Not only network transaction fees but slippage, front-running, LP fees. I'm not saying that wash trading doesn't occur in DeFi, but Uniswap would be one of the more inefficient places to do it.
So which is more likely?
1. Uniswap Labs, a Delaware C Corp based in NYC, is risking everything to burn millions or billions of dollars in order to place fake trades and bolster volume numbers.
2. Uniswap, the top on-chain exchange on Ethereum (a network where the primary use-case is creating and trading assets, and which has an ecosystem market cap of something like $800B) has over the course of over 5.5 years, done $2T in all-time volume (~1 billion / day on average)?
8 comments
[ 98.9 ms ] story [ 745 ms ] threadIt’s pretty easy to generate trillions of trading volume on a database when there’s no penalties for wash trading. All it takes is a for loop.
It’s a rigged game around the world’s worst stored procedure database presented as some sort of magical truth machine.
So which is more likely?
1. Uniswap Labs, a Delaware C Corp based in NYC, is risking everything to burn millions or billions of dollars in order to place fake trades and bolster volume numbers.
2. Uniswap, the top on-chain exchange on Ethereum (a network where the primary use-case is creating and trading assets, and which has an ecosystem market cap of something like $800B) has over the course of over 5.5 years, done $2T in all-time volume (~1 billion / day on average)?
Occam's razor says 2.