2025-12-27 08:21:54

Regarding the trading strategy of $PIPPIN, many people have found a method. The core logic is to seize the window before the hourly candle closes—enter a long position one minute early, quickly profit from the spread difference in fees, and then exit. Once the candlestick truly closes, as long as there is no loss, you can exit relying on the fee spread advantage. This trading rhythm will continuously amplify the trading volume of the coin, attracting more market participants to enter.

It sounds simple, but the actual operation carries significant risks. The fee spread may seem stable, but if a whale suddenly dumps, the small profit can instantly turn into a deep loss—tragedies of "holding forever" often unfold this way. Therefore, while this tactic is theoretically feasible, it requires a keen sense of market rhythm and proper stop-loss settings to avoid being wiped out by sudden sell-offs.

PIPPIN-3,67%

View Original

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.

11 Likes

Reward
11
6
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

GasFeeCrier

· 16h ago

It sounds like a high-frequency scam to cut leeks, with tiny profit margins from fees and spreads that can't withstand a wave of dumping. At the moment the big player dumps, your stop-loss order has already run away. This kind of strategy has risk and reward that don't match at all. I'd rather just hold my coins honestly. Another "guaranteed profit" illusion—there's no such good thing in the market. How about PIPPIN? Should I wait and see for a while before making a move?

View OriginalReply0

BlockchainDecoder

· 16h ago

From a technical perspective, this strategy is essentially high-frequency arbitrage, and data shows that the risk factor has been seriously underestimated. The logical flaw in this "buy the spread and run" approach is that — the market maker's dumping often happens at the very moment when it's hardest for you to withdraw, so there is no such thing as a "safe window." In plain terms, it's a gamble on the market sentiment not collapsing. Once it collapses, stop-losses won't save you. I see this strategy as a probability game: winning ten times but getting caught once, and your principal is gone. It's worth noting that increased trading volume does not equal healthy price growth — these are two different things. Instead of studying these tricks, it's more practical to focus on whether the fundamentals are reliable.

View OriginalReply0

DarkPoolWatcher

· 16h ago

Uh, it's the same story again. Basically, it's about betting that the house won't dump the market. Once the house starts to act, your small fee difference isn't even enough to fill a gap.

View OriginalReply0

TokenomicsShaman

· 16h ago

The fee difference sounds appealing, but in reality, it's like licking blood on the edge of a knife. When the market maker dumps the price, they lose everything.

View OriginalReply0

APY追逐者

· 16h ago

The moment the market maker dumps the order, the fee spread instantly turns into a huge loss. This is the reality.

View OriginalReply0

LiquidityHunter

· 16h ago

It all sounds like armchair strategizing, but when it comes to dumping, you'll be stunned. The market makers don't follow any rules, and the fee spread instantly leads to liquidation. I've tried this kind of window period trading before, but the stop-loss can't react in time.

View OriginalReply0