DOCSLIB.ORG

The Law of One Bitcoin Price?∗

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Law of One Bitcoin Price?∗ The Law of One Bitcoin Price?∗ Alexander Kroeger† and Asani Sarkar‡ January 19, 2017 Abstract Bitcoin, a digital currency, constitutesa textbook example where the law of one price should be satisfied as, unlike asset pairs previously studied in the literature, it is a fully fungible asset with identical payoffs. Despite this, we show the existence of persistent, statistically signifi- cant differences between US dollar-denominated bitcoin prices in multiple bitcoin exchanges. Further, the absolute values of price differences are positively related to the bid-ask spread, or- der book depth and volatility and negatively related to volume. Price differences are also higher on exchanges with smaller trade sizes, consistent with clientele effects from greater institutional trading. Moreover, impulse responses indicate that shocks to illiquidityand volatilityhave more persistent effects on absolute price differences between exchange pairs with more retail trading and greater counterparty risk. Finally, the speed of arbitrage and the amount of price discovery is related to the arbitrage frictions. Thus, limits to arbitrage remain relevant even in the context of a homogeneous asset class where many of the frictions in more traditional asset markets are absent. Keywords: bitcoin exchanges, limits to arbitrage, digital currency JEL classification: G12, G14 ∗The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York or of the Federal Reserve System. Any errors or omissions are the responsibility of the authors. †Federal Reserve Bank of New York; e-mail: [email protected] ‡Federal Reserve Bank of New York; e-mail: [email protected] 1 Introduction The law of one price states that assets with identical payoffs should trade at the same price but, on occasion, this law appears to be violated. Examples of such violations are “Siamese-twin” stocks with almost-identical dividend streams that trade at different prices (Jong et al. (2009), Rosen- thal and Young (1990) and Debora and Froot (1999)), parent and subsidiary company stocks trad- ing at prices such that the parent company value is negative (Mitchell et al. (2002), Lamont and Thaler (2003)) and the off-the-run minus on-the-run Treasury bond spread(Amihud and Mendel- son (1991), Warga (1992) and Krishnamurthy (2009)). Nevertheless, this evidence exists for only a limited set of asset pairs since those with closely related payoffs are hard to come by (Gromb and Vayanos (2010)). Additional violations of the law of one price come from cross-listed stocks, such as American Depository Receipts (ADR), where the stock of the same company trading in geographically-dispersed exchanges trade at different prices (Gagnon and Karolyi (2010)). In all these cases, although the payoffs are close, they are not identical. For example, even ADRs and the foreign shares they represent are not fully fungible (Gagnon and Karolyi (2010)). In this paper, we study price differences of the virtual currency bitcoin trading on 6 exchanges constituting 15 exchange pairs where the price is quoted in US dollars (USD). Unlike asset pairs previously studied in the literature, bitcoin in different USD exchanges is by design the same, fully fungible, asset with identical payoffs and no currency risk. As such, these exchanges constitute ideal, textbook examples where the law of one price should be satisfied. Our results, however, show the existence of persistent, statistically significant differences between bitcoin prices quoted in multiple USD exchanges. These price differences constitute two groups. For exchange pairs involed BTC-e, bitcoin consistently trades at substantially lower prices on BTC-e compared to the other exchanges, and the average price difference is statistically significantly different from zero. For the remaining exchange pairs, price differences are typically more episodic and smaller in magnitude, and they switch signs. For example, higher transfer costs and lower liquidity are likely to result in larger trading fric- tions and thus higher price discrepancies. Consistent with this idea, we find that the absolute values of price differences are positively related to the bid-ask spread, order book depth and volatility and negatively related to volume. We also account for explicit fees, in particular bitcoin network trading fees that users specify in order to incentivize so-called “miners” who create bitcoin.1 However, even after accounting for the implicit and explicit trading costs, we find that the average absolute price difference remains statistically significant for exchange pairs involved BTC-e. 1See Section 2.1 for a more detailed description. 1 Since trading frictions do not fully account for price differences in the exchange pairs involving BTC-e, we next examine market segmentation and institutional factors as determinants of bitcoin arbitrage profits. Segmentation may arise from clientele effects with the more active exchanges hosting more institutional traders, as inferred from differential trade sizes. We define dummy vari- ables bothretail and oneretail that indicate whether both or one of the exchange pairs, respectively, have small trade sizes and find that absolute price differences are positively related to the incidence of retail trading.2 We account for institutional factors through exchange-pair fixed effects. These fixed effects are generally statistically significant, implying that institutional features matter. Other factors, such as anonymity and exchange failure risk are also important, although we cannot quan- tify them. In particular, BTC-e offers enhanced anonymity relative to other exchanges, making it potentially attractive to users wishing to convert illicitly-obtained bitcoin into fiat currency, thus creating increased selling pressure (and hence lower prices) compared to other exchanges. Traders may also percieve BTC-e as carrying a greater risk of loss of customer accounts due to the opacity of their operations, entailing a risk premium on an arbitrage trade. Do trading frictions account for the persistence of price differences? We estimate impulse re- sponses from a Vector Autoregression (VAR) of price differences and search frictions. We find that shocks to illiquidity and volatility have persistent effects on price differences between BTC-e re- lated exchange pairs, lasting 10 days or more. In contrast, the effect of shocks on price differences are more attenuated, lasting 2 to 3 days, for exchange pairs that do not involve BTC-e. Overall, both the magnitude and persistence of price differences are related to search frictions. How do arbitrage frictions affect price efficiency dynamics and price discovery? We estimate a Vector Error Correction Model (VECM) and find that prices of all exchange pairs are cointegrated of order one, indicating the existence of a long-run equilibrium relation between prices of every exchange pair. However, there are substantial differences between exchanges in the speed of ad- justment of prices to deviations from the long-run equilibrium relation. Specifically, the half-life of a price deviation (i.e. the number of days required to eliminate half of the price deviation) is two to three times higher for BTC-e, as compared to other exchanges. Moreover, the information share of BTC-e is small compared to other exchanges, indicating that little price discovery occurs on this exchange for the period analyzed. By contrast, a substantial part of price discovery occurs on Bitfinex, relative to other exchanges. These results imply that arbitrage frictions impede the speed with which prices revert to equilibrium and the amount of price discovery. 2 “Retail exchanges” are defined as having a 75th percentile of trade size that is below the 75th percentile of all trade sizes for the past 30 days. 2 We contribute to the literature by showing that search frictions, market segmentation and insti- tutional features all contribute to limiting arbitrage between bitcoin exchanges in the cross-section and in the time series. We demonstrate how frictions affect arbitrage profits across exchange pairs. Further, we relate the persistence of arbitrage profits to search frictions, and show how the dynam- ics also differ across exchange pairs. Finally, we relate arbitrage frictions to price discovery. Thus, limits to arbitrage remain relevant for price efficiency even in the context of a homogeneous asset class where many of the frictions in more traditional asset markets are absent. The article is organized as follows. Section 2 provides an overview of Bitcoin and the exchange market. Section 3 provides more information on the sources of data used to carry out the analysis. Section 4 documents the price relationships between the major USD–BTC exchanges and describes the various arbitrage frictions that could lead to price discrepancies. Section 5 presents regression results to quantify the effects of various frictions on price disparities. Section 6 analyzes some of the dynamic considerations for arbitrage. Section 7 concludes. 2 How bitcoin is owned, used, priced and regulated Bitcoin is a digital asset and payment system introduced in 2009 that has attracted a great deal of attention due to its innovative design. Over the last seven years, bitcoin has grown to become a major medium of exchange with an estimated 100,000 merchants worldwide accepting bitcoin.3 In this section, we describe the use of bitcoin as a decentralized payments system (section 2.1) and how bitcoins are traded over online exchanges (section 2.2). Regulatory issues related to exchanges are discussed in section 2.3. 2.1 The bitcoin payment system Ownership of the units of bitcoin is established through claims to the current state of the public transaction history known as the “blockchain.” Users of bitcoin are identified by one or more bitcoin “addresses.” These addresses are known to the public and are often managed by client software known as a “wallet.” In order to claim ownership of bitcoin, that is, to send bitcoin from a particular address, one must possess the “private key” associated with that address. As the name suggests, the private key is not known to the public.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Is Bitcoin Really Untethered?
    THE JOURNAL OF FINANCE • VOL. LXXV, NO. 4 • AUGUST 2020 Is Bitcoin Really Untethered? JOHN M. GRIFFIN and AMIN SHAMS∗ ABSTRACT This paper investigates whether Tether, a digital currency pegged to the U.S. dollar, influenced Bitcoin and other cryptocurrency prices during the 2017 boom. Using al- gorithms to analyze blockchain data, we find that purchases with Tether are timed following market downturns and result in sizable increases in Bitcoin prices. The flow is attributable to one entity, clusters below round prices, induces asymmetric auto- correlations in Bitcoin, and suggests insufficient Tether reserves before month-ends. Rather than demand from cash investors, these patterns are most consistent with the supply-based hypothesis of unbacked digital money inflating cryptocurrency prices. INNOVATION, EXCESSIVE SPECULATION, AND DUBIOUS behavior are often closely linked. Periods of extreme price increases followed by implosion, commonly known as “bubbles,” are often associated with legitimate inventions, technolo- gies, or opportunities. However, they can be carried to excess. In particu- lar, financial bubbles often coincide with the belief that a rapid gain can be ∗John M. Griffin is at the McCombs School of Business, University of Texas at Austin. Amin Shams is at the Fisher College of Business, Ohio State University. Helpful comments were received from Stefan Nagel (the editor); an associate editor; two anonymous referees; Cesare Fracassi; Sam Kruger; Shaun MaGruder; Gregor Matvos; Nikolai Roussanov; Clemens Sialm; and seminar and conference
    [Show full text]
  • Coinbase Explores Crypto ETF (9/6) Coinbase Spoke to Asset Manager Blackrock About Creating a Crypto ETF, Business Insider Reports
    Crypto Week in Review (9/1-9/7) Goldman Sachs CFO Denies Crypto Strategy Shift (9/6) GS CFO Marty Chavez addressed claims from an unsubstantiated report earlier this week that the firm may be delaying previous plans to open a crypto trading desk, calling the report “fake news”. Coinbase Explores Crypto ETF (9/6) Coinbase spoke to asset manager BlackRock about creating a crypto ETF, Business Insider reports. While the current status of the discussions is unclear, BlackRock is said to have “no interest in being a crypto fund issuer,” and SEC approval in the near term remains uncertain. Looking ahead, the Wednesday confirmation of Trump nominee Elad Roisman has the potential to tip the scales towards a more favorable cryptoasset approach. Twitter CEO Comments on Blockchain (9/5) Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey, speaking in a congressional hearing, indicated that blockchain technology could prove useful for “distributed trust and distributed enforcement.” The platform, given its struggles with how best to address fraud, harassment, and other misuse, could be a prime testing ground for decentralized identity solutions. Ripio Facilitates Peer-to-Peer Loans (9/5) Ripio began to facilitate blockchain powered peer-to-peer loans, available to wallet users in Argentina, Mexico, and Brazil. The loans, which utilize the Ripple Credit Network (RCN) token, are funded in RCN and dispensed to users in fiat through a network of local partners. Since all details of the loan and payments are recorded on the Ethereum blockchain, the solution could contribute to wider access to credit for the unbanked. IBM’s Payment Protocol Out of Beta (9/4) Blockchain World Wire, a global blockchain based payments network by IBM, is out of beta, CoinDesk reports.
    [Show full text]
  • Trading and Arbitrage in Cryptocurrency Markets
    Trading and Arbitrage in Cryptocurrency Markets Igor Makarov1 and Antoinette Schoar∗2 1London School of Economics 2MIT Sloan, NBER, CEPR December 15, 2018 ABSTRACT We study the efficiency, price formation and segmentation of cryptocurrency markets. We document large, recurrent arbitrage opportunities in cryptocurrency prices relative to fiat currencies across exchanges, which often persist for weeks. Price deviations are much larger across than within countries, and smaller between cryptocurrencies. Price deviations across countries co-move and open up in times of large appreciations of the Bitcoin. Countries that on average have a higher premium over the US Bitcoin price also see a bigger widening of arbitrage deviations in times of large appreciations of the Bitcoin. Finally, we decompose signed volume on each exchange into a common and an idiosyncratic component. We show that the common component explains up to 85% of Bitcoin returns and that the idiosyncratic components play an important role in explaining the size of the arbitrage spreads between exchanges. ∗Igor Makarov: Houghton Street, London WC2A 2AE, UK. Email: [email protected]. An- toinette Schoar: 62-638, 100 Main Street, Cambridge MA 02138, USA. Email: [email protected]. We thank Yupeng Wang and Yuting Wang for outstanding research assistance. We thank seminar participants at the Brevan Howard Center at Imperial College, EPFL Lausanne, European Sum- mer Symposium in Financial Markets 2018 Gerzensee, HSE Moscow, LSE, and Nova Lisbon, as well as Anastassia Fedyk, Adam Guren, Simon Gervais, Dong Lou, Peter Kondor, Gita Rao, Norman Sch¨urhoff,and Adrien Verdelhan for helpful comments. Andreas Caravella, Robert Edstr¨omand Am- bre Soubiran provided us with very useful information about the data.
    [Show full text]
  • Sample Iis Publication Page
    https://doi.org/10.48009/3_iis_2020_245-252 Issues in Information Systems Volume 21, Issue 3, pp. 245-252, 2020 BITCOIN AND THE CROSS-MARKET EFFECTS OF THE MT. GOX MELTDOWN Michael Williams, Governors State University, [email protected] Semih Emre Çekin, Turkish-German University, [email protected] David Green, Governors State University, [email protected] ABSTRACT Bitcoin is a well known cryptocurrency that has existed for over a decade. We examine the historical cross-market dynamic relationships among four important Bitcoin cryptocurrency markets at a pivotal point in cryptocurrency acceptance among markets and the public. We pay particular attention to cross-market relations during the introduction of a new, competing Bitcoin exchange, Bitfinex, and the subsequent demise of the once-prominent Bitcoin exchange, Mt. Gox. Our findings show that Bitfinex's introduction led to a shifting of trading activity from the once popular Mt. Gox exchange to other exchanges. Mt. Gox's loss of trading activity caused price distortions in all Bitcoin markets under study. In addition, cross-market relationships became less efficient while Mt. Gox experienced its death throes. Our study provides evidence that (1) Bitcoin markets are susceptible to volume losses to rival exchanges, (2) shifting trading activity is also associated with price distortions mainly originating from the suffering exchange, and (3) Bitcoin cross-market dynamics are resilient and, ultimately, self-healing from shocks, strengthening Bitcoin’s long-term viability. Keywords: Bitcoin; cryptocurrency; virtual currency INTRODUCTION Since its inception in 2009, Bitcoin has become a widely discussed electronic payment system around the globe. Bitcoin exchanges have played an important role advancing the viability of Bitcoin but have also hurt Bitcoin’s image due to a series of problems that occurred among exchanges.
    [Show full text]
  • The Insurance Coverage Law Information Center
    The following article is from National Underwriter’s latest online resource, FC&S Legal: The Insurance Coverage Law Information Center. The Insurance Coverage Law Information Center AT THE END OF YOUR TETHER: ADDRESSING, RESPONDING TO, AND INSURING CRYPTOCURRENCY THEFT January 17, 2018 Herbert F. Kozlov, J. Andrew Moss, Kari S. Larsen, Vincent James (Jim) Barbuto Tether, the company behind USDT – a digital token backed by fiat currencies like the dollar and euro – disclosed that a hack resulted in the loss of $30.95 million worth of tokens.[1] Tether posted an announcement to its website November 19, 2017 reporting that a “malicious action by an external hacker” resulted in the coins being “removed from the Tether Treasury wallet” and “sent to an unauthorized Bitcoin address.”[2] Tether worked to “blacklist” or otherwise inhibit hack- ers from using the stolen coins following the hack. The Tether hack illuminates the privacy, reputational, financial and recovery risks associated with issuing, owning, and stor- ing digital currencies. These risks and events are likely to repeat themselves as more initial coin offerings (“ICO”) come to the market, and the prices of digital currencies continue to soar. According to Tether, USDT tokens are pegged to fiat currency to decrease the volatility experienced by non-fiat backed cryptocurrencies, such as Bitcoin, and to facilitate trading of USDT tokens on crypto-exchanges.[3] Although it is a less commonly used coin, the Tether hack rippled throughout the cryptocurrency market. News of the Tether theft contributed to a 5.4 percent decline in Bitcoin’s value the week the incident was announced (it eventually recovered).[4] Background: Recent Breaches/Cryptocurrency Thefts and the Consequences Tether is only the most recent of a number of security incidents that have befallen cryptocurrency providers and partners since the introduction of Bitcoin in 2009.
    [Show full text]
  • Cryptocurrency Exchange Option Is Among One of the Most Promising Areas (Figure 1)
    BDCENTER.DIGITAL CONTENTS Introduction 3 1. Jurisdictions 6 2. Exchanges possessing their own tokens 11 3. Profitability 17 4. Website versions (language and additional versions, landings) 23 5. Analysis of Fiat Gateways Capabilities 27 6. PR 34 7. Analysis of traffic sources 37 8. Social Networks 48 9. Social network activity shown by managers of the Exchanges 54 10. Forums activity 59 11. SEO, link mass, mentioning 60 12. Email marketing 73 13. Referral and affiliate programs 75 14. Visual style 79 15. Target Audiences 83 16. Opinion leaders 88 17. Brokers at Forex who work with cryptocurrency 90 Conclusion 99 2 BDCENTER.DIGITAL INTRODUCTION Nowadays, the Initial Coin Offering (ICO market) is experiencing a fundraising decline, that’s why many key market players have started to look for other high-yield cryptocurrency projects. Cryptocurrency exchange option is among one of the most promising areas (figure 1). Raised funds & Number of ICOs Check the amount of funds raised and number of ICOs finished by month for the past 12 months. Source: websites icobench.com/stats 3 BDCENTER.DIGITAL Figure 1. ICO funding has been declining from a record of 1.7 billion dollars in March to under 0.2 billion in October 2018. Binance Exchange turned out to be a huge success. Experts note that this exchange is the most successful unicorn startup in the history of cryptoprojects. In the last six months, Binance estimation of the market size was close to $ 2 billion. Moreover, the project is profitable. In a short period of time, the income of all cryptocurrency exchanges has grown rapidly.
    [Show full text]
  • Virtual Markets Integrity Report
    VIRTUAL MARKETS INTEGRITY INITIATIVE REPORT Office of the New York State Attorney General Barbara D. Underwood Attorney General Page 1 September 18, 2018 INTRODUCTION The New York State Office of the Attorney General (the “OAG”) launched the Virtual Markets Integrity Initiative to protect and inform New York residents who trade in virtual or “crypto” currency. As a medium of exchange, an investment product, a technology, and an emerging economic sector, virtual currency is complex and evolving rapidly. The OAG’s Initiative, however, proceeds from a fundamental principle: consumers and investors deserve to understand how their financial service providers operate, protect customer funds, and ensure the integrity of transactions. VIRTUAL CURRENCY TRADING PLATFORMS Public interest in virtual currency – bitcoin, ether, and other digital units used to store or exchange value – has increased significantly. The best-known virtual currency, bitcoin, was created less than a decade ago and is now valued at over $100 billion.1 Another virtual currency, ether, went from an abstract concept described in a “white paper” to a tradeable asset valued at over $20 billion in less than five years. There are currently more than 1,800 different virtual currencies exchanged around the world, with more released each month. No longer the exclusive province of tech-savvy hobbyists and traders, virtual currency now appeals to Wall Street firms and “mom-and-pop” retail investors. To access the virtual currency marketplace, investors rely on virtual asset trading platforms, often referred to as “exchanges.” These online platforms match buyers and sellers of virtual currency, performing functions similar to traditional stock exchanges, private trading venues, and broker-dealers.
    [Show full text]
  • Law of One Bitcoin Price?
    Law of One Bitcoin Price? Alexander Kroeger and Asani Sarkar Analysis Group and FRBNY Fintech Conference, FRB Philadelphia, September 28 2017 The views stated here are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, or the Federal Reserve System. 1 What is Bitcoin? . Bitcoin is a virtual currency, launched 2009 . “Unregulated, digital money, issued and usually controlled by its developers, and used and accepted among members of its specific virtual community” (ECB 2012) . Decentralized: mutually agreed set of codes (“bitcoin protocol”) . Not issued and regulated by central authority . Does not constitute legal claims on issuers (unlike FR notes which are technically claims on assets of FR system) . Blockchain: public ledger on which entire history of bitcoin transactions is recorded . Likely benefits: bitcoin protocol may reduce fees, time, risk in transferring value (e.g. 10-min settlement vs 1-2 days for ACH) . Accepted for payment by range of businesses and non-profits . Startups: proposed new businesses . BUT bitcoin is not widely accepted unit of account in and of itself 2 Bitcoin Value Transfer • Bitcoin to bitcoin between digital wallets relatively frictionless (e.g. China) • Need to exchange bitcoin for fiat currency in most cases (e.g. major retailers use 3rd parties to receive bitcoin from customers) • Buy bitcoin from exchanges using fiat currency • Bitcoin receivers typically don’t hold it but exchange back to fiat currency • Volatile exchange rate between bitcoin and fiat currency • Low correlation with fiat currency 3 Persistent, Directional Bitcoin Price Differences . 3 exchanges wrt BTC-E for US $ - bitcoin transactions .
    [Show full text]
  • Is Bitcoin Really Un-Tethered?
    Is Bitcoin Really Un-Tethered? JOHN M. GRIFFIN and AMIN SHAMS* June 13, 2018 Abstract This paper investigates whether Tether, a digital currency pegged to U.S. dollars, influences Bitcoin and other cryptocurrency prices during the recent boom. Using algorithms to analyze the blockchain data, we find that purchases with Tether are timed following market downturns and result in sizable increases in Bitcoin prices. Less than 1% of hours with such heavy Tether transactions are associated with 50% of the meteoric rise in Bitcoin and 64% of other top cryp- tocurrencies. The flow clusters below round prices, induces asymmetric autocorrelations in Bitcoin, and suggests incomplete Tether backing before month-ends. These patterns cannot be explained by investor demand proxies but are most consistent with the supply-based hypothesis where Tether is used to provide price support and manipulate cryptocurrency prices. *Helpful comments were received from Cesare Fracassi, Sam Kruger, Clemens Sialm, Sheridan Titman, and semi- nar participants at The University of Texas-Austin and University of Zurich. Integra FEC purchased data and provided research assistant support for the project. Griffin is an owner of Integra FEC and Integra REC, both of which engage in financial consulting on a variety of issues related to financial fraud, including cryptocurrencies. We especially thank Tin Dinh for excellent conceptual assistance and Prateek Mahajan for research assistance. Griffin can be reached at john.griffi[email protected] and Shams at [email protected]. Innovation, excessive speculation, and dubious behavior are often closely linked. Periods of ex- tremely rapid price increases followed by implosion, commonly known as ’bubbles’, are often associated with legitimate inventions, technologies, or opportunities.
    [Show full text]
  • Referenčné Inštitúcie, Ktoré Sú Poskytovateľmi Kotácií Finančných Nástrojov, Ktoré Sú Predmetom Pokynov Na Nákup Alebo Predaj (V Súvislosti S Bodom 6.46
    Referenčné inštitúcie, ktoré sú poskytovateľmi kotácií Finančných nástrojov, ktoré sú predmetom pokynov na nákup alebo predaj (v súvislosti s bodom 6.46. OP): • LMAX • Finalto (CFH Markets) • IS Prime Limited • Matchtrade Technologies LLC • GC Exchange Limited • Organizované trhy • Burzy kryptomien*: BINANCECOIN - Poloniex, Binance BITCOIN - Coinbase Pro, Bitfinex, Poloniex, OkEx, Gemini, Bitstamp, Binance, Huobi, HitBTC BITCOINCASH - Coinbase Pro, Bitfinex, Poloniex, OkEx, Bitstamp, Binance, Huobi CARDANO - Coinbase Pro, Bitfinex, OkEx, Binance, Huobi CHAINLINK - Coinbase Pro, Poloniex, OkEx, Gemini, Bitstamp, Binance, Huobi DOGECOIN - Coinbase Pro, Poloniex, OkEx, Gemini, Binance, Huobi EOS - Bitfinex, OkEx, Binance, Huobi ETHEREUM - Coinbase Pro, Bitfinex, Poloniex, OkEx, Gemini, Bitstamp, Binance, Huobi, HitBTC LITECOIN - Coinbase Pro, Bitfinex, Poloniex, OkEx, Bitstamp, Binance, Huobi POLKADOT - Coinbase Pro, Bitfinex, Poloniex, OkEx, Binance, Huobi RIPPLE - Bitfinex, Poloniex, OkEx, Bitstamp, Binance, Huobi, HitBTC STELLAR - Poloniex, OkEx, Binance TEZOS - Coinbase Pro, Bitfinex, Poloniex, OkEx, Gemini, Binance, Huobi UNISWAP - Coinbase Pro, Bitfinex, Poloniex, OkEx, Gemini, Bitstamp, Binance, Huobi XTB vytvára ceny ponúkaných Finančných nástrojov na základe trhových cien poskytovaných vyššie uvedenými inštitúciami. Cena XTB je vytvorená odvodením z trhovej ceny od Referenčných inštitúcií a pridaním XTB spreadu. Vzhľadom na skutočnosť, že obchodná činnosť XTB je založená na modeli tvorcu trhu, horná hranica pridanej hodnoty zahrnutej do spreadu, ktorú XTB vypočíta na transakciách založených na CFD, je 100 %. Spread vypočítaný podľa XTB tvorí náklady, ktoré nesú Zákazníci a patria XTB. XTB vyvinie maximálne úsilie, aby zabezpečila, že ceny transakcií sa nebudú významne líšiť od cien Podkladových aktív, poskytnutých v reálnom čase Referenčnými inštitúciami. Na žiadosť Zákazníkov XTB zverejní názov konkrétnej inštitúcie, ktorej cena bola základom pre stanovenie ceny Finančného nástroja, na ktorej bola transakcia vykonaná.
    [Show full text]
  • Vindax Is the Seventh Cryptocurrency Exchange Hacked This Year: What Should Investors Be Considering?
    November 21, 2019 VinDAX Is the Seventh Cryptocurrency Exchange Hacked This Year: What Should Investors Be Considering? On November 5, 2019, Vietnam-based cryptocurrency exchange VinDAX was hacked, losing half a million U.S. dollars’ worth of funds spread across 23 different cryptocurrencies.1 The VinDAX hack marks the latest in a series of cryptocurrency exchange hacks and data breaches that have taken place this year, and is part of a larger and growing trend of digital currency heists that have occurred since Bitcoin, the first cryptocurrency, was introduced in 2008.2 In July of this year, Japan-based cryptocurrency exchange Bitpoint was also hacked, losing about $32 million in cryptocurrency,3 and earlier this year, hackers stole $16 million worth of cryptocurrency from New Zealand-based Cryptopia.4 Losses from cryptocurrency hacks this year alone are reported to have totaled around $1.39 billion worth of assets.5 Background Cryptocurrencies are built on a technology called “blockchain”— a distributed ledger technology in which transactions are recorded across a network of peer-to-peer computers. Since the most well-known cryptocurrency, Bitcoin, together with the underlying blockchain technology, was developed by one or more developers using the pseudonym Satoshi Nakamoto and published in a white paper in 2008,6 blockchain has been praised for its intrinsic security, as well as qualities that allow cryptocurrency holders to remain largely anonymous. But the same features that have made blockchain an innovative financial technology 1 Yogita Khatri, Little-known Asian crypto exchange VinDAX got hacked; lost ‘half a million USD’ worth of tokens, The Block (Nov.
    [Show full text]
  • Bitfinex Ready for Surge in Institutional Volume After Matching Engine Upgrade
    Bitfinex Ready for Surge in Institutional Volume after Matching Engine Upgrade ROAD TOWN, British Virgin Islands, July 7 2021 - Bitfinex, a state-of-the-art digital token trading platform, has upgraded the exchange’s matching engine in a move that bolsters the exchange’s capacity to handle spikes in volatility as volumes continue to surge, driven by increasing numbers of institutional investors entering the space. The upgrade in the matching engine provides the exchange with the capacity to handle mushrooming volumes as the digital token space continues to attract major participants from conventional financial markets. As the most liquid exchange for bitcoin and Ethereum, Bitfinex has handled an exponential growth in order volume, servicing daily volumes of US$10 billion during peak periods of trading activity. Meanwhile, the exchange has successfully handled spikes in user activity that coincide with volatile trading. For example, the number of real-time connections on the platform jumped to 482,939 on February 8 2021 when Tesla announced it invested US$1.5 billion in bitcoin. The upgrade of the matching engine also coincides with Bitfinex’s launch of its own native Financial Information eXchange (FIX) protocol Application Programming Interface (API). As an industry standard for participants in conventional markets such as Forex and equities, FIX provides optimum trade execution speeds. “Bitfinex has time and time again stood out during episodes of extreme volatility as an exchange able to maintain an impeccable performance regardless of market conditions,” said Paolo Ardoino, CTO at Bitfinex. “This latest upgrade to the Bitfinex matching engine consolidates the exchange’s position as the pre-eminent platform in the digital token space.
    [Show full text]