Trading Fees
Trading fees on Synchronicity Exchange are based on an account’s rolling 30-day trading volume across all assets of a given type (e.g., perpetuals, spot). Main accounts and sub accounts will share and contribute to the same 30-day rolling volume.
Fee schedules are determined per order book. This provides flexibility for discounts on newer asset pairs, decreasing the friction to attract liquidity upon listing.
The fee schedule for a given order book will look similar to the following.
| Tier | 30d volume ($ notional) | Fee |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | < 10M | 0.030% |
| 1 | > 10M | 0.025% |
| 2 | > 25M | 0.020% |
| 3 | > 100M | 0.015% |
| 4 | > 1B | 0.010% |
| 5 | > 2B | 0.005% |
| 6 | > 10B | 0.002% |
In the future, upon the issuance of Synchronicity’s token, accounts that stake the Synchronicity token will receive a discount on fees.
Fees are paid upon opening and closing a position (i.e., when an order is filled), unless the position is closed by the ADL.
The amount paid is calculated as follows.
For example, (according to the fee schedule above) if an account has traded a total volume of $30M notional value in the past 30 days at the time of a trade, the fee rate would be 0.020%. Therefore, if the trade was for $5M notional value, the trade would incur a fee of $5M * 0.020% = $1000.
No Distinction Between Maker and Taker Fees
On continuous central limit order books, there is typically a distinction between the fees charged to makers and takers. If an order that is filled was resting in the order book, it is considered a maker order and charged a lower fee for providing liquidity to the order book. If an order is filled by a resting limit order, it is considered a taker order and charged a higher fee for removing liquidity from the order book.
Frequent Batch Auctions dissolve the traditional maker–taker dichotomy because technically, both sides that are filled are resting limits. At first glance it may appear that being unable to charge makers lower fees would result in worse prices for takers, but upon closer examination that is untrue.
In a continuous limit setting where maker fees (M) and taker fees (T) are set according to different schedules, the difference between the best price the maker is willing to offer the taker (P*) and the effective price received by the taker (P) is M + T.
In practice, the proportion of the fee charged to makers and takers makes no difference to the effective price received by takers. The only thing that matters is the aggregate fee (i.e., M + T).
Even though makers are expected to quote wider spreads to account for their being charged a higher fee, the lower fee charged to takers offsets the wider spread, leading to the same or better effective clearing prices for takers.