Uniswap Who? Trader Joe’s AMM Takes DeFi By Storm

In the fast-evolving world of decentralized finance (DeFi), new players are constantly emerging with innovative solutions to address the challenges of trading and liquidity provision. One platform that has been making waves in the DeFi ecosystem is Trader Joe, which has gained steam with its capital-efficient decentralized exchange (DEX).

According to a recent Twitter post by Chase, a researcher at Messari, the heart of Trader Joe’s success is its Liquidity Book (LB), a concentrated liquidity model that is being hailed as a game-changer for liquidity providers in the DeFi space.

What Makes Trader Joe Different From Other DeFi Protocols?

Competing with established players like Uniswap V3, Trader Joe’s LB is quickly gaining traction, being the fastest-growing DEX over the last 180 days. The platform’s surging growth is a testament to its appeal to traders and liquidity providers.

Trader Joe and Uniswap are decentralized exchanges allowing users to trade cryptocurrencies without relying on centralized intermediaries. However, there are several key differences between the two platforms:

• Liquidity Model: Trader Joe’s uses a concentrated liquidity model called the Liquidity Book, as said before, while Uniswap uses a constant product market maker model. The LB can be more capital-efficient and cost-effective for liquidity providers, while the construct product model is simpler and more widely used in the DeFi ecosystem.

Furthermore, its LB is a liquidity provision model developed by Trader Joe’s. It allows liquidity providers to concentrate their funds in a specific price range rather than spreading them out across the entire price spectrum.

Additionally, the LB can be more cost-effective for smaller liquidity providers, who may not have the capital to provide liquidity across the entire price spectrum on other Automatized Market Makers (AMMs)

• Fees: Trader Joe’s charges lower fees than Uniswap. This can make it more attractive to traders and liquidity providers looking to minimize costs.
• Development: Trader Joe’s is community-driven, allowing users to propose and vote on changes on the platform. On the other hand, Uniswap is governed by a protocol controlled by a small group of stakeholders.

Keys Behind Trader Joe’s Current Success In DeFi

According to Chase, one key factor behind this success is Joe V2’s higher base fees. This means liquidity providers earn more fees on every trade in the pool. Joe V2 adds a volatility fee, further increasing liquidity providers’ profitability.

According to data compiled by Chase, 36.5% of Joe V2’s WETH-USDC liquidity on Arbitrum falls within the +/- 2% price range, significantly higher than the 19.9% for Uniswap V3 and the 4% for SushiSwap. This concentration of liquidity is likely driven by the lower liquidity provider management costs on Joe V2 compared to Uniswap V3.

Despite the success of Trader Joe’s V2 pools regarding liquidity provider profitability and liquidity concentration, the platform still faces significant competition from established players like UniSwap.

Per the researcher, over the last 2 weeks, UniSwap V3 has averaged $10 million in daily ARB-ETH volumes from 1inch, while Joe V2 has only averaged $9,800. Chase claims that to compete with UniSwap and attract more trading volumes, Joe V2 must either cut its fees or grow its liquidity.

As of this writing, the circulating market capitalization of Uniswap is worth over $4.5 billion, down 2% in the last few days. In contrast, Trader Joe’s market cap is currently at $195 million, with a trading volume of $29 billion. This is significantly lower than Uniswap’s trading volume, which is $831 billion.

Despite the differences between Trader Joe and Uniswap, the fast growth of Trader Joe, and the continued dominance of Uniswap in the decentralized exchanges (DEX), the DeFi ecosystem seems poise to grow. Competition and further innovations in the ecosystem can attract more users and investors to the nascent industry and its technologies.

Featured image from Unsplash, chart from TradingView.com

Source