This article is wrong on many levels:
BitMEX (not "BitMex") was not the first to offer derivatives
BitMEX has already offered a limited options product (and it failed)
BitMEX's original high-leverage model was a copy of OKEx socialised losses "dynamic profit equialisation" https://twitter.com/BurgerCryptoAM/status/1248571501336543239
BitMEX (not "BitMex") was not the first to offer derivatives
BitMEX has already offered a limited options product (and it failed)
BitMEX's original high-leverage model was a copy of OKEx socialised losses "dynamic profit equialisation" https://twitter.com/BurgerCryptoAM/status/1248571501336543239
There's also more interesting aspects to hit on:
- Quedex offers inverse options using $ face value vs BTC
- Obviously on futures inverse has diff payout in BTC, but the risk structure is identical to USD Linear which is why FTX/BTSE have same futures curve as BitMEX/Deribit
- Quedex offers inverse options using $ face value vs BTC
- Obviously on futures inverse has diff payout in BTC, but the risk structure is identical to USD Linear which is why FTX/BTSE have same futures curve as BitMEX/Deribit
- This guy manages to write a long article about perpetuals without even talking about funding rate
- Manages to write about futures without talking about basis
- Never mentions the early BTC Quanto contracts which were badly mispriced (v important in crypto derivs history)
- Manages to write about futures without talking about basis
- Never mentions the early BTC Quanto contracts which were badly mispriced (v important in crypto derivs history)
I don't think anyone can write cogently on the topic of crypto derivatives without having actually experienced the market since 2014
So many lessons have been learned, failed shops that didn't understand key concepts
This is a history you have to have lived, not just read about
So many lessons have been learned, failed shops that didn't understand key concepts
This is a history you have to have lived, not just read about