDK layers. Routing decides how to combine pools, farming decides how to share extra rewards and the SDK decides how to present all of this to external tools.
The interesting part is how thin each layer actually is. Most of the complexi

From the outside, a swap on STONfi looks simple: choose assets, confirm, see a new balance. Under the hood, a lot of small choices make this feel reliable rather than random. Two of the most important are precision handling and strict deadlines.
Precision is about decimals. Different tokens on TON can use different scales, and rounding errors add up if they are ignored. STONfi normalizes values inside contracts and the SDK so that swaps and liquidity operations behave the same, whether the asset uses nine decimals or three.
Deadlines are about time. Every prepared transaction carries a poi

On the surface, a simple swap looks like “take asset A, give asset B”. For STONfi, a minimal version of that might include all of the following steps in one flow.
First, the application asks the STONfi SDK for a route: which pools to use, in what order, with what expected output. The SDK delegates this to routing, which asks solvers to propose paths. One route wins.
Second, the SDK builds a transaction that encodes that route, the minimum acceptable output and a deadline. The wallet shows the numbers and asks for confirmation.
Third, the transaction reaches TON and runs through the pool

The best infrastructure is often the kind you do not think about. For most users, STONfi is not a brand or a destination, it is just the place where “swap” happens when they tap a button in a wallet or a bot on TON.
Behind that button, STONfi tracks pool balances, swaps fees into reserves, lets projects plug in farming streams, coordinates routes and prepares transactions for many different interfaces at once. Most of this work is invisible when everything functions as expected.
The real value shows up when conditions change. Fees on TON move, new pools appear, some routes become less effi

Imagine every app on TON trying to build its own tiny exchange. Liquidity would be thin, prices would differ, and users would constantly compare numbers. STONfi solves this by acting as a shared “liquidity brain” that many apps plug into at once.
Each wallet, bot or game asks the same backend how to execute a swap. The answer comes from STONfi pools, routing and SDK, not from isolated logic in each product. When one app attracts more users and deposits, everyone else indirectly benefits from deeper pools and better routes.
$GRAM This is why so many integrations choose to reuse STONfi inste

Holding TON in a wallet is simple. Turning that balance into a structured position with yield, exposure to several assets and controlled risk takes more steps. STONfi provides those steps without forcing users to leave the ecosystem.
Through pools, a holder can split TON into combinations with other assets. Through farming, they can attach reward streams. Through routing, they can move between positions without hand crafting every swap. Each layer sits on top of the same contracts, and each operation remains native to the chain.
From the outside, this might look like “just another DEX”. In

One of the challenges in any ecosystem is keeping behavior consistent across many interfaces. A user might use a Telegram bot in the morning, a wallet at lunch and a web app at night. If each had its own exchange logic, results would drift.
STONfi addresses this by putting the core decisions into contracts, routing and the SDK. Interfaces ask STONfi for quotes, routes and transaction payloads instead of improvising them. As long as they respect those responses, they produce similar outcomes for similar inputs.
This is why the same swap often feels the same across tools built on TON. Differ

Not every user on TON wants the same risk profile. Some prefer to stay close to TON itself, others are willing to explore more volatile tokens or experimental projects. STONfi provides a common surface where these preferences can coexist.
Core pools with deep liquidity and known assets form the conservative side. Pairs with project tokens, memecoins or synthetic assets sit further out on the spectrum. Routing connects them, but each user can decide how far they want to go by choosing which pools and farms to interact with.
Because everything runs through the same contracts and SDK, changes

Fast finality on TON means that once a transaction is confirmed, the network quickly agrees that it is part of the canonical history. For protocols like STONfi, this is more than a convenience, it is a structural advantage.
When swaps and liquidity operations finalize quickly, applications can safely chain actions without long waiting periods. A user can complete a swap, see the result and immediately use that new balance in another operation, all within a short window. Strategies that depend on precise sequencing become practical.
STONfi leans into this by designing flows that assume quic

For many users, their first contact with DeFi on TON is not a whitepaper or a tutorial, but a simple swap or pool interaction on STONfi. In that sense, the protocol doubles as a teaching tool for how things work under the hood.
Concepts like routing, liquidity, fees, farming and risk become concrete through repeated use. Each successful action is a small, practical lesson in how contracts and assets behave. Over time, users who start with “just swap this” build an intuition for deeper mechanics without needing formal training.
STONfi’s design encourages this gradual learning. It exposes en

STONfi uses different pool curves to better match asset behavior. For assets with independent price movement, pools rely on a classic automated market maker curve. For assets that are expected to stay close in value, stable oriented curves concentrate liquidity around a narrower band, making small trades cheaper.
These curve choices are reflected in pool metadata and tags. Integrators using the STONfi SDK can read these details and decide how to present pools to users or which pools to prefer for certain strategies. Omniston routing also considers curve types when combining pools into larger

TON assigns a small cost to each operation inside a transaction, but recent fee reductions made even multi step interactions inexpensive in practice. This allows applications to compose several contract calls without making individual actions feel heavy or impractical.
STONfi uses this room to bundle multiple steps into a single user flow. A swap can include route selection, several pool hops and internal checks, while a liquidity action can combine single sided provision and optional farming enrollment. Each additional step is still affordable because the base fees stay low.
For developer

Because TON processes transactions across multiple chains in parallel, it can distribute load as demand grows. New chains appear when they are needed, and the network scheduler assigns transactions so that no single segment is overloaded for long.
STONfi benefits from this by spreading its activity across the available capacity. Swaps and liquidity operations that touch STONfi contracts do not have to queue through a single bottleneck, even when daily volume reaches tens of millions. The routing layer can maintain a steady cadence, and users still see fast confirmation times.
For automated

On the surface, a simple swap looks like “take asset A, give asset B”. For STONfi, a minimal version of that might include all of the following steps in one flow.
First, the application asks the STONfi SDK for a route: which pools to use, in what order, with what expected output. The SDK delegates this to routing, which asks solvers to propose paths. One route wins.
Second, the SDK builds a transaction that encodes that route, the minimum acceptable output and a deadline. The wallet shows the numbers and asks for confirmation.
Third, the transaction reaches TON and runs through the pool

The best infrastructure is often the kind you do not think about. For most users, STONfi is not a brand or a destination, it is just the place where “swap” happens when they tap a button in a wallet or a bot on TON.
Behind that button, STONfi tracks pool balances, swaps fees into reserves, lets projects plug in farming streams, coordinates routes and prepares transactions for many different interfaces at once. Most of this work is invisible when everything functions as expected.
The real value shows up when conditions change. Fees on TON move, new pools appear, some routes become less effi

Imagine every app on TON trying to build its own tiny exchange. Liquidity would be thin, prices would differ, and users would constantly compare numbers. STONfi solves this by acting as a shared “liquidity brain” that many apps plug into at once.
Each wallet, bot or game asks the same backend how to execute a swap. The answer comes from STONfi pools, routing and SDK, not from isolated logic in each product. When one app attracts more users and deposits, everyone else indirectly benefits from deeper pools and better routes.
This is why so many integrations choose to reuse STONfi instead of

Managing a portfolio on one chain with many assets looks simple on the surface: a list of balances and some charts. Underneath, every rebalancing step is a sequence of swaps and liquidity moves, each with its own constraints.
STONfi gives wallets and dashboards a way to compress this complexity. A portfolio tool can describe a target allocation and then use the STONfi SDK to translate that plan into concrete swaps and liquidity actions. The same routing and pool logic that powers a single swap also powers multi asset adjustments.
Because everything runs on the same contracts, the cost and

STONfi is used as a backend by many wallets, bots and applications on the TON network. When a user taps a swap button in a wallet or a Telegram bot, the request often goes to STONfi pools and routing rather than to a separate in house exchange.
This shared backend model means that different interfaces can offer swaps, liquidity provision and farming without duplicating core logic. They rely on the same pools, the same Omniston routing layer and the same STONfi SDK. For users this results in similar pricing and behavior across tools, even if the front ends look very different.
As more produ

As activity on TON grows, the routing layer used by STONfi has to account for changing gas costs, pool conditions and new venues. Omniston continuously updates its view of available routes, taking into consideration not only prices but also the cost and reliability of each path.
If gas usage or congestion make a particular route less attractive, the router can shift preferences toward alternatives that achieve a similar result with fewer steps. When new STONfi pools or connected venues reach meaningful depth, they can be added into the routing set without requiring changes from users or inte