Aerodrome’s Big Upgrade | Alexander Cutler

What's up guys? Welcome back to another live stream of Zer X Research, the first one of the new year. And today we're joined by Alex from Dromos Labs, the company labs team behind Arrow. Originally Aer Belgium. How you doing Alex?

Doing well. It's my first pod of the new year here too. So I feel like I'm shaking off the cobwebs a bit here. So thanks for having me on.

Thank you for coming on. I guess just to start us off, why did you guys decide to change it to Arrow?

I mean, if you think about the journey we've been on, everything sort of started with Veladrome on OP mainet, and drrome quickly became sort of the leading exchange on OP mainet. It's expanded across now 10 different super chains and it leads across almost all of them. It also meant we launched aerad drrome which quickly became the leading exchange of bass, but that was a huge deal because bass is the L2 of Ethereum these days, so it was no small thing.

I think as we began to think about the future, Metadex03 is kind of a major upgrade to what we think is the leading dex operating system on the market, and we thought it was time for these two protocols to come together as one to expand to mainet Ethereum and kind of be that one protocol, one name, one unified ecosystem to connect liquidity across all of Ethereum. It's a classic social network vibe of like, drop the drone. It's simpler. Just go with Arrow.

Actually, I do want to give some credit because quite some time ago, when I first shared with Jesse Pollock of the Bass team our plan here and we were talking about things, his question was like, "Well, so what are you going to call the thing?" And we were kicking around a few different ideas and when I mentioned arrow, he was like, "No, that's it. You got to go with that." Now, it took us another few months of arguing and debating, but that stuck in my head. So, Arrow, it's simpler.

I agree with Jesse and with you as well. I like the air. Although I did really like the Vel drum branding as well. Like the bicycle was very very cool. Is there anything that I guess like thinking about it vell stakers got arrow token so there isn't anything functionally changing in terms of like revenues and everything right?

Correct. The initial distribution is basically benchmarked on previous year revenue of the two protocols. So if you assumed that the only thing that we announced last November was the two protocols coming together and we announced a lot more expansion into new markets major upgrades to the technology the economics but if it was just the merge and you were to benchmark your distribution of the revenue of the two protocols based on that past year everybody's claim of the pi would be the exact same so arrow um v arrow uh and arrow tokens are getting dropped proportionate it to Arrow's revenue. Same for Vell.

The great thing is is you aren't actually getting a share of the same PI. You're getting a share of what we think will be a much larger PI because right now these two protocols only service about 1/5 of total EDM volumes. So in theory, everybody's share of total rewards should grow.

You mentioned Metadex zero free a few times. at a high level because I want to dive deeply into each section. What are the changes? So, it's expansion into new chains as well as a few other things. What are they?

We think Metadex03 is kind of the the endgame of the DEX design, spot exchange design that will finally unify liquidity across all of Ethereum. So, there's a few key features probably worth hitting on here. One is the air and rev engines and so these are basically big changes to the economics of the protocol which we think are already the best economics in the industry. Arrow led all dexes last year in revenue by a substantial margin. And even if you look at the sort of back testing of the fee switch on unis swap, it would lead it significantly even if it had been enabled over the same period.

The air and rev engines basically make the economics much more adaptive. It means we internalize new revenue streams like aggregator fees like MEV like all these other things. We direct that to the token as well. So that is an increase in the amount of revenue coming into the system. And then the air engine means emissions can now be dynamically allocated which means we can drop the amount of value out. So air and rev engine simply just means more value into the system but with less value coming out. And based on our back testing and estimates, it's like a 2.8x net increase in value flowing back into the system. So we think these are really powerful new economic engines.

The other big thing is Slipstream V3. So Slipstream V2 already leads on a 3 to 1 margin versus uni v2, v3, v4 combined anywhere they compete. and Slipstream B3 will bring even more sort of upgrades, institutional level verification and KYC features, upgraded dynamic fees, and a whole bunch of other upgrades that will make it even more competitive than it is today.

One I'm personally very excited about is meta swaps. So if you think about the experience of like swapping for assets on chain right now, there's still a lot of this confusion. You might have USDC sitting on mainet Ethereum and then you see Jesse's tweeting about some token. You're having to go through all these bridges and get it over and then you forgot to bridge the gas. So you have to bridge that and then by the time you get there, which decks do you use an aggregator, etc.

MetaSwaps is basically the first totally bundled crosschain, swapper, aggregator, and bridge all in a single product. So, you won't need to it won't matter where you have your assets. If you see a token somewhere that you want, Meta Swaps make it possible for you just to click swap, trade, execute on the chain. You don't need to worry about gas, any of this stuff. There's a bunch of other features we can get into. I mean, open pools just make it way easier for like token launchers and things to integrate directly within our system. Autopilot just makes the entire like earning yield process much much simpler whether you're a token operator, whether you're an LP or you're participating in any number of these different ways.

The net result of this is that this our hope is metadex03 arrows expansion. This will be the liquidity infrastructure of Ethereum and that means it's one place to go for the best place to trade, the best place to earn and the best place to launch new tokens.

I there's a lot there. Daniel, unless you have a first question I wanted to ask about.

Maybe just one quick followup there. Curious on, you know, some talk about the expansion here and you mentioned meta-wops which which sounds interesting like are those intertwined in the sense that you know you're looking to expand the product to maybe a few chains here and there and then you know this product will apply to those environments or is it kind of more broadly encompassing of you know the variety of sort of like EVM ecosystems that exist?

Meta swaps will be live day one anywhere arrows deployed. So on day one that'll mean obviously the OP super chain that drrome serves today that'll mean base that Aerome serves, Ethereum mainet circles arc and syndicate's chain as well. And that will mean you know accessing and trading tokens and liquidity and all that sort of stuff across all those chains will be fully abstracted for the the first time ever. This has always been the vision of the Ethereum scaling roadmap is it shouldn't feel like this fractured thing. You should be able to tap into this without needing to worry about what chain you're on.

We can continue to scale this to any chain where we see activity users interests. And the great thing is is because of our decentralized DAP, we can scale infinitely at zero marginal cost because we don't rely on any centralized APIs, servers. were probably like the largest protocol without like an AWS or cloud account and so it's as easy as just deploying the contracts the front end reads everything offchain and so you know while we will cover now I think like 23 or maybe even more with those chains of of global sort of EVM volumes addressing the markets we're not currently serving will be very easy.

Just one more quick followup there like I think the expansion to like Ethereum mainet makes a ton of sense. You know, a large large amount of EVM activity happens there. Of course, ARC and Syndicate are interesting. I'm curious the decision-m behind like some of these newer teams and ecosystems coming to market versus like I don't know like an arbitum or something along those lines. What was the thinking?

Ethereum mainet makes a ton of sense because that is still where the bulk of trading activity happens. So service that win a significant share of that and you are probably now the largest decks in in volume terms anywhere in in EVM. In the choices beyond that it's kind of about experimentation right now. I think in syndicate we see a very very interesting app chain model and they have interest and ability in developing some like unique offerings. So being there day one is kind of like okay let's see what we can build together in in that space which I won't get too much into unless we get further along in the the process before launch but we see it as an experimental sort of place to go.

I think ARC is super interesting because we've been very close partners with Circle for years. I think our EURC USDC pool is the top onchain FX pool and it's obviously you know than their top FX pool anywhere on chain. And with them what we see is they built an L1 because they see an opportunity to onboard institutions that for them any eventhereum chain is probably a step too far in the complexity. They they know they want to get engaged onchain. They want to get engaged in tokenization, but they literally want to be able to like call a CEO somewhere, you know, if something goes wrong.

We see they have an opportunity perhaps to bring assets that would not ordinarily come in to other ecosystems. They have the relationships at the institution level, I think, to do this. And by being the DEX infrastructure there, that means we are able to sort of host and service assets that we might not be able to otherwise. But then because of things like meta swaps, we give them distribution across broader EVM. And that would mean like you know if there's a really new interesting RWA and you want exposure to that again you don't have to worry about the fact that it's on ARC you can just swap on the UI. We want to be that sort of bridge if they are going to bring net new issuers, net new users, institutions, our liquidity infrastructure can not only help them but then bridge them back to the broader world of Ethereum.

I'm going to go back to the meta for one second. So it's not I guess like a traditional aggregator in the way that like one inch and match it is and is more so like a unified front end for all arrow products. Are you guys planning on charging a fee for that usage or will it just be treated as like the regular do you know what like aggregator is charged some form of whatever like five bits or something you guys are planning on doing?

It's something we're we're looking at because especially if I mean think about how cool this actually is, right? Because if you're on a chain right now with bad wrapped eth USDC liquidity and you could get better trading execution on the most basic swap or even the route of wrapped eth USDC on another chain you would have to go bridge that right those funds in order to do that and you know most people are just not going to do that they're going to eat a bad trade on the chain that they are on.

The big innovation here is the crosschain aggregation of liquidity. And so if you just want ETH at the best price and you're on mainet Ethereum and we can give it to you on base or vice versa, it'll it'll route your trade. And so we do potentially see, you know, if the rates we are giving and the access we're giving on the crosschain piece are significantly better than what other products can give in aggregating even multiple dexes within a single chain, that perhaps there's some additional fee but that fee again would only go back to the token and the token goes back to incentivizing liquidity providers. So it just be a way of growing depth across all of these chains versus like you know there's going to be an entity taking that value out of the system that's like core to us is that all value needs to be internalized. All of it needs to be redirected to the token. All the token needs to go to deepening liquidity which fuels the overall flywheel.

I think that makes sense. I guess like the reason that I was wondering is you might have to do some bridging but it does it doesn't make any sense because you would just fill them on the chain that they get filled in right like if I yeah there would be some some bridging components in there and and you know we will have the ability to integrate with any bridging solution so for instance if you're going to arc right you might be using circles solution you might be using layer zero you might be using hyperlane right and there'll be some degree of of bridging fees there.

Overall the goal is to keep the cost absolutely minimal. And if you know about how bad slippage can get, especially on low liquidity chains, I mean it's going to be nothing in comparison to the value you will make up.

I was recently looking at crosschain swaps and there are some providers that like intense providers that take like 11 bips take which is very very high obviously.

I think it's the classic line of their margin is our opportunity, right? And so much of metadex3 is designed around it does not make sense that an auto compounder should take 5 to 10%. Let's just build it directly into the product and you could charge 1% if anything and then you redirect it back towards the token. You know secondary marketplaces for voting positions, auto voters, all of these bridges, aggregators, there is just so much value that has been I think extracted out of systems at rates that are you know I think quite offensive or at least not what the market rate should be if they were being competed with effectively.

We want to internalize all of that margin. We want to charge that bare minimum. we want to redirect it all towards the token and basically internalize all the value that dexes so far have been very very happy to leak.

One last thing on the crosschain side VE tokconomics themselves are kind of I would say more complex than other other token systems. Is there how are you guys working around that? Like if I want to vote on a poll on a Ethereum, how is that going to work?

I think that's where autopilot comes in. I mean like that complexity has pros and cons, right? On the one hand, isn't it incredible that a entity like Coinbase Ventures can go out, buy a bunch of Arrow, lock it up, and then use that to drive liquidity and business outcomes on base while earning back you know, a ton of value for that activity. Like that utility is very good. It's complex. It takes some learning, takes some management, but that's a good thing. But on the other hand, if you're just a retail participant and you're just here to earn yield, that's where autopilot comes in, where you can just say, "Hey, I've basically locked up some arrow. I'm going to toggle the autopilot button and each week autopilot's going to vote automatically for me and return to me, you know, that yield in the token of my choice, right? It could be autoco compounding back into position. It could be USDC, it could be arrow, but we want to ensure that the access to yield is as simple as possible.

That's why, by the way, on the LP side, we're building in things like ALM with no additional fees. why we're building in things like autoco compounding with no additional fees or minimum fees that go back to the token such that like even if you're just a mini app user on the base app and it doesn't matter if you want to be operating right using locked positions or you want to be lping it's just a one-click yield experience that is simple enough to manage on your phone.

I fought this vote So auto voting system or a form of it is already live, right? Like you guys have some form of an implementation and I assume this one is just going to build on top of that.

Exactly. So as of today we have something called relay in which you can like deposit into the maxi relay vault and it'll do that voting and compounding for you. In autopilot is basically an upgrade where you know right now it's only compounding back into the locked position versus converting your yield into the assets of your choice. There are also just some technical limitations on it right now around crosschain voting doesn't work on the side. So obviously crosschain voting will fully work in the stacks that's going to expand everywhere. And then the number of pools right now is limited that the relays can vote for. So that can have like some trade-offs with with yields potentially in some conditions and and bunch of upgrades just to ensure if you know you toggle that autopilot button and you know you go on hiatus for 6 months you come back and all you got was the best you could possibly have gotten.

Maybe to to jump to another topic I'd love to get into the details here with you on Slipstream V3. like maybe can you give us some background explainer on it, walk us through it and then then we can dive in.

There's a ton of stuff coming in slipstream v3. So like slipstream v2 has been like a an amazing success right anywhere it's deployed like base or op mainet competing against you know basically like 10 years of or eight years of unis swap development uni 2 uni 3 uni 4 it's taking a 3 to one margin right so it's very very successful and like one of the portions of that just to to highlight it is right we direct rewards just into the active tick of liquidity.

Only productive liquidity is utilized and those rewards come in the form of arrow emissions. So that reward rate is constant, right? It's not going up and down based on volatility. And when you combine those two things with dynamic fees right which are adjusting the fee rate like surge pricing based on volatility in the market it means you have kept liquidity sticky and you can undercut feebased sort of exchanges competing for flow in moments of low volatility and then you can increase the amount of liquidity you have available relative to them and then charge higher rates when the volatility hits. So, it's almost more like order books now where you're actually correctly internalizing the value relative to the the flow.

Slipstream V3 will have a new upgraded dynamic fee mechanism. It'll have things like payment for order flow Robin Hood Citadel style. So if we know that you know every bit of flow coming out of coinbase.com or the base app or you know in the future Robin Hood you know things like that is non-toxic then we can offer a preferred fee rate for that flow because you don't need to charge as much and in doing so we can ensure that we win you know the vast majority of that flow completely organically right not by cutting a deal not by having not by being privileged But just knowing that those are better rates that we can offer.

This is also very important by the way with the expansion of FX because if you think about like payments processors, service providers, I mean we know right now like on EURC, USDC, we're giving a rate like 500x better than Wells Fargo gives on a euro to dollar conversion. we're giving like 20x better than even like wise can often give on these types of transactions and you need payments processors who are also going to be non-toxic to be able to get that kind of preferred rate on their flows as well and so we think this is really important and the other big thing in slipstream v3 is this verification stack so we can plug into coinbased verifications we can plug into like world verifications any of these sort of KYC like things which we think will continue to sort of be a slow burn but it is a really important thing to have the ability to build in as more institutions come on chain and the need to validate you know who is trading or at least that they are you know not baddies in these pools and that's another big important part of it.

It's all very exciting I one with regard to the Euro C USDC thing. I've always wondered how has the I think oftentimes we hear a lot about like order books bringing in new forms of equity or FX trading but it's not as like discussed within AMMs or in the MM space. Have you guys seen like a significant change in activity in terms of like real world assets or is it is it not has it not hit the level that you would have expected yet? And maybe like a follow on to that is V3 and like the verification you guys' attempt at making sure that more and more activity can come on.

The verification I mean anything that is composable and permissionless is going to be able to track liquidity and activity in a far more capital efficient way. we'll say right now, right? Until there are major institutions that are going to come in and you could give them all the KYC liquidity that they want, but they're not going to generate enough activity to sustain it, it's not going to be very useful. And I think that's like what you've seen on the like verified pools that Coinbase launched and Uni V4 is almost no activity yet, right? Because we haven't solved that cold start problem quite yet.

Just as an example on the EURC USGC pool I can't remember when it was sometime last year you know circle came to us and they were like this is the only FX pool that we have found anywhere on chain where there is real organic activity that we can't attribute right somebody is using these pools for something versus this is just like a pool that's got bootstrap sort of static liquidity and occasionally catches some arbs and So I think it is happening. I think that is only going to accelerate. I think that is again why I think ARC is very very interesting because what happens when you pair the best onchain ERC pool plus a bunch of global issuers of other you know local currency stables that are very very high quality and you have an onchain sort of FX market that can also tap into lending markets to leverage up and sort of do these things like I think it's only going to accelerate but yeah We've been like I think blown away because like there's no extra incentives or anything on top of the EURC pool. That thing has been self- sustaining for quite some time.

I imagine Circle was a little bit concerned if they don't know exactly who is doing it and why they're doing it though, right? Like they must have at least had some thoughts. We need to understand who is doing this.

I don't think that hits them because you know if they are just the ones issuing the USDC and EURC you know tokens and then u you know obviously you can't go in and redeem those if you're just anybody. They're very very happy for widespread permissionless distribution and access of those things.

Is the MEV internalization going live with V slipstream V3 or is that a separate additional product on top of it?

That is that is part of the the V3 launch and you know that's a big one because the if you think about the total addressable market the amount of revenue that MEV creates for sequencers I mean it's more than like a drrome and drrome combined made in revenue the past year as again the leading dexes in the space so for us to have the opportunity to internalize that revenue, right? By doing this sort of MEV auction at the AMM level versus doing it at the sequencer level and and intercepting it. That is like a massive new revenue stream that we're able to internalize to the token, which means of course that token that we're emitting into the active tickle liquidity represents now even more than trading fees plus launch payments plus everything else, right? we are just increasing the rate at which we can reward over a feebased DEX for a liquidity provider which I think compounds our moat and that's all the more significant you know in this period where we now have competing economic models in the sense of unis swap actually pulling back a bit on how much they're able to reward liquidity providers at a moment where we're actually trying to increase over swap fees the amount that we can reward liquidity providers.

I have one more thing, Danny, and then you can go ahead. I assume the ME inter Well, I think the MEV internalization can only be for Ethereum. And then it's kind of a janky segue, but UniS swap is very very dominant on Ethereum. Now do you think that is mostly because there are no good competitors out there or do you think it's just it's going to be a struggle for you guys? Now you've done very very well on base and on Drrome and on like wherever you guys have watched. So I'm not I don't mean this in like a way like oh are you going to be compete but more like what is the strategy to compete? Because in my mind that is their well that's like their biggest thing right they don't have a lot of other areas that they're very competitive in right now.

I think our answer is very much intrinsic to that. We have tested now metadex O2 against unis swap in you know I can't remember every chain but you know let's just say six seven chains right and in almost all conditions the metadex model takes not just like a winning share but like a dominant share versus unis swap and so I think we're very confident that Bringing the same model that has shown an ability to compete and win against Uniswap to mainet Ethereum will allow us to capture a significant amount of share especially with the upgrades that we're bringing in in Metadexo3.

In some ways it's interesting that we've been able to take that sort of 3:1 dominance against unis swap in a period where they were still heavily able to subsidize their costs with the the token right so they were rewarding LPS with 100% of fees because the token didn't get anything so if we've been that competitive against them passing through all the value that they're generating if you cut fees to LPS fees by 25% which is the average I think of what they are doing right right now that makes our competitive advantage I think all the more significant because if you go back to the sushi swap vampire attack which was I think the last time unis swap really got tested on mainet Ethereum what did sushi swap do they just provided some degree of additional value on top of LP rewards sufficient to attract mercenary LPS over to them and Sushi Swap took 50% of Unislap's share in about a week.

We think, you know, as they're dropping yields and we're increasing them and we're taking a model that is already very very competitive and extending it into their home market, we're very bullish, I think, on our potential. By the way, it's like it's a very interesting thing because last time I looked at the numbers, if we just captured 30% of mainet, were the largest decks anywhere, period. And I think it's an open question, you know, what has kind of held up you know, unis swaps, you know, extreme premium in the market. And I guess I would believe that it's probably because they have still remained kind of number one.

If we only need 30% of mainet and then you know folks have to start asking the question is Arrow you know now going to be this number one exchange and what does it mean for unis swap if they are not I think you could get some pretty crazy flywheel effects both positive and negative but I also just love the you know let's make mainet fun again let's make DeFi fun again I mean when's the last time we had a good good exciting battle you know, like the old days.

I like your viewpoint there, Alexander. I think maybe interestingly to talk about mainet a little bit, it's not necessarily the case that they haven't been losing share. You know, Fluid has had quite a run this year on on mainet. Something like 15% of market share now, I think, from the last time I checked the data. So I think it does maybe showcase the point that there's potential to sort of break into that market. It's not like they have an iron grip on all the activity there. So probably you know to your point there there's you know opportunity to compete.

I'm curious like maybe your general thoughts on kind of the EVM DEX landscape going forward given you know the competition we're seeing even on base. I think you know like Pancake Swap has seen a rise there. Is this you know is it productled is it you know rewards led is it who do you think are going to be like the winners going forward and and how and why in the VM tech space?

When I think about think about who will be the winners, I think you have to start with like what does winning mean, right? And I think when you're evaluating a DEX, right? You have to take into consideration the core metrics of a DEX, right? So TVL matters but not in isolation. Volume matters but not in isolation. Fees matter but not in isolation. And revenue matters, right? But not in isolation. So you you take those four together and you get a very different view of the DEX landscape.

This will be like one of the times it's it's rare but it happens like I'll I'll defend unis swap. Like fluid I don't think has actually cut into unis swap's fee share on mainet. They have cut into their volume share by charging very very low fees on stable swaps that don't produce a lot of value. And so I would assume that unis swap share of fees on mainet has remained pretty healthy. And then there's been some noise about curve but you have to isolate curve fees from yield basis fees. And same thing I think unis swap share fees remains pretty constant. You can get distorted if you're looking at volume.

That's the same thing for like pancake on base. Pancake has grown a lot of volume on incentivizing pairs that don't generate fees. So we don't worry much about them because there's not really any value to necessarily be captured there. So I think like the competition is definitely going to be fierce like it's going to be a lot of fun but I think if you look across those metrics it'll be very very clear who is actually winning right how much net new value is being created how much volume flow that that's winning and how much capital flows into those systems and I think there should be a pretty clear undisputed number one winner across all those four key metrics in pretty short order.

I think what we've seen so far is it's distorted by the fact that not everybody's competing everywhere. I think fluid unis swap have been competing everywhere for a long time. I think the metadex model has not but it's really clear anywhere it competes across those four it wins hands down against all of them combined and that is I think what makes us very very bullish on the model especially knowing it's getting a massive upgrade even from where it is now with significantly more value coming into the system less going out and then all these other technology and UX upgrades.

I guess as a followup to that, what do you think about well on Ethereum this should be fine, but what do how like on L2 if we're doing order books on prop AMM systems? What do you think about I guess a traditional AMM seems a bit weird to say about you know what I mean?

I think orderbook like experiences, the prop AMM, they're all going to have their kind of like niches and value and things that they serve. But I think permissionless AMMs, the composability, the distribution, the reliability, the transparency of them, you can't beat those network effects. This is actually another thing I saw, you know, Hayden go to bat for AMMs recently and I think he was absolutely right. If you look at, you know, the prop AMMs on Salana, it's servicing, of course, soul USDC volume greatly, but it's not servicing much else and it's not very transparent. We all remember what happened on like October 10th when that liquidity was needed. It was gone.

There there are trade-offs like there are niches. But I think continuing to build upon the economics of permissionless dexes, continuing to internalize, verticalize more value, use it to reward liquidity providers, ensure that that liquidity is constant. It is available, it is transparent, is permissionless. the networks of effects of this will continue to grow which is by the way right why folks like OKX like Coinbase are directly integrating dexes into their core products and now distributing this infrastructure.

I always think the contrast for like a onchain order book or even some of the prop AMMs or even some of the like KYC pool stuff is well just go on a centralized exchange. They're great. They are great at doing a lot of those things if that's what you're looking for. So what we need to do is build something better on chain. I think we're doing it. That's why centralized exchanges are integrating and distributing these products and that as the industry continues to grow that will be where most of the economic activity is created.

I'm curious I think you make a great point that we're seeing centralized exchanges route orders to dexes. I think that's a trend we'll continue to see grow. I'm curious if you have an opinion there on whether we see Binance make that move in broad fashion like in 2026 or if they kind of try to hold on to like their kind of crown or mantle longer.

I think we've already seen them do a bit of this right in how they've integrated in with Pancake Swap, right? And Binance Alpha and things like that. I think it's clear that there's like a very close relationship between Pancake and Binance. I think they'll do it as long as there's a net benefit to them. I do think as permissionless distribution of assets continues, it's harder and harder for any centralized entity to keep up with it because the life cycle and number of tokens is just going to keep the life cycles are going to keep getting shorter and shorter and the number is going to keep going up and up and so why would you leave any money on the table and not distributing that to your customers charging some sort of fee and things like that.

Binance was probably, you know, earlier to some degree of integrating between these two than than Mini. Whether or not they go for sort of the full stack integration, we'll see. But I would I would I think it's inevitable for kind of any forward- facing consumer crypto company to distribute coin sorry, DeFi products generally.

With the coin base app integration, how has have the flows been different to what I don't know if you guys do this. So I guess like I should have first asked if you look into the data of what you get for your front end, what you get for like API or contract integrations and what you get for the base app. Is that different? And you could do dynamic fees for that as well. Is that something you guys are considering?

That's the whole idea behind having this sort of dynamic fee and payment for order flow is that you know most dexes I believe is pretty standard in the industry. It's like 10 to 20% via the front end. Everything else is aggregator programmatic sort of stuff hitting the contracts or routers directly. It's a it's a pretty big split. And then if you go into where those flows are coming from something like fee rebates or dynamic fees you know associated with that ensures that of that 80% the programmatic stuff you can win more and more right and so yeah we would want to win every single trade originating from a Coinbase every single trade originating from a Robin Hood every single