2026-01-03 02:28:04

Some folks keep saying Prop AMMs and Intent-based mechanisms have killed off classic AMMs—but the data tells a different story. Stablecoin-to-stablecoin AMM liquidity remains rock solid, and honestly, orderbooks still lag way behind in this segment. The real question isn't whether these innovations killed AMMs; it's when volatile pair trading gets its own StableSwap moment. That's where the next wave of efficiency gains happens.

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

12 Likes

Reward
12
7
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

OldLeekMaster

· 19h ago

Stablecoin pools are the real way to make money; no one can beat AMM in this wave.

View OriginalReply0

NFTHoarder

· 01-03 02:57

Stablecoin liquidity is indeed not as fragile as imagined, but what about volatility... Wait, can the StableSwap system be universally applied?

View OriginalReply0

UnluckyMiner

· 01-03 02:55

The liquidity of stablecoin pairs is indeed stable, but who is really using them?

View OriginalReply0

LiquidityHunter

· 01-03 02:54

The liquidity depth data of stablecoin pairs is not as fragile as imagined; this perspective is quite interesting.

View OriginalReply0

hodl_therapist

· 01-03 02:51

Stablecoin trading pools are indeed still the domain of AMMs, this point is beyond doubt.

View OriginalReply0

SelfStaking

· 01-03 02:49

Liquidity for stablecoin pairs is still a real skill; the order book is far behind.

View OriginalReply0

OfflineValidator

· 01-03 02:43

Stablecoins indeed have no problem with liquidity, but isn't that just saying that the new mechanism hasn't been used yet? Let's talk again when the volatility pair also has its own killer move.

View OriginalReply0