Topic: Exchanges trading pairs? (Read 213 times)

Imho ypu shouldn't really bother yourself with deversification if you are doing day trading (not just buying an alt and waiting for a pump).
Exactly. If adding those currencies won't be becked by demand then they will partly take volume (and liquidity) drom other currencies or just   die with 0 volume.

it will simply come down to demand. you may think additional pairs are good and all the explanation that you placed here may very well be 100% true. but the question that you should be asking is that do others really want other pairs?

for example if you look at some of these markets apart from X-BTC like X-LTC, X-FTC, X-Doge, X-ETH (x is the altcoin name) you can see that these markets don't really have that much volume which shows people are not really that interested in them.

and when people don't use them, there is not enough incentive for the exchanges to add additional pairs.

p.s. altcoins getting dumped will still happen even if there were other markets.

More Trading pairs doesn't make any sense because people usually only trade their alts for either bitcoin and fiat. Just look at trading volume other pairs are getting in terms of USDT and BTC in exchanges where they support multiple currency pairs.
 
Coinexchange actually have 5 base pairs BTC, ETH, ETC, LTC and DOGE but most of the volume is in BTC pairs.

Etherdelta only have ETH pairs for tokens and volume is high there because all tokens traded there are based on ETH.

I'd love to see exchanges like Bitstamp and GDAX add more trading pairs. I need more exposure to altcoins, and I'm less comfortable everyday with Poloniex and Bittrex. Obviously, the exchanges are primarily concerned about legalities (especially with ICO tokens) and with liquidity. After GDAX's flash crash fiasco earlier in the year, I can imagine they are treading carefully when considering adding new coins.


Indeed, Ethereum in particular has a serious scaling problem that must be overcome by sharding or some other radical change to its consensus system. In general, I think that the market has partially priced in the growing pains and the fact that they will take years to overcome. The rest is hype.


I think the recent BTC forks (Cash and Gold) show that market cap is a poor fundamental predictor. Forking an active network doesn't transfer that network's value to the fork automatically, but market cap acts that way.

We need to look at sustained price/market cap in addition to other factors -- a coin's community, market interest (are exchange customers clamoring for it?), hash rate etc. Does it have real use cases, and is it innovative? Does it potentially fill a market niche? Sector analyzation is becoming increasingly important. I can see privacy coins and DEX coins are two areas that will grow immensely in the next year or two.

Doesn't yobit already do this? They have DOGE markets, WAVES markets, LTC markets, BTC markets, ETH markets... You name it. But still they don't really generate much trading volume as jorneyflair said. If it does't then whats the point of putting it there in the first place? Bitcoin crashing doesn't have that much to do with the direction altcoins are heading at either, because altcoins are traded against BTC, and people will not care about the USD value as much.

The only altcoins that i think should be considered to be added as a pair are ETH, XMR, and USDT, and a lot of exchanges such as polo, bittrex, etc. already have this anyways. There is no need for more.

It's really up to the exchanges.

If they deem it profitable to add these new pairs then they will do it. However if they see it as a hassle to reengineer their framework and rather stick to the traditional USDT/BTC as base currencies, then they are welcome to do that too.

I think that most of the trading volume for alt-alt goes through BTC pairings anyways, meaning that if you directly pair two altcoins together you may not actually get that much better spreads, potentially even worse.

I don't see any need to add more pairs to the currently existing ones in any of the exchanges. Their volumes would not even come close to competing with the volumes of the more common trading pairs that include Bitcoin and Ethereum. If you ever want to trade between any 2 not-as-popular cryptocurrencies, there's not much of a difference going through any of the major ones and then trading for the other currency. The only benefit direct pairs would have is when it comes to fees, as you would only have to pay the trading fee once, but it is usually close to negligible unless you are day trading or making very big trades. I simply do not think that the benefits outweigh the negatives in this case.

Do you guys not think that Exchanges should add more tradingpairs, besides BTC, ETH and LTC? If we look at international currencies we see that most of these have quite a bit of pairings which makes a lot of sense in terms of monopolisation and market safety. If BTC crashes, it would take down a lot of alts with it, even though I currently (since 10k btc milestone) don't think this needs to happen, BTC, ETH are quite experimental and though i'm bullish on BTC for the longterm it does show that it doesn't scale well, same as Ethereum and this cryptokitty fiasco this week. It takes 1 app to go viral and the whole network becomes unusable. But they have proven the ideology and principles of the technology.

But the biggest issue would really be, what extra pairs can you add? We're still a tiny dot in comparison to global markets. Most currency's are multi trillion and we aren't even at a trillion marketcap as a whole. Myself I was thinking about, Dash, ADA, Monero and NEM as diversification of trading pairs. I hope any exchanges reading this will also read this and think about adding more trading pairs, because everything is to dependent on what BTC is going to do next, even though some projects are really good and shouldn't have to depend on this.

What does the rest of the forum think? Do you agree, not agree? Reasons?